Going back to car dealer with "issues"

Depends on the age of the car and what would be a reasonable expectation of condition at purchase. You might expect some rust on a 10-year-old car, although obviously not a major defect. MOTs don't often pick up subframe cracks, was there a claimed inspection of the subframe by the dealer before you bought it?

You'd need an independent report on the subframe issue. If the cracking is rust-related, then I guess that might add some weight to the argument that it cannot have just popped up in the last seven months, but even then, proving that they sold you an unroadworthy vehicle could be tricky.

You'll struggle given the age of the car as they're not really built to last that long (yes it's silly and they do tend to last much longer). You're more likely to get some goodwill from the selling garage than any refund

So, as far as I can tell, under CRA I’m in the 6-12 months where I must prove the fault pre-existed.

There's a big difference between a new and used anything, a 12 year old car has already outlived any legally defined life and clearly didn't have a fault at time of (original) sale or manufacture so anything of that sort is out, which means you're onto "satisfactory quality" under the CRA. Defining that for a 2nd hand anything is difficult

You are I suspect going to be highly reliant on good will* and "warranty" at this point but I'm afraid this is the risk of buying used to a large extent.

FWIW, the CRA gives you a 30 day DoA from a dealer, 6 months to find and report a fault during which it's assumed to have been present at time of sale then 6 years (5 in Scotland) after that in which if you can "prove" it was faulty at point of sale its still their responsibility to do something to rectify it.

The age of your car means that proving it was faulty eg outside of expected wear and tear is going to be incredibly difficult as you need to prove its not of the "expected quality" of a 12 year old vehicle of that type, so if many of the sub frames on that model failed between 10-15 years you're screwed. Eg. If it's an ex estate land rover and its rusted to death and cracked you'll have no where to go, a ferrari with 300mi on the clock you likely would.

In the first instance, forget the CRA or anything else of the sort. Speak to them nicely and see what they say, after that maybe start thinking about your legal position if you need to but you can guarantee any good will will stop the moment you start mentioning your statutory rights.

just trade it in against something else (not from the original dealer), or sell to we buy any car etc - it will be less hassle in the long run than trying to get anything out of the current dealer.

Anyone who had an old mini will be familiar with subframe rust. I had mine welded years ago and I suspect that will be the solution offered to you.

Hmmm. Some interesting food for thought there.

Current plan is to go have a chat with the dealer and see what he'll do... I was thinking of px'ing it to him and paying (quite a lot!) extra to get a newer car from him. As a small dealer he doesn't carry much stock though, and it's all too small, too french or too expensive for my budget.

WBAC is at £1900 ish, less their haggle.

I had mine welded years ago and I suspect that will be the solution offered to you.

Oh, this is also important, you're looking at repair or possibly a partial refund, you are not, after 7 months of use, entitled to a full refund (you're not actually entitled to one after 14 days for anything but that's a different issue). For cars especially there is a legally protected (under the CRA) expectation of reduction in value for use.

The only genuine bit of (IMO) always applicable advice I can give, is always get a 2nd car fully serviced and checked over by another garage ASAP but within the first 28 days of ownership.

Horse, door, bolted obviously.

I'm not interested in repair as an option. There are other issues with it as well, and when a garage says "Nah..." to a lot of work, you know there are deeper things wrong with it.

I've read about the refund guidelines already and that's something I'd take on the chin tbh. Any idea of a rough £ per month? Like £100?

As for the check by the second garage, it was the garage who found the problem who recommended me to the supplying dealer in the first place! And my MIL, who isn't going to get away with this. 😀

Worst case for me is wbac or chop it in somewhere else.

Best case is get a reasonable trade in with him.

I was thinking of px’ing it to him and paying (quite a lot!) extra to get a newer car from him.

If you're planning on doing that, you probably don't want to be telling them that you think it's buggered first.

too french

Might have to change your mind on that if you want to avoid another rust bucket. 🙂

And is it only me who thinks honesty is the best policy. There's no reason to think the dealer was being dishonest when he sold the car, they aren't all sharks.

