Porsche 911UK Forum

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Know your (new) rights when being a car from a dealer....

MJA911

Well-known member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
2,963
Just reading this in a newsletter from Warranty Direct...I'm sure most know this, but there are threads from owners who have bought a car from a dealer who don't seem to know how strong their hand is...


The Consumer Rights Act 2015 has recently been introduced. However, new data from the RAC shows just one in 20 (5%) motorists are aware of the new law that gives anyone buying a vehicle significantly more protection if it turns out to be faulty.

The RAC believes the new law will strengthen the hand of buyers who think they have been mis-sold a used car or if a fault is revealed within the first 30 days. The new 'short-term right to reject' provision allows the buyer to demand a full refund – previously the dealer could simply replace or repair a faulty item or part.

Up to six months from the original date of sale, the dealer will be obliged to repair or replace the faulty part, and will only have one opportunity to fix the problem. If a repair or replacement is not possible or unsuccessful, the buyer will still be able to demand a reduced price or exercise their 'final right to reject', and demand full or partial repayment.

New research from the RAC's Opinion Panel found that 95% of respondents were unaware of the new law. Of those that did know about it, just 30% correctly identified that the law came into force on 1 October 2015.

Despite the changes, four in 10 (39%) said they felt the new law would do nothing to change their confidence when purchasing their next used car, underlining the continuing deep-rooted mistrust of dealers.

However, the RAC warns that after six months the onus will be on the buyer to prove there is a fault with their vehicle, and that it was present at the time of sale. Motorists therefore need to be clear on their rights.
 
The beauty of this is the dealer is the one with the headache and not the buyer. They act like they're doing you a favour when the say 'we'll put a 6 month warranty on it sir', when in reality, they're washing their hands of the sale and passing the buck on to you.
This is great for car purchasers because when they say 'we'll put a six month......', you can just smile politely and say - no thank you :wink:
 
alex yates said:
The beauty of this is the dealer is the one with the headache and not the buyer. They act like they're doing you a favour when the say 'we'll put a 6 month warranty on it sir', when in reality, they're washing their hands of the sale and passing the buck on to you.
This is great for car purchasers because when they say 'we'll put a six month......', you can just smile politely and say - no thank you :wink:

thats true :thumb:
heres a flip thats doing the rounds in the trade already, some purchasers are buying a high end car (range rover etc) driving round europe, road trips, holidays etc, then pulling the MAF sensor off the car to through an engine management light, then giving it back to the supplier (who fixes the fault..clears the light) then the customer pulls the MAF again, and can "legally" back the car for a full refund, no matter how many miles its racked up.

you could pull this if after a few months of ownership if you find a better/cheaper car, not the dealers fault, but he will suffer the burden.

two sides to this, its great for genuine cases to protect the buyer, but harsh and open to abuse from unscrupulous buyers for the seller (trade)
 
To reject a car for a refund, it was my understanding that you have to deliver it back to the dealer, with keys and paperwork, reject it, and demand the refund.... at which point, you have no car :(

When the dealer starts to wriggle and make excuses, delaying, or refusing the refund, your recourse is to take them to court.... you still have no car :(

So unless you can afford to buy another car, whilst you hope that you eventually get your money back on the first car, likely after several months, and stressful legal action, the dealer knows that you are unlikely to choose this option.

For the ordinary Joe, versus the even slightly unscrupulous dealer, the law remains an ass.

IMHO
 
That may be so but it's a thousand times better than the law before it.
 
NB the final para of the OP... the buyer has to prove the fault was present at the time of sale. Good luck with that.

Personally, I'd still rather have a 3rd party warranty for 6 months
 
Robertb said:
NB the final para of the OP... the buyer has to prove the fault was present at the time of sale.

That is for faults that appear after 6 months, so your 3 month or 6 month third party warranty has ended in any case, assuming it was actually worth the paper it was written on in the first place :(
 
Surely it can't be expected for a dealer to make good any faults that occur after the point of sale? Fair enough if it was an existing fault, but this new rule means every car sold is an open ended liability.

It could mean no dealer will touch a car outside of manufacturers warranty in the end, all buyers will have to go private with no consumer protection at all, no PX etc.
 
Re: Know your (new) rights when being a car from a dealer...

MJA911 said:
Just reading this in a newsletter from Warranty Direct...I'm sure most know this, but there are threads from owners who have bought a car from a dealer who don't seem to know how strong their hand is...


The Consumer Rights Act 2015 has recently been introduced. However, new data from the RAC shows just one in 20 (5%) motorists are aware of the new law that gives anyone buying a vehicle significantly more protection if it turns out to be faulty.

The RAC believes the new law will strengthen the hand of buyers who think they have been mis-sold a used car or if a fault is revealed within the first 30 days. The new 'short-term right to reject' provision allows the buyer to demand a full refund – previously the dealer could simply replace or repair a faulty item or part.

Up to six months from the original date of sale, the dealer will be obliged to repair or replace the faulty part, and will only have one opportunity to fix the problem. If a repair or replacement is not possible or unsuccessful, the buyer will still be able to demand a reduced price or exercise their 'final right to reject', and demand full or partial repayment.

New research from the RAC's Opinion Panel found that 95% of respondents were unaware of the new law. Of those that did know about it, just 30% correctly identified that the law came into force on 1 October 2015.

Despite the changes, four in 10 (39%) said they felt the new law would do nothing to change their confidence when purchasing their next used car, underlining the continuing deep-rooted mistrust of dealers.

However, the RAC warns that after six months the onus will be on the buyer to prove there is a fault with their vehicle, and that it was present at the time of sale. Motorists therefore need to be clear on their rights.

