[Apples12]

Hi all



Bit of a long story, not BMW related but another German marque



We picked up a golf 1.4tsi match edition on a 66 plate from a main dealer.



We took delivery on 22nd march



Issues as soon as we got it home. Rear light cluster holding water, damp smell in car, tracking off and middle left front parking sensor would detect something there when there wasnt. 



Promptly got on the phone and was asked to email pics etc. Did so. 





Post lockdown they have the car for 2 weeks. Apparently they had the seats and carpet out to fix the leak, they replaced the light cluster and assured me sensor had been fixed along with tracking.



Tracking and sensor were exactly the same as when we dropped the car off. Car stank of damp still.



2 weeks later the car is back with them to replace the sensors and tracking. Was supposed to be a 3 day turnaround but turned into 8 days as they spotted a leaking shock absorber and it asked for a service too (service covered by service pack)



I go to pickup the car yesterday and the sensor is still throwing spurious errors and the damp smell is there to the point even the sales exec pulled his nose up!



Now. I've asked to reject the car (we usually buy cars with finance initially and once we're fully satisfied we'll settle the finance, usually get better deals and find it gives us a bit better protection)



How can I handle this as I have never dealt with anything like this before. 



I spoke to vwfs who advised it was up to the dealer to resolve and they would step in if I wasn't satisfied. Vwfs confirmed I had 6300 in the car from our deposit/part ex/payments to date





Finally spoke to sale manager and we picked out another golf. He then proceeded to tell us we only had 5000 of equity in the car, when I questioned this he said he would have to look into it and call me back. Still waiting for that call.



Any advice, tips/tricks etc?

[robbiep]

You can still reject the car under the Consumer Rights Act - under the law, they are allowed one attempt to fix a fault. Failure to rectify means you can reject.

They are allowed, by the law, to make a 'reasonable deduction' from the refund for the time / mileage you have had the car for - what exactly constitutes 'reasonable' hasn't been determined as yet, if you're not happy with their calculations then you should be trying to reach a middle ground with them.

Note that if you've rejected the car, but continue to use it, then your rejection might be viewed as non-valid.

Rejection figures and positive / negative equity in the car are 2 very different things. Remind the dealer of this.

If you really aren't happy with their numbers, and you can't meet a middle ground, say so, and that unless they budge then you'll ask for a letter of deadlock and to take it to the Ombudsman. That usually gets them to move.

There seems to be a lot of 'spoke to' various people in your post. Everything has to be in writing, or notes made promptly of a conversation and emailed to the person (with a "just to confirm our discussion on xyz", etc). That way, unless they challenge what you sent in the email promptly, they will have a lot harder time doing so at a later date.

[3-GT]

I think considering you're rejecting the car due to faults with the car that they can't/won't repair you shouldn't be at a financial lose.

You should be getting a full refund or a replacement of at least equal value.

If you are getting nowhere with the supplying dealer then it's time to get the finance company involved as you should be covered under section 75.

[aquazi]

I think value in equity makes no odds... you want to reject the car i.e return you to a position before you bought the car minus any reasonable dealer expenditure.

Go back to the dealer in writing - quote they have more than enough chance to rectify it; cc the dealer principe... ignore the salesman.

[robbiep]

Originally Posted by 3-GT

I think considering you're rejecting the car due to faults with the car that they can't/won't repair you shouldn't be at a financial lose.

You should be getting a full refund or a replacement of at least equal value.

If you are getting nowhere with the supplying dealer then it's time to get the finance company involved as you should be covered under section 75.

With respect, it doesn't matter what you, or I, or anyone, 'thinks' should happen.

The law (Consumer Rights Act) states that the dealership is entitled to make a reasonable deduction for the period of ownership.

Refuse to accept that fact, and when you go to the ombudsman you lose your case, because you have not acted reasonably, and the dealership have - it's just the level of deduction that has to be determined, not whether there should be any deduction or not.