Sometimes they could rip you off and don't; I dropped my car off this morning for a routine service at Renault and told them to replace the service battery if there was any doubt as I'd be leaving the car out in freezing temperatures. When I picked it up it hadn't had the battery changed but a printout of its state was stapled to the bill.

Batterie santé 91%
Batterie charge 76%

I'll give it a charge

I don't think you'll get anything out of the garage. It's been too long since you bought it, and its an old car.

I'd stick it on ebay as spares and repairs.

I've not used wbac but surely they'd check it over very carefully before giving you any money??

I’ve read about the refund guidelines already and that’s something I’d take on the chin tbh. Any idea of a rough £ per month? Like £100?

No ideas, it'll depend on the level of use and utility you've had from it and I doubt there's any sort of official ish number

in honesty on a £4k car I'd not be expecting to see much by way of refund.

Gut feel is I'd most likely work to
[value at purchase]/[mot length at purchase]*[mot remaining]
So £4000/10*3 = £1200 refund

That being based on my thinking a 13 year old car of unknown history is equally likely to be written off, need work to it's own value or sail through with no advisorys at the next mot.

I’ve not used wbac but surely they’d check it over very carefully before giving you any money??

They're more likely to knock you down over a scratched alloy than it being a death trap just so long as the paperwork doesn't tell them it is.

View up and forward of the sub frame.

https://imgur.com/a/5QXR4Xm

Ok, I looked into this last year.

You have to prove that there's a significant fault and it was there when the car was bought. In your case I'd have thought that was pretty easy. I was also told the law heavily sides with the consumer in these cases.

Essentially you've bought something that's not fit for purpose, regardless of age, so you are absolutely entitled to a refund in my view.

View up and forward of the sub frame.

Fuuuuuu... you were 100% ripped off - this is open and shut.

What the hell was that car OP? (obviously it might well be a land rover, 50% of them look like that after a week, the rest live for ever)

I've bought a Volvo XC90 - 12years old, Swedish build quality, £50k new car, full Volvo service history, 1 owner from new, galvanized bodywork etc etc.

The rear subframe looks like it's been dragged up from the bottom of the North Sea! Motto of this story is that older cars need more maintenance. Not only do they need what the manufacturer states (oil changes etc) but bodywork needs rust addressing, tired parts changing.

You either do the work yourself, line the pockets of your mechanic or get a new car on finance/PCP etc.

Edited to add - posted before seeing that photo above. That's pretty knackered!

What car and mileage?

View up and forward of the sub frame.

Japanese car? Mazdas and Hondas of that vintage are notorious for rust.

The car was obviously seriously corroded when you bought it, and not in a hidden place. The crack it's difficult to say but recent. What STWers really need to know is which MOT station gives certificates to cars in that state so they can keep their dangerous old bangers on the road. 😉

Edit: to be honest if that was mine I'd be pissed off with myself for buying it not at the dealer for selling it. Getting your knees dirty or turning up with a mirror on a stick is a must when buying.

Motto of this story is that older cars need more maintenance. Not only do they need what the manufacturer states (oil changes etc) but bodywork needs rust addressing, tired parts changing.

No - structural rust like that is not a maintenance issue. It's a severe safety critical problem, in my view, and no-one should have been driving that off the forecourt never mind all around the country for the last 6 months.

The car was obviously seriously corroded when you bought it, and not in a hidden place.

Not always obvious - the '07 Civic Type R I have is notorious for snapped subframes, but they rot from the inside.

No – structural rust like that is not a maintenance issue. It’s a severe safety critical problem, in my view, and no-one should have been driving that off the forecourt never mind all around the country for the last 6 months.

soz - I'd posted before seeing the photo.
I was expecting surface rust - that's ****ed!

It's a 10 plate vx meriva. 59k.

Not sure I could sell that on with a clear conscience!

There's no way that wasn't similarly extensive when you bought it. In order for a car to be 'of satisfactory quality', it must be roadworthy at the point of sale (and that's not just a current MOT, a car can be unroadworthy with a valid MOT certificate).

The seven months clouds the issue slightly, but claiming that amount of rust has happened in that period seems improbable. This car was not roadworthy when they sold it to you.

The thing is you expect rust at that age, if it didn't have rust you would be more surprised.

The hole and crack show its a lot more than surface but until they're there the only way to really be sure is hit it with something (or something with it, like a pot hole) possibly putting a hole/crack in it.

As above its the stuff you can't see until it fails that usually does the damage.

But yeah, no way that wasn't at least obviously going to fail at the time of sale.

It’s a 10 plate vx meriva. 59k.

I'd bet it hasnt done 59k miles either.

Not always obvious

In this case it's obvious, have you seen the photo? Even without the crack that amount of rust tells you not to buy it.

It’s a 10 plate vx meriva. 59k.

I'd be checking the MOT history online and checking the certificaate numbers.

So, the issue I have is that the sub frame is (apparently) pre-existing the purchase, but the other issues have developed since.

I'm going back on the basis of the sub frame, but I don't want the car back. At all.

Am I right to play it that way, or hit them with everything?

Would you buy a more recent car from the dealer? Like a 18-19 plate Captur for 10-11k?

For balance - I did have a well cared for privately run Transit LWB van. Waxoyld underneath yearly and well maintained. Year before no advisory, no sign of rust, spotless underneath. Following year arse absolutely fell out of both cills and front arches. I couldn't believe how badly and quickly it had gone. I scrapped it.

However I would have probably expected to see the OP's subframe as an advisory by now. Externally it should have been bad enough to be flagged. Was it always MOT'd at the same place?

I'd buy a more recent car from the dealer, yes, but I'd do an online search and get it inspected before paying 10-11k.

Would you buy a more recent car from the dealer? Like a 18-19 plate Captur for 10-11k?

I wouldnt touch anything the dealer sells with a bargepole - they've demonstrated they will just sell on any old crap.

By all means go back and ask them for a refund , but they'll probably offer you slightly below WBAC value. Best option (for your sanity) is to shift it to WBAC and buy something else from someone else - chalk this one up to experience.

I’m going back on the basis of the sub frame, but I don’t want the car back. At all.

Am I right to play it that way, or hit them with everything?

Yeah, stick to the subframe, as it is in not sure how that would have been classed as safe to drive and if they start to bleat about it that's what I'd personally be pushing on.

Would you buy a more recent car from the dealer? Like a 18-19 plate Captur for 10-11k?

Yes, the dealer has possibly never looked under it, the garage he used to mot on the other hand... I'd be asking him to get your regular garage to give it a once over and change his mot station.

Was it always MOT’d at the same place?

I think so, yes. Always serviced there anyways and apparently they pre-mot cars and fix them first.

Link to MOT history
https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/results?registration=DA10VXM

Edit to clarify, the mot and servicing garage is nothing to do with the supplying dealer. It was traded in and he retailed it back out (it does look in decent nick!)

The Merivas and Zafiras of that age do rust quite rapidly when it starts but even then I'd have expected that to flag up as an advisory at minimum on the last MOT.

Best advice I can give is to not go in all guns blazing but be calm but firm with the dealer, much more likely to get a decent result that way. If you want to see teal examples look up 'Chops Garage' on YouTube to see how it's best played.

Like a 18-19 plate Captur for 10-11k?

A very quick squiz on auto trader suggests that's £1-2k higher than normal too

Best of luck, let us know what the dealer's response is please.

Nothing to add about your existing car other than "oooft" - that's some rust for that age and mileage.

For future, pre-purchase inspection. I'm not mechanically-savvy enough to trust my own judgement, so I used https://www.clickmechanic.com/pre-purchase-inspection prior to buying my most recent car. It was (at the time) a 13yr old Aussie-built car known for having next to no underseal and a tendancy for front chassis legs to rust, 57k miles and spent its life in NE England. Car was 200+ miles away so I booked someone to inspect it before I travelled. Money well spend IMO, even if just for peace of mind.

Thanks all. I'll update with how I get on.

I've just fetched the kids from school in it and we survived. 🤗

I guess the worst that could happen is...

I’ve just fetched the kids from school in it and we survived.

Sure?

OK, wow, I'd be tempted to approach trading standards about the garage that did the MOT!
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/report-an-mot-tester

Would that subframe normally be covered by an undertray that the garage has taken off to do the service work?

If so -
A) it wouldn't be spotted on an MOT, as it wouldn't be visible and testers remove no covers or other parts (my certs always have a disclaimer on saying as much.).
B) Its entirely possible that the drainage channels on the car leave puddles of manky water sitting on the undertray every time it rains, which the subframe sits in - hence the rust...

7 months on, I'd say tough titty. If you'd been under it and found it within a week of having bought it, you'd have a fair case. Caveat emptor and all that. The crankshaft seal - unless its losing pints or making the clutch slip - meh. Old(ish) cars leak a bit. Call it an inbuilt rustproofing system....

Would that subframe normally be covered by an undertray that the garage has taken off to do the service work?

Nope.

I take your point about the leak, but there are other issues as well...

I said to you the other day Rich its like it was left in West Kirby Marine Lake for a year then pulled out and re commissioned!

Don't think my OBDII reader would have picked that up  😮

so this was MOT'd up to 10 months ago? I can't see you have any go-back to the dealer myself - its an old car (old cars will be worn out, its why they're cheap), that has some rust (old cars have that) and damage that can easily have occured in the last 7 months. Whilst the rust can't have occured entirely in the last 7 months, it may well have looked nothing like that when it was sold. A month after sale? sure you've got a case. 7 months? no.

if WBAC inspect it properly there's not much chance you'll get full whack out of them either.

Looking online it seems like the subframes on those cars are failing on younger and lower milage models so theres probably nothing untoward about milage or MOTS. Rust is a product of time. design and  environment not miles. Replacement subframes are £120 (so not really more than a tyre or an exhaust)  so unless its an especially laborious job might not an especially uneconomical repair if used prices are still high. Given the repairs you've already had done its probably going to have less surprises left in it than another second hand car. I think to be frank buying can be so difficult at present the only reason someone has to sell a car is if they suspect theres something wrong with it.

If the condition of the subframe is because that particular part has designed-in / manufacturing quality issue then it'll be the only bit under there that's a problem and a replacement will be good for another decade. If the problem is a result of use and abuse - the car has be driven into the sea every weekend - then you expect all the the bottom of the car the have problems not just that one component.

old cars will be worn out, its why they’re cheap

No. You can't sell something with a massive problem without clearly stating there's a massive problem. If you do, you're on the hook. It is taken as implied that if you don't say there's something big wrong with it then it's fine. Otherwise, how else would anyone buy a car without a full inspection?

No. You can’t sell something with a massive problem without clearly stating there’s a massive problem.

The dealer will just turn round and say it had passed a MOT at an unconnected garage so it clearly didn't have a massive fault at the time. It's a 12 year old Vauxhall, they rust. 3 years ago that would have been a £1k shed and it'd now be being scrapped.

The dealer will just turn round and say it had passed a MOT at an unconnected garage so it clearly didn’t have a massive fault at the time. It’s a 12 year old Vauxhall, they rust. 3 years ago that would have been a £1k shed and it’d now be being scrapped.

right. things you sell have to be "of reasonable quality". at the bangernomics end of the market, if the cost for a years repairs are under a grand a year, its probably what most people would consider "reasonable quality". Yes, a lot of cars will cost less than that to run for a year, but thats the gamble of buying something thats beyond its designed lifespan.

if you can demonstrate the problem was there when you bought it you have a case, rust in itself isn't an issue on a car, and I think you'll struggle to find an engineer to produce a report stating the car had terminal rust 8 months ago, particularly when an independent report 2 months earlier stated it didn't.

at the bangernomics end of the market, if the cost for a years repairs are under a grand a year, its probably what most people would consider “reasonable quality”.

I'd agree with that. My '07 Civic cost 3.5k 2 years ago and it's roughly cost 1k a year in odds and sods of repairs.

If I'd intended to spend 4k on a car in a year, I'd have leased a brand new one instead. 😒

It's already had £900 of repairs, at dealer pricing (I have a copy of the receipt).

I do appreciate the various points about "what did I expect?" above, but the fact is I bought a car from a dealer at a higher price specifically so it wasn't knackered and worthless inside one year.