I think the RAC have over simplified the 30 day rule. The car can only be rejected if the fault existed when the customer took the car, which is different to a fault then happening within a 30 day period.

To ensure dealer protection, we have signed up several dealers prior and since this date. Every Porsche they buy comes to us - we do a full PPI on the car listing all the faults - the dealer fixes all mandatory faults and on the report we provide it lists all advisories. So for example one we did today has slight corrosion on the inner faces of all discs - that is an advisory.

Therefore the buyer buys the car from the dealer, with a list of all advisories. The dealer has a signed PPI from us, which is given to the buyer.

I think in the end it offers a better car to the buyer which is good news, and long term will probably remove a lot of non compliant garages.

My dealers who are sending me cars every other day have one rule - for god sake don't miss anything :D

Ken
 
doesn't your average 6 month RAC warranty cost the dealer something like £35? Worth less than the paper it's written on - don't fool for it as reassurance...know your rights and don't in any way view this as a safety blanket!
 
Re: Know your (new) rights when being a car from a dealer...

996ttalot said:
MJA911 said:
Just reading this in a newsletter from Warranty Direct...I'm sure most know this, but there are threads from owners who have bought a car from a dealer who don't seem to know how strong their hand is...


The Consumer Rights Act 2015 has recently been introduced. However, new data from the RAC shows just one in 20 (5%) motorists are aware of the new law that gives anyone buying a vehicle significantly more protection if it turns out to be faulty.

The RAC believes the new law will strengthen the hand of buyers who think they have been mis-sold a used car or if a fault is revealed within the first 30 days. The new 'short-term right to reject' provision allows the buyer to demand a full refund – previously the dealer could simply replace or repair a faulty item or part.

Up to six months from the original date of sale, the dealer will be obliged to repair or replace the faulty part, and will only have one opportunity to fix the problem. If a repair or replacement is not possible or unsuccessful, the buyer will still be able to demand a reduced price or exercise their 'final right to reject', and demand full or partial repayment.

New research from the RAC's Opinion Panel found that 95% of respondents were unaware of the new law. Of those that did know about it, just 30% correctly identified that the law came into force on 1 October 2015.

Despite the changes, four in 10 (39%) said they felt the new law would do nothing to change their confidence when purchasing their next used car, underlining the continuing deep-rooted mistrust of dealers.

However, the RAC warns that after six months the onus will be on the buyer to prove there is a fault with their vehicle, and that it was present at the time of sale. Motorists therefore need to be clear on their rights.

I think the RAC have over simplified the 30 day rule. The car can only be rejected if the fault existed when the customer took the car, which is different to a fault then happening within a 30 day period.

To ensure dealer protection, we have signed up several dealers prior and since this date. Every Porsche they buy comes to us - we do a full PPI on the car listing all the faults - the dealer fixes all mandatory faults and on the report we provide it lists all advisories. So for example one we did today has slight corrosion on the inner faces of all discs - that is an advisory.

Therefore the buyer buys the car from the dealer, with a list of all advisories. The dealer has a signed PPI from us, which is given to the buyer.

I think in the end it offers a better car to the buyer which is good news, and long term will probably remove a lot of non compliant garages.

My dealers who are sending me cars every other day have one rule - for god sake don't miss anything :D

Ken

I think that's a fabulous and entrepreneurial response you are taking Ken. And great for the consumer.
 
Robertb said:
Surely it can't be expected for a dealer to make good any faults that occur after the point of sale? Fair enough if it was an existing fault, but this new rule means every car sold is an open ended liability.

It could mean no dealer will touch a car outside of manufacturers warranty in the end, all buyers will have to go private with no consumer protection at all, no PX etc.

Even before these new regulations, it was the case that any faults occuring within the first 6 months were deemed to have existed at the point of sale. Whether car buyers were aware of this in volume is unlikely, and whether they could beat the wriggling dealer if they were aware, is a moot point.
 
Re: Know your (new) rights when being a car from a dealer...

996ttalot said:
To ensure dealer protection, we have signed up several dealers prior and since this date. Every Porsche they buy comes to us - we do a full PPI on the car listing all the faults - the dealer fixes all mandatory faults and on the report we provide it lists all advisories. So for example one we did today has slight corrosion on the inner faces of all discs - that is an advisory.

Therefore the buyer buys the car from the dealer, with a list of all advisories. The dealer has a signed PPI from us, which is given to the buyer.

I think in the end it offers a better car to the buyer which is good news, and long term will probably remove a lot of non compliant garages.

My dealers who are sending me cars every other day have one rule - for god sake don't miss anything :D

Ken

Any chance of naming the said dealers - I should have the money to buy a 996 over the next few months, and it would be good to know that it had been thoroughly checked, and major issues fixed.
 
As with all legislation, evidential proof is everything....what the law states and what powers it provides the consumer is one thing, following it up and achieving a successful lawful outcome should something go wrong is something very different indeed.
The introduction of new consumer powers is great on paper, but putting them into practise ?
 
F15HAR said:
As with all legislation....

The introduction of new consumer powers is great on paper, but putting them into practise ?

Indeed.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted


Upon my early morning read it would seem:
1) There's still no immediate rights to rejection - it's still locked to satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described so you'd need to have solid evidence of at least one of those

If you took satisfactory quality as an example:
The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of"”

(a)any description of the goods,

(b)the price or other consideration for the goods

And then you'll notice the caveats:

The term mentioned in subsection (1) does not cover anything which makes the quality of the goods unsatisfactory"”

(a)which is specifically drawn to the consumer's attention before the contract is made,

(b)where the consumer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal

So, a test drive then....

Having rights is good - but having the argument in exercising them isn't quite as chipper.
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,354
Messages
1,439,450
Members
48,708
Latest member
JLav211
Back
Top