Also, note that Section 75 only applies to Credit Cards, not finance agreements. Though if any deposit was paid by credit card, then it would apply

[3-GT]

Originally Posted by robbiep

With respect, it doesn't matter what you, or I, or anyone, 'thinks' should happen.

The law (Consumer Rights Act) states that the dealership is entitled to make a reasonable deduction for the period of ownership.

Refuse to accept that fact, and when you go to the ombudsman you lose your case, because you have not acted reasonably, and the dealership have - it's just the level of deduction that has to be determined, not whether there should be any deduction or not.

Also, note that Section 75 only applies to Credit Cards, not finance agreements. Though if any deposit was paid by credit card, then it would apply

Sorry the refund I was referring to is the deposit and part ex not the monthly payments made.

On reflection a full refund may not be possible as a deduction from the refund may be required to reflect the monthly payments that would've been incurred without a deposit and part-ex.

With respect I think section 75 would apply, unless I've interpreted the following incorrectly.

I personally would be asking the dealership to supply a car of equal value in exchange. This route is probably the most suitable for all parties involved.

[Apples12]

Originally Posted by robbiep

With respect, it doesn't matter what you, or I, or anyone, 'thinks' should happen.

The law (Consumer Rights Act) states that the dealership is entitled to make a reasonable deduction for the period of ownership.

Refuse to accept that fact, and when you go to the ombudsman you lose your case, because you have not acted reasonably, and the dealership have - it's just the level of deduction that has to be determined, not whether there should be any deduction or not.

Also, note that Section 75 only applies to Credit Cards, not finance agreements. Though if any deposit was paid by credit card, then it would apply

What is considered a fair and reasonable adjustment?

In 4 months they have had the car for 1.

The sales manager is suggesting that they only return my deposit and not the £800 or so we've paid since the agreement was started.

I cannot see why I should be out of pocket to this extent because the car they sold us was not up to standard and numerous attempts to repair have not been successful.


This is the first time I've encountered anything like this so struggling to figure out how best to handle it.

[3-GT]

Originally Posted by Apples12

In 4 months they have had the car for 1.

This is the first time I've encountered anything like this so struggling to figure out how best to handle it.

If they supplied a courtesy car free of charge during the time they had the car then I would see that as a reasonable alternative.

If they charged you I'd be asking for a refund of those charges.

If you never took a courtesy car then yes you have a point.

Asking them to supply a car with the same age/milage/spec is probably the best outcome for all.

[MashinBenzin]

Originally Posted by Apples12

What is considered a fair and reasonable adjustment?

In 4 months they have had the car for 1.

The sales manager is suggesting that they only return my deposit and not the £800 or so we've paid since the agreement was started.

I cannot see why I should be out of pocket to this extent because the car they sold us was not up to standard and numerous attempts to repair have not been successful.


This is the first time I've encountered anything like this so struggling to figure out how best to handle it.

On a brand new car that I rejected, 45p per mile was the ballpark charge that was suggested to me. I did haggle to a much better position, but that was to everyone's benefit in securing a new sale.

I was told that this rate had been in place for a long time, so assume it is acceptable to the ombudsman etc.

ETA a bit more detail. Rejection was just before the six month point of ownership. Deal struck was deposit returned, mileage charge made, neg equity funded by manufacturer. New deal on replacement was £xxxxs cheaper. And retained use of the rejected car until the new one was ready, which was a further six months.

Not a strictly comparable situation, but it's clearly beneficial to be buying again from the same vendor in order to better the position. There is no getting around their right to charge for usage, cars are somewhat unique in this under consumer law AIUI.

[robbiep]

Originally Posted by Apples12

What is considered a fair and reasonable adjustment?

In 4 months they have had the car for 1.

The sales manager is suggesting that they only return my deposit and not the £800 or so we've paid since the agreement was started.

I cannot see why I should be out of pocket to this extent because the car they sold us was not up to standard and numerous attempts to repair have not been successful.


This is the first time I've encountered anything like this so struggling to figure out how best to handle it.

From what you are saying then, the garage are suggesting that you should end up having paid the £800, and that only, for 4 months of ownership ?

That works out at approx £200 per month.

I suspect that the ombudsman would view that as entirely reasonable on their part.

You have had use of the car throughout lockdown - whether or not it has been used is irrelevant.

Whether you 'Cannot see why you should be out of pocket' or not is irrelevant. The law expressly allows a deduction to be made.

The garage appear to be being reasonable (in my opinion). If you are not 'reasonable', then they would be entitled to refuse your rejection, and tell you to take the matter to court. If a judge then views that the garage's offer was 'reasonable', then you could quite easily face a five figure bill.

[agentorange]

Originally Posted by robbiep

From what you are saying then, the garage are suggesting that you should end up having paid the £800, and that only, for 4 months of ownership ?

That works out at approx £200 per month.

I suspect that the ombudsman would view that as entirely reasonable on their part.

You have had use of the car throughout lockdown - whether or not it has been used is irrelevant.

Whether you 'Cannot see why you should be out of pocket' or not is irrelevant. The law expressly allows a deduction to be made.

The garage appear to be being reasonable (in my opinion). If you are not 'reasonable', then they would be entitled to refuse your rejection, and tell you to take the matter to court. If a judge then views that the garage's offer was 'reasonable', then you could quite easily face a five figure bill.

It's nice that the garage are so good at being reasonable, but they need to pick up the pace on fixing stuff properly.

[Apples12]

Originally Posted by robbiep

From what you are saying then, the garage are suggesting that you should end up having paid the £800, and that only, for 4 months of ownership ?

That works out at approx £200 per month.

I suspect that the ombudsman would view that as entirely reasonable on their part.

You have had use of the car throughout lockdown - whether or not it has been used is irrelevant.

Whether you 'Cannot see why you should be out of pocket' or not is irrelevant. The law expressly allows a deduction to be made.

The garage appear to be being reasonable (in my opinion). If you are not 'reasonable', then they would be entitled to refuse your rejection, and tell you to take the matter to court. If a judge then views that the garage's offer was 'reasonable', then you could quite easily face a five figure bill.

Whilst I agree a deduction should be made if we stick to the letter of the law, but out of the 3 months that we had the car (4 payments made) we have not had the car for 1 of those months.

The car should not have been sold as an approved used in the first instance with these faults. They should have been resolved by now.

In any case, we have identified a similar car we would be happy to get into and have put it to the sales manager. He is to come back to me next week with a resolution.

[NotGotABimmer23]

Worth noting that the 'clock' stops once you have booked the car in for repair (not just while it's in the dealers).

I'd guess you raised this very soon after receiving the car and its only covid that has caused it to take 4 months.

I don't know how long u had the car between failed attempts to repair but if you could argue the total time you had the car trouble free was <30 days then you get a full refund and cannot be charged for use.

[Firaxis]

Originally Posted by Apples12

Whilst I agree a deduction should be made if we stick to the letter of the law, but out of the 3 months that we had the car (4 payments made) we have not had the car for 1 of those months.

The car should not have been sold as an approved used in the first instance with these faults. They should have been resolved by now.

In any case, we have identified a similar car we would be happy to get into and have put it to the sales manager. He is to come back to me next week with a resolution.

I sent one back after three weeks and had to compromise for mileage / interest losses which is perfectly reasonable and if presented to an ombudsman would be deemed so. They're not responsible for fiscal options or usage.

Although the time taken to fix said fault isn't reasonable, there has obviously been more than one attempt and you may logically argue that. Be aware though that's only up to six months of ownership, so if you're moving to reject it needs pushing now.

Also if a courtesy car wasn't supplied (like in my case) then you can move to have them rebate the amount equal to a months financial payments. Contact your finance company, get things moving and either push for a replacement or tell them to compromise on an amount to settle the finance and hand the car back.