Having had a look at a Youtube or two (how's that for idle curiosity) I'd be tempted to change it myself. Say £350 of parts, another 500 for the tools if you don't already have them and a weekend of graft, maybe two.

I had a 97 Ducato from 98 to 2012, looked after it and ran it to 160 000km. The battery leaked and rotted the front cross member so I replaced that and the exhaust to sell it rather than scrap it when I no longer needed a van. A month ago a saw it in the queue at the DIY store and went for chat with the guy I sold it to. It's now on well over 300 000km and it's been as reliable for him as it was for me.

I'd personally just repair it, if it's just a subframe it shouldn't be expensive, a few hundred quid plus labour?

Edit: Edukator beat me to it

It’s already had £900 of repairs, at dealer pricing (I have a copy of the receipt).

How much has it actually cost you though? £900 worth of repairs FOC by dealer don’t count! 😀

I’d be tempted to change it myself

Righto. Do you want to buy it off me? 😜

If I’d intended to spend 4k on a car in a year, I’d have leased a brand new one instead. 😒

the problem is the whole market is distorted at the moment so the economics are different. A car you bought for £4k a dealer wouldn't have even put on the forecourt a few years ago - a dealer wouldn't take the risk of having to honour a sale on such a small margin. You could have picked up a car that age for about a grand privately. A repair like the one in prospect wouldn't be considered by many to be economical at that value (I disagree with many people's idea of the economics mind but thats just me)

But if the market is still distorted then a repair on a 12 year old car is much more credible - its low milage, its had some recent work done identifying known gremlins done free of charge. You've done pretty well just getting those repairs to be honest - nearly a quarter of the value of the car they sold - they've probably made a loss all in.

I'd investigate a price for getting it repaired - dont be put off by the garage who identified it being fatalistic - garages are often not keen if a repair is out of their comfort zone but they'll sell you that as the car's shortcomings rather than theirs 🙂 They also largely deal with customers who hugely resent (or are scared of) having to pay anything at all for repairs and will usually panic and spend more on replacing it rather than repairing.

Compare those costs against what you'd have to pay for a car (which might be shit) with prices still inflated. And try and imagine that car being a dead cert for not needing any work.

I drive a car a few years older than yours and with double the milage and have no issue with paying for sizeable works - new gearbox, injectors, and rear axel in the last year alone - but it all adds up to less than replacing it with something else. Definitely right now.

If I’d intended to spend 4k on a car in a year, I’d have leased a brand new one instead.

That's the gamble you take with older cars, you might get lucky or it might be expensive. Until 18 months ago I'd never spent more than £2k on a car, and only then on interesting stuff. I've had £500 sheds that lasted a few years and a £1000 Saab 9-5 that lunched it's gearbox within 6 months. I ended up spending much more on a 3 year old Kia as even stuff at £4k looked like what I used to buy on the understanding it could be uneconomical in 6 months.

The dealer will just turn round and say it had passed a MOT at an unconnected garage so it clearly didn’t have a massive fault at the time

MOT means nothing, they don't check everything and can't. It clearly did have a massive fault at the time of sale, that rust didn't happen over one of the driest summers on record did it?

if you can demonstrate the problem was there when you bought it you have a case, rust in itself isn’t an issue on a car,

That rust is!

I know the feeling all too well...

Bought a Caddy from a dodgy Burnley dealer just over a year ago for about 5k (with 172k miles). It wasn't cheap, but no van was at the time and it looked in really good condition.

Even my local garage commented that it looked really good for the mileage it had done, then the issues start.

Injector went (garage said it looked like it had been bodged previously)
Recently, both front wheel bearings gone, and it still needs a new radiator, fan and thermostat housing

Oh and it has been hit by other driver twice while it has been parked up, but that's not the dealers fault.
I still need to sort an aerial out for the radio because the mirror that was swiped off contained it, I didn't know at the time.

I approached them with the injector problem as it happened in the second week, but I could just tell it wasn't worth the hassle.

You were surprised that a van with 172,000 miles on the clock has needed new wheel bearings and an injector?

You were surprised that a van with 172,000 miles on the clock has needed new wheel bearings and an injector?

I think thats a tad unfair - the surprise is more that a £5k van on a dealers forecourt needed new wheel bearings and an injector...

