Rejecting a used car

Mud

Mud

Mud

Soldato
Joined
13 Dec 2004
Posts
3,186
Location
Bristol
I bought my wife a used Renault Modus (1.4l petrol, 06 plate, 17k miles), I'll summarise the course of events for clarity and to be succinct:

25/07/11 - Car purchased.
03/08/11 - Cam belt kit and water pump replaced at a cost of £320, car run for ~125 miles since purchased.
08/08/11 - Rough idle noticed and dealer informed of issue. Engine occasionally stalls from idle and digital display cluster flickers on idle. Car run for ~150 miles since purchased. Dealer blames cam belt job.
09/08/11 - Cam belt job verified as good by the garage that performed the job (I observed the checks), and the garage's omniscan finds 6 unknown faults logged. It's agreed to return the car to the dealership for diagnostics. They hook up their official Renault computer and say no faults found, so are reluctant to do work (but suspect upstream O2 sensor). They ultimately do no work and forward the car to Renault to update the car's software.
17/08/11 - Waiting for car to be returned from Renault, but I'll be very surprised if the software update cures the rough idle.

I'm on the brink of officially rejecting the car if the rough idle isn't cured...I don't want a problem child of a car. Naturally, if the rough idle is cured then everything is peachy and we'll keep the car...but if it isn't should I be looking to recoup the cost of the cam belt job, or just getting a refund/replacement on the car?

I'm a little concerned that the dealer is going to start blaming the cam belt job as the cause of the rough idle again. The idle may have been rough before the job and my wife simply wasn't informed enough to notice. In any case, the car was sold requiring an imminent service (not yet performed) and cam belt job, so the work was not elective.

Also, does anyone know if the Renault computer is all-knowing? Why it doesn't catch the faults the omniscan detects (but has no diagnosis for) is beyond me...
 
I don't think you have any grounds for rejecting the car yet, unless the dealer can prove that the cambelt replacement is causing the rough idle then I don't think they can blame it on that.

Omiscan is rubbish btw.......

Did you buy it from a main dealer or independant and who is the warranty through?

Thanks
 
Independent dealer, so usual limited warranty.

I've read that it's difficult to reject a car after 4 weeks, hence wanting to get a move-on if the car is a problem child.
 
HarryPainful said:
I'm sure any garage that sells a car has to give a 3 month warranty by law.
Click to expand...

Isn't it 3 months that they'll admit to, but in reality the SoGA says longer? That's not the main issue though...a niggling fault that cripples the car is far less desirable than a big fault that's fixable as far as I'm concerned.
 
Mud said:
Independent dealer, so usual limited warranty.

I've read that it's difficult to reject a car after 4 weeks, hence wanting to get a move-on if the car is a problem child.
Click to expand...

Yes but who is the warranty underwritten by?

Best bet is to wait till car comes back from Renault, in my experience I've always found the main dealers to be better at finding faults in cars than any independants, I'm not saying that's always the case as there are plenty of good independants out there.

But if this doesn't cure it, and an upstream oxygen sensor doesn't cure it and it worked fine before you had the cambelt done then it will be between the dealer and garage to sort it out.
 
Maz said:
Yes but who is the warranty underwritten by?

Best bet is to wait till car comes back from Renault, in my experience I've always found the main dealers to be better at finding faults in cars than any independants, I'm not saying that's always the case as there are plenty of good independants out there.

But if this doesn't cure it, and an upstream oxygen sensor doesn't cure it and it worked fine before you had the cambelt done then it will be between the dealer and garage to sort it out.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the underwriter I must admit, will find out. What difference does it make?

I can neither confirm nor deny that the idle wasn't rough before the cam belt job, but I think it was fine when I road-tested it.

Just had a phonecall from the dealer, they say the software update has cured the dodgy idle. Going to collect the car now...

Thanks all.
 
HarryPainful said:
I'm sure any garage that sells a car has to give a 3 month warranty by law.
Click to expand...

How sure? Because that is simply not true.

They need not give any warranty at all but any faults occurring in the first 6 months are deemed to have been present at time of purchase unless the trader can prove otherwise which is very hard and means almost all traders offer a warranty to cover themselves.
 
Are these engines variable timing (ie. have a de-phaser pulley)?

Sounds to me like it probably was the cambelt job.
 
MikeHiow said:
Are these engines variable timing (ie. have a de-phaser pulley)?

Sounds to me like it probably was the cambelt job.
Click to expand...

The cams are fixed timing as far as I know (not far). The rough idle is better now (as in not doing it all the time), but did do a few seconds of roughness when I went to collect the car (twice)...so it would appear the flash made some difference. I've been told that the cache on the engine management computer has been cleared and needs to do probably 40 miles to get itself right again, so on that basis I accepted the vehicle with the caveat that I'd bring it back if it wasn't 100% within a day or so and that the mechanic would talk to the dealer to explain he'd witnessed further roughness.

