You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So I bought a secondhand car from a franchised main dealer on Thursday. I’ve discovered it has had some pretty shoddy accident repairs done to the rear and I can also prove the dealer did these repairs. I’d explicitly asked if it had had any paint work done and was told no.
If I reject the car am I obliged to take my part exchange back - don’t mind so much, but am I correct it would add yet another owner to the log book
I can't see how they could if it's no longer yours? Interesting question, I'd be curious to see how it pans out.
... I mean, it's a long shot if it was only two days ago, but they might not even have it any more.
Normally depends on the dealer, if they still have it or have moved it on.
Personally I’d be more focused on getting the refund but can understand if your left without transport getting the trade in back could help.
If I reject the car am I obliged to take my part exchange back – don’t mind so much, but am I correct it would add yet another owner to the log book
I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the dealer would appear on the logbook as they would fill out the dealer section of the V5c not the new owner bit. But you would count as 2. But then if you've still got the old V5c's (because you did it online rather than by post?) you could show that to any buyer.
But also, is it something people are bothered by anymore? Post-GDPR it's not like you can tell if it was 1 boy racer or a succession of grannies.
Thinking about this, if it's going for trade-in rather than a private sale then would a dealer even care about number of owners?
But also, is it something people are bothered by anymore? Post-GDPR it’s not like you can tell if it was 1 boy racer or a succession of grannies.
I'd say it's more important now with the kinds of faults we see in cars these days. Lots of ownership changes in a short period would indicate high chance of unsolvable or expensive to solve issues.
I’ve done this, the dealer just refunded me the entire cost of the car and didn’t get my trade in back (which was fine).
Actually not quite “rejecting” more “you’re taking this car back and giving me my money or I’ll see you in court”. Combined with Seat UK telling the dealer “give the man his money back”.
If it's only two days, the chances are it will still be with them and they will want you to have it back. There will not be any further owners added to the V5, it's basically an unwinding of the deal so they will cancel all of their invoices like the transaction never happened. In the unlikely event that they have sold it on, it would be the financial equivalent.
they will want you to have it back
I doubt this unless they paid top money for it.
I doubt this unless they paid top money for it.
That's possible I suppose. It depends if the PX is being retailed or it's going to the block. If it's a retail car, they may want to hold on to it, but if it was due to go to auction they will be looking to save the fees and transport, I would have thought. That's just me though, dealers often make decisions that defy logic.
They will prob offer first a repair or trade/exchange to a different car in the lot... Then as a last resort give you your money back.
The way 2nd hand car prices are, it's unlikely they want you to have the trade in back.
Read up on your consumer rights before any confrontation, incase they start any bs - which tbh is unlikely.
I take it wasn't a cat n or s ? It's just an undeclared repair?
Done it myself.
I queried why the redaitor looked so new - oh it's been steam cleaned. Specifically said it had not been crashed.
Upon getting home and giving it a full check over, noticed the lights were just a few months old (date stamped) and then found a not too good repair on the door on close inspection.
Dealer didn't argue and took it back and I swapped it for another.
I checked with the DVLA and it looks like my car will rack up another owner if I have it back. My car is 10yr/100K+ miles so they won’t retail it.
It is annoying they assured me it was fine knowing full well they’d done a really budget repair on it. Issue is that it is a 2.5hr drive to get back there, maybe I could push for them to collect it from me. In this age of social media and online review I don’t understand why a big main dealer would try and pull a fast one like that.
rack up another owner if I have it back. My car is 10yr/100K+ miles so they won’t retail it.
Unlikely to make any difference to perceived value at that age /milage.
It'll probably have gone up in value in the last few days if anything 😄
Reading this again, I’m not convinced you have grounds to reject it.
They lied about the repair, but you also had the opportunity to inspect it before you bought it. I hope I’m wrong for your sake, but my attention wouldn’t be on worrying about if I was getting my trade in back just yet.
Of course he has grounds to reject it. Its not as described.
Reasonable to expect a member of the public not to spot crash damage.
Not acceptable to be asked outright about it and lie.
Garage is wrong here
They lied about the repair, but you also had the opportunity to inspect it before you bought it.
If bought from a private seller, sold as seen is fine. Bought from a deal is a different matter and the law covers the op- he has a right to return the vehicle for no reason at all if he likes, can't remember the time frame for that one but it's 30 days if it's sold with a pre-existing fault, which it was.
Franchise dealers may have better than statutory warranty e.g. a no quibble guarantee. My local VW place does. Otherwise you have to demonstrate that it is faulty. A bad repair might qualify for that.
I can also prove the dealer did these repairs
Last week's newspaper behind the filler? 🙂 Actually, curious how you know?
Last week’s newspaper behind the filler? 🙂 Actually, curious how you know?
Rear badges missing from the tailgate (would need removing for the respray) - I guess they didn’t want to pay the £80-90 for new ones. However I found a cached version of the advert showing the badges in place, so the damage must have happened while the car was in their possession.
After a bit of googling, looks like you have 30 days to reject and the dealer has to collect the car, plus I don’t need to take my old car back👍
So is it just a poor paint job and missing badges on a damaged boot lid, or can you see more structural stuff that's gone on underneath? That seems a light reason to be rejecting the whole vehicle, depends how much you like the car shopping process I suppose.
I checked with the DVLA and it looks like my car will rack up another owner if I have it back
Add another one to the totally irrelevant pile. If it was three years old and had 3 owners maybe but for your car I'd look at what work has been done and what stuff has poppet up on the mot I wouldn't even check number of owners all that would tell me is how many different flavours of fart are embedded in the driver's seat
Could it have been debadged for a different reason?
If bought from a private seller, sold as seen is fine. Bought from a deal is a different matter and the law covers the op-
Yup.