As has already been said, 2nd had cars are crazy money at the moment, and unlikely to drop much unless new cars come back down a lot.

I've been to see the man.
He's offered to fix it (the sub frame) but I've said no.
So he's said he'll pay top book trade in for one of his stock cars... but he doesn't have a lot in.
I'm currently hunting around some nearby dealers and he's looking for stock that matches my somewhat scatty list of "what I want".
So, I'm hopeful a deal can be done. It'll mean I take a bit of a bath on what I paid for it, but I'm still hopeful I can squeeze a bit more out of him if and when we can find a replacement.
And that's going to be the hard part!

Thanks for all the help and advice, both positive and negative. It really helped.

Now, does anyone want to buy a car from me? One careful owner*
FSH**
Completely clear MOT history
Bargain at £3499... 😁
Sold as seen*

Assuming that's the only fault, why wouldn't you let him fix it? You've then got a 'decent', known quantity for £4k in a very uncertain market...

He’s offered to fix it (the sub frame) but I’ve said no.

So for the time being you're driving kids around with a knackered sub-frame!?

I’m currently hunting around some nearby dealers and he’s looking for stock that matches my somewhat scatty list of “what I want”.

Moon on a stick by the sounds of it.

Give me this dealers details - he sounds like a very fair bloke!! 🙂

He sounds like a good sort to be honest. Who is he as we should give good folk a shout.

So, I’m hopeful a deal can be done. It’ll mean I take a bit of a bath on what I paid for it

I hope you can get an arrangement without small claims - he's sold you a car that is defintely dangerous ****ed and was definitely like that when he sold it to you - because he didn't check. There's no argument here. He sold you bad (and dangerous) goods, you should not be out of pocket. In fact you should be compensated for the risk and the extra hassle you've had.

It's not the same as wheel bearings or injectors. Those are wear items, and you would expect nearly worn bearings on an old car that then fail after a short time. But you can't sell structurally buggered cars and pass them off as sound.

Assuming that’s the only fault, why wouldn’t you let him fix it? You’ve then got a ‘decent’, known quantity for £4k in a very uncertain market…

A very good question.

So for the time being you’re driving kids around with a knackered sub-frame!?

Slowly and gently, yes.

Give me this dealers details – he sounds like a very fair bloke!!

Happy to share once we've done the deal.

Assuming that’s the only fault, why wouldn’t you let him fix it?

It's not.

I think thats a tad unfair – the surprise is more that a £5k van on a dealers forecourt needed new wheel bearings and an injector…

Having bought a car from a dealership (Arnold Shark) and looked at a line of main dealers at the time, I think they do NOTHING other than run an history check, a mini-valet and kick the tyres. I did not find a dealer who had done anything else. Questions about service history were met with 'why would you ask that?', cars were chipped and scratched, dirty inside, and engine bay's were full of spiders and clearly had not been checked if there was more than a couple of thousand miles to the service. I was stopped from sticking my head under a car by main Ford dealer 'because health and safety' - nothing to do with the rust that was all over it underneath (when I checked history it was from Ayr, a coastal town..._. And this was on £10-15k cars...

Son's £4k/100k/12yr old rusty Transit was bought with £1k in the bank - and he spent £680 on a service, new brakes and brake lines from our trusted garage who we sent it to a week after he bought it. We asked them to give it a good nosey and list the issues they saw (thankfully only rust, which we are on top of enough now). A year later it has had an oil * filter change, more rust work and a new wheel bearing.. Still I expect it has maybe 3-5 years of life left, on a good day.

So a £5k / 170k+ vehicle is going to have issues.

Same with a £4k Meriva. However, the rust on that one from OP is rather shocking.

Having bought a car from a dealership (Arnold Shark) and looked at a line of main dealers at the time, I think they do NOTHING other than run an history check, a mini-valet and kick the tyres.

I think you're right - but they need to appreciate that if they save money on checks then some cars will come back. Essentially you're letting the buyers do the validation work for you.