[NotGotABimmer23]

Originally Posted by Firaxis

I sent one back after three weeks and had to compromise for mileage / interest losses which is perfectly reasonable and if presented to an ombudsman would be deemed so. They're not responsible for fiscal options or usage.

Although the time taken to fix said fault isn't reasonable, there has obviously been more than one attempt and you may logically argue that. Be aware though that's only up to six months of ownership, so if you're moving to reject it needs pushing now.

Also if a courtesy car wasn't supplied (like in my case) then you can move to have them rebate the amount equal to a months financial payments. Contact your finance company, get things moving and either push for a replacement or tell them to compromise on an amount to settle the finance and hand the car back.

You shouldn't have a paid a thing. If it's rejected within 30 days they have no right to any money at all.

[Firaxis]

Originally Posted by kylemacca01

You shouldn't have a paid a thing. If it's rejected within 30 days they have no right to any money at all.

That would be 14 days, it's clearly stated in the BMW finance agreement (also the new agreement I've taken out with another finance company). It wasn't much though, I ended up getting pretty much the exact same model / year / mileage over 1K cheaper and in a colour I much preferred.

So win .!

[NotGotABimmer23]

Originally Posted by Firaxis

That would be 14 days, it's clearly stated in the BMW finance agreement (also the new agreement I've taken out with another finance company). It wasn't much though, I ended up getting pretty much the exact same model / year / mileage over 1K cheaper and in a colour I much preferred.

So win .!

Glad it worked out but you are mistaken. Its 14 days cooling off on the finance, but any rejection within the first 30 days is subject to a full refund, its only after this time (and within 6m) that you can be charged for use.

"Short-term right to reject – the first 30 days : You are entitled to a full refund by the same method in which you paid for the car. The dealer cannot charge for usage, wear and tear, collection of the vehicle or anything else."

https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/rejecting-a-car/

[Firaxis]

Originally Posted by kylemacca01

Glad it worked out but you are mistaken. Its 14 days cooling off on the finance, but any rejection within the first 30 days is subject to a full refund, its only after this time (and within 6m) that you can be charged for use.

"Short-term right to reject – the first 30 days : You are entitled to a full refund by the same method in which you paid for the car. The dealer cannot charge for usage, wear and tear, collection of the vehicle or anything else."

https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/rejecting-a-car/

I think we're at cross purposes here and I'm honestly not trying to be combative, it's quite the minefield when you look deeper into it and there's plenty to learn.

You're talking about car rejection, I'm talking about finance rejection for a car (charged at 2% after 14 days). Here's a few excerpts from the article you linked that can cause major headaches.

"If the dealership refuses to accept your rejection, you will need to take legal action to reject the vehicle. This means engaging a solicitor and potentially taking the dealer to court. It will be expensive, and there is no guarantee you will win."

"If your new or used car has a significant fault that was present when you bought it (as opposed to developing afterwards), you can reject the car within the first 30 days and get a full refund."

I don't disagree with your premise but it cost a hundred to get rid free of any hassle. I mean I could have pushed for rejection and like you said it wouldn't of cost me anything but there are reasons not to. In the ops situation however it's perfectly reasonable for them to allow deductions for mileage / wear costs.

[Apples12]

Just thought I'd update this

After escalation to vwfs, dealer principal and vwuk we agreed on the following

Refund of original deposit plus 3 out of 4 monthly repayments if we bought another car from the same dealer network or only deposit plus 1 payment if we took our business elsewhere

Gave the garage another opportunity to find us a car, ended up in a nicer 17 plate/facelift Mk7.5 golf, same spec as our original car minus heated seats with an extra payment of £400 from us.

Was given the car for 2 hours to test drive etc, promptly took it to a mates garage where we had it up on a ramp and gave it a thorough run. Car drives and feels like a golf should!

Not withstanding the lies from the retail manager, we've taken the newer car and will no longer use this particular dealer group for any of our servicing needs.

Reversing camera ready to go in along with dashcams and will be tinted on the rear soon too.