A used car bought from a dealer, you have the same rights as if bought from new. 30 days under CRA to return faulty goods (not as described / not fit for purpose / not of satisfactory quality).
If you bought it online then under CCR you have 14 days from receipt to reject it without needing a reason.
Could it have been debadged for a different reason?
I can't immediately think of a reason to debadge a car which would make it a more attractive purchase. I'd rather have a car that'd been crashed and professionally repaired than one that'd spent half half it's life having the snot ragged out of it by a boy racer.
I can’t immediately think of a reason to debadge a car which would make it a more attractive purchase.
There are other reasons it could have been debadged e.g. some one was going to buy it, wanted it debadged as part of the prep and then couldn’t complete the purchase.
In my more foolish past, I had a car debadged before I collected it; I wasn’t even a boy racer either.
Otherwise you have to demonstrate that it is faulty. A bad repair might qualify for that.
Theres a difference between a 'bad repair' and a 'repair'. Being aware of a repair doesn't make the repair 'bad' I guess. On something bodywork related the quality of a repair is something only time can really demonstrate.
wanted it debadged as part of the prep
So youd refit them afterwards surely....
Rear badges missing from the tailgate (would need removing for the respray) – I guess they didn’t want to pay the £80-90 for new ones. However I found a cached version of the advert showing the badges in place, so the damage must have happened while the car was in their possession.
Other than the absence of the badges is there anything to suggest the paint is either new or poorly executed? Or that theres been any other damage or repair work - You would need to remove the badges to respray but their absence doesn't prove a respray.
Being aware of a repair doesn’t make the repair ‘bad’ I guess.
Being lied to about it, even verbally, falls very squarely into "not as described" though.
I wouldn't reject a car solely because it'd been shunted and repaired. Cars get shunted all the time. But I would absolutely reject it if they told me it hadn't because of catastrophic trust failure, what else have they buried?
So youd refit them afterwards surely….
No, not if the reason for removing the badges is to hide the spec of the vehicle.
They can also be damaged during removal so might not have been able to have been refitted after the other buyer has pulled out.
But I would absolutely reject it if they told me it hadn’t because of catastrophic trust failure, what else have they buried?
The only substance the OP is giving that they've been lied to is that the badges that weren't on when he viewed and bought the car can be demonstrated to have been present previously - thats the sum total of the accusation of 'some pretty shoddy accident repairs done'. Nothing he's offering as his evidence says the answer 'no' to the question 'has the car been resprayed/' is a lie. He's just noticed the absence of the badges and ascribed a motive to that and has decided they prove a series of events to do with damage (which he can't see) a repair (which he can't see) and a respray (which he can't see).
To me that sounds like a bloody excellent repair rather than a shoddy one 🙂 But it also sounds like no repair at all.
Their absence doesn't instead prove that a decision was made to remove the badges as preparation for sale either by request or on the dealers own initiative. Or given that the badges are only stuck on theses days anyway that they didn't just fall off when the car was being cleaned.
He’s just noticed the absence of the badges and has decided they prove a series of events to do with damage (which he can’t see) a repair (which he can’t see) and a respray (which he can’t see).
That's exactly how I read it too. There is a whiff of buyers remorse.
He’s just noticed the absence of the badges and has decided they prove a series of events to do with damage (which he can’t see) a repair (which he can’t see) and a respray (which he can’t see).
I didn’t say that.
Paint runs, overspray on lights, fisheyes in the paint, masking lines. The Bodyshop I took it too were shaking their heads and laughing about generally shoddiness of the repair. More worryingly uneven panel gaps on the tailgate suggesting possible distortion. Also bumper badly resprayed, straight over parking sensors. Pin holes, suggesting evidence of filler etc. wouldn't care so much if it was a cheap car, but when you are paying 20K+ from a franchised dealer on a premium car, I’d expect better.
I'm with the OP that any body work is a significant stumbling block for me and any undeclared bodywork is an absolute, no question, walk away, deal breaker.
It doesn't matter how you look at it, repair work is not as good as an undamaged panel with the original factory finish.
No warranty on the inevitable paint bubbling, adhesion issues, rust etc. If you can see it in the surfacing, the chance that the pre paint prep was well done is highly unlikely.
Similar experience a few years ago.
Bought brand new car, part ex'd Ford. Front brake caliper seized on way home, recovered back to garage.
Gave garage chance to repair.
Picked up new car again and set off home.
Front caliper seized.
Took advice from CAB, rejected car.
Dealer had disposed of my car (auction or passed on to 2nd hand dealer).
Agreed to give me the (inflated) trade in allowance for the Ford as a cheque.
Amusing part of the story was the importer of the brand rang me from East Anglia and told me I couldn't just reject the car "because of the brakes seizing on".
I advised him that CAB, dealer and consumer law disagreed with his bullying bullsh*t!
I’d explicitly asked if it had had any paint work done and was told no.
For me as a buyer, if I'd been told this, and then found that it had, how well or badly it was done would be largely irrelevant. And also, for the pedants, would address the "not as described" piece more than adequately.
Paint runs, overspray on lights, fisheyes in the paint, masking lines. The Bodyshop I took it too were shaking their heads and laughing about generally shoddiness of the repair. More worryingly uneven panel gaps on the tailgate suggesting possible distortion. Also bumper badly resprayed, straight over parking sensors. Pin holes, suggesting evidence of filler etc.
Did you see the car before you paid for it?
Ah, that last description of the problems was kind of critical!
Fair play, if they told you no repairs, and that's the standard of what was done you definitely have good cause to reject it.
It doesn’t matter how you look at it, repair work is not as good as an undamaged panel with the original factory finish.
Not really related but I know that dealers for a certain German sports car manufacturer routinely respray the front end of used cars they are selling as it's the best way to get back to a factory finish.
It all depends on who's done the work.