Yeah best to avoid his "too French" stock as a Megane would have had a galvanised subframe that would still be looking like this 🙂

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/275566747057?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5338364431&toolid=11000&_ul=UK&customid=Cj0KCQiAtvSdBhD0ARIsAPf8oNmWR7ZSs6Ddo0ZeXouQMnc-I4yz8mtVN1RJEYj9M4qb5zvZ1DhQfqgaAp7nEALw_wcB&gclid=Cj0KCQiAtvSdBhD0ARIsAPf8oNmWR7ZSs6Ddo0ZeXouQMnc-I4yz8mtVN1RJEYj9M4qb5zvZ1DhQfqgaAp7nEALw_wcB

Essentially you’re letting the buyers do the validation work for you.

That is how I read it.

The time and money to sell a 'quality' car is not there - better to take a chance and hope not too many come back.

Buyer beware.

I think them offering to repair it is a good outcome, if you still don't want it after that sell it on.

I wouldn't be driving around on it in the mean time.

The dealer should have checked under the car when they bought it but sadly I think you should have also looked a lot sooner.

Old cars are not problem free and professional dealer sale or not you should do your due diligence when buying them. The law is fairly generous to consumers when it comes to buying used cars but you didn't make adequate use of it here in time. The dealer shouldn't have sold it as it was and you would have been able to reject it I'd have thought, provided you did it within the timescales set out in law. It's not hard to get a mirror and have a cursory glance under the car and a corroding subframe would have been fairly obvious if it was at that bad of a stage of rot. You don't have to do that on the forecourt but should do so within a week or two of taking the car home to avoid issues like this.

Lesson learned take the repair offer and move on.

+1 for airvent.

I do exactly the same checks at dealers as I do privately.

Take a code reader, bright torch and wear old clothes when looking at cars. Inspect every bit, get on your hands and knees to check underneath not just for corrosion but accident damage, lift carpets in boot etc to check for hidden repairs, check every switch, good test drive, including reverse, turning at full lock etc.

It's a ball ache, which is why it might be better getting that car repaired, so at least you can take your time looking for something else.

I disagree that it's easy to do. A lot of people depend on cars but are not at all capable of doing a check to that level of detail. I bet only 1% of drivers know what a subframe is. In a lot of cars you need to get under it to remove undertrays and things, which is too much to ask for most people. You might lament the lack of technical skills in society but that's just the way it is. Only one of the parties involved in the sale is expected to be an expert (and probably advertises that) and it's not the buyer.

A second opinion from an independent isn't a bad idea though. I did this, cost me £90 IIRC and they did a full readout (which they gave me a copy of and talked me through) and got it up on a ramp to check underneath. Given the money involved this is probably a good idea.

The time and money to sell a ‘quality’ car is not there – better to take a chance and hope not too many come back.

Buyer beware.

As others have alluded to, your consumer rights when buying a used car from a dealer are the same as buying new. Of course, "acceptable quality" here doesn't mean like new but what would be reasonable to expect of (say) a 10-year old car. That should give piece of mind but some dealers might just see it as a numbers game. Amount of work / expense to tart everything up vs the likelihood of a problem (and the likelihood of someone successfully complaining if there is).

At work we used to have a Logistics department which shipped sometimes rather expensive kit up and down the country. I had a site delivery go missing once, turned out that it wasn't insured. I was like, "what madness is this?" It turned out, it was more cost-effective to take the hit on an occasional £500 switch or £10k router getting lost than it was to insure everything that went out.

I totally agree with Molgrips.

I do know what a subframe is though, but I had several original Minis so it's inevitable.

I think thats a tad unfair – the surprise is more that a £5k van on a dealers forecourt needed new wheel bearings and an injector…

I'm surprised you managed to get any sort of drivable van for that money from a forecourt for that money in the current climate. I was looking at vans at the start of last year - went to a dealer who had about 100 on the forecourt. Prices ranged from 10k to 20k - all high milage, filthy, every single one had a sizeable dent in , some had hole punched in the them, some had doors that wouldn't close 🙂

Completely clear MOT history
Bargain at £3499… 😁
Sold as seen*

You're aware that we've only seen one bit of it 🙂

You’re aware that we’ve only seen one bit of it 🙂

And that picture revealed some of it was missing 🤣