The mechanic showed me a plot of ignition timing (spark angle) vs. time, and it's perfectly stable with the AC on (or some other load on the engine, such as bringing up the clutch a little). As soon as the engine is completely without external load is when the roughness is happening. Not sure what to make of that to be honest, but goes some way to explaining how to reproduce the fault (and why it wasn't always noticeable - I like fresh air when possible).
 
MikeHiow said:
Are these engines variable timing (ie. have a de-phaser pulley)?

Sounds to me like it probably was the cambelt job.
Click to expand...

Had a problem with a Volvo with variable timing, people who fitted timing belt didn't set the variable pulley up properly, so even though the car drove fine engine light was constantly on.
 
It seems like the VVT moduses are all 1.6l, and mine's 1.4l. I could be mistaken, seems like a tricky thing to find out on something as tame as a modus. It's a normally aspirated 4-pot DOHC, chosen largely because the missus is unlikely to do mega-miles and hopefully simple enough to be low on surprise bills.
 
Last edited:
Things like 6 months for faults and the retailer having to prove it wasnt faulty at purchase is for NEW goods, not second hand.

You basically have no grounds to reject, you wouldnt even be able to reject a brand new car for an intermittant stall and a random fault code.

As for the cambelt, well, you purchased it knowing it needed doing. If you didnt agree to have it done beforehand then you really cant grizzle - more fool you for not negotiating a better deal.
 
This isn't actually about warranty per se. It's about having a reasonable time to inspect it in. Normally this takes place before you purchase the item, but with cars the law accepts that there are many things about the car that you simply can't find by just looking under the bonnet. The period of time that is considered 'reasonable', allowing you to reject the car, is fact specific, but it can run to several months. I've not looked at this relatively specific area of the law since I was a law student so can't remember the relevant periods, but will dig them out later tonight.
 
TRNC said:
Things like 6 months for faults and the retailer having to prove it wasnt faulty at purchase is for NEW goods, not second hand.
Click to expand...

Absolute rubbish.

OFT guidance for second hand car dealers

Compliance with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended)

Faults with the car emerge in first 6 months after purchase - presumed to have been present at time of sale. Burden of proof is with the dealer to prove fault not present at time of sale
Click to expand...

Source: OFT.gov.uk
 
What Fox has done is take snippets from one page, and bits from another and concocted a very misleading post (nothing new there then).

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1241.pdf is the "official" guide for dealers. I stand by the statement i made, you CANNOT reject the car, if you dont believe me then try and I will fall about laughing as will the dealer. You have no legal redress to force them to take it back and you wouldnt win any legal action. At best you can try to get them to fix it but as you had another garage do work in the mean time you would have to prove their work didnt cause the problems, not the selling garage.
 
From the link you posted:

A consumer buys a four-year old car
from a dealer at a cost of £9,000.
The dealer provides the consumer with
a free three month warranty with the car.
The engine seizes up after four months
due to a fault – it will be presumed to
have been present at the time of
purchase in the absence of any proof
from the dealer to the contrary. The
dealer cannot then refuse to repair or
replace the car simply because it is out
of warranty. The consumer is entitled
to a repair or replacement as the car
was not of satisfactory quality at the
time of purchase.

Seems to support the OFT snippet, non?
 
TRNC said:
I stand by the statement i made, you CANNOT reject the car, if you dont believe me then try and I will fall about laughing as will the dealer.
Click to expand...

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rig...econd-hand-cars/second-hand-cars-your-rights/

Which said:
If there's a problem with a second hand car soon after you’ve bought it, for example, the car develops a problem you wouldn’t expect for the car’s age and mileage, or it turns out to be not what you’d been lead to expect, you may have the right to ‘reject’ the car and get your money back.

However, you have only a ‘reasonable’ time to reject a second hand car. There’s no clear definition of what a reasonable time is – you probably need to do it within three or four weeks of buying it. And if the fault is very obvious you may have less time.

If you reject a second hand car you must stop using it.
Click to expand...


http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/c_secondhand_cars.pdf
Citizens Advice Bureau said:
Whether you can return the car and demand your money back depends in
part on how long you have had the car and how many miles it has travelled
before reporting the fault. If the fault is serious and you have not done many miles and return (reject) it very shortly after purchase, you may be entitled to a full refund. If, however, you keep the car for a longer time without returning it, you may lose this right, although you may still be entitled to ask for the fault to be rectified. If you are entitled to a refund, this will include both the money you paid for the faulty car and the return of any part-exchanged car. If the part-exchanged car has since been sold, you are entitled to the cash value as represented on your paperwork.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom