Second hand car engine failure after 3 months
- Thread starter Linkex
- Start date
He's wrong but not "entirely" wrong. While the KV6 is defiantly a Rover engine, the one used in the Rover 75 was re-designed for that purpose, by Rover under BMW's supervision (hence why it has so many German parts in it for a British engine).
I think that's what the owners club may be getting at, however as nobody except the Rover/BMW techs really know just how much influence/involvement BMW had over the finished product for all we know their supervision could just have been two blokes named Hans and Frits standing in the Rover design office eating Wienerschnitzel and laughing every time a Rover tech did something
Glad to hear the outcome, only just read this thread and noticed it was 8 months old, seems taking things to court really does take ages.
I'm surprised by the garage though, surely they would have known they wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it got to court and should have just given a full refund months ago.
I'm surprised by the garage though, surely they would have known they wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it got to court and should have just given a full refund months ago.
Congrats. Well played.
Got to agree with above though. Surely this garage must be idiots? It seems obvious they were going to lose, so why take it to court and have to pay court fees and such? Mental.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2014
- Posts
- 3,008
6 months 
Glad you got it sorted though bud.
It does suck that as stated above it takes so much effort to extract the "guarentee" you paid for by buying trade.
Glad you got it sorted though bud.
It does suck that as stated above it takes so much effort to extract the "guarentee" you paid for by buying trade.
Thank you.
Yes, they turned up. I actually felt slightly sorry for them at the start, because after the judge read my complaint and I confirmed it was correct, he turned to the dealers side and said (and I'm paraphrasing because I can't remember the exact words) ' I have read your defence and I can't say I'm particularly impressed. Did you seek legal advice?'.
They contended that the hole in the piston was caused by extended overheating and that there must have been signs of overheating prior to the breakdown which we had ignored and that by continuing to drive the car in that state rather than taking it back to them, we worsened the damage. The judge took the view that even if that were the case (And it wasn't) it would demonstrate a clear fault with the car anyway, so it would still be their responsibility. He also observed that it would be for them to prove that was the case, not for me to prove it wasn't.
During the initial discussions with them, when they were asking questions about what had happened, they asked if I had been checking the oil. I told them that I checked it every couple of weeks (As most do). They argued that the manual says 'once a week or when you fuel up, whichever is sooner' and because I failed to do that, I was not properly maintaining the vehicle. They also suggested that if I had checked it in line with the manual, I would have noticed it losing oil and could have taken it back to them for repair. The judge took the view that if a car that is losing that much oil that it needs weekly checking, then it has a major fault, which again, is their responsibility and the fact that I wasn't checking exactly in line with the handbook wasn't relevant.
All in all, the Judge seemed quite clued up on mechanics - for example, I had planned to counter their argument about not checking the oil that, if it had been losing it at a high rate, I would have either seen puddles or smoke, but he actually stepped in and pointed out exactly that himself.
I didn't actually do much talking in the end. He read the version of events as he understood it, which I confirmed. Towards the end, he asked why my wife wasn't present (She was driving at the time it died) and I explained she was abroad at the moment and gave her version of events. He briefly considered putting the case on hold until she was back, but concluded that she was unlikely to say anything I hadn't already said. Beyond that, almost all of the talking was between the Judge and the dealer on the above subjects.
Congrats on seeing this though to the end mate, the best man won in the end, even if it did take 6 months. I guess you'll have to wait and see what they decide to do, whether it's repair the car or just give you a full refund
Thanks
Actually, thats no longer up to them. When I first took the car to them they could have either repaired or refunded, but because they did neither and I took it to court, it became a specific petition for a refund. In giving his judgement, he said to the dealer (and I'm paraphrasing again) 'The car is now your property, you owe Mr Linkex £xxxx. Mr Linkex, you must do whatever paperwork goes along with returning ownership to them (i.e. the V5)'. And with that, we were invited to leave, so I thanked him and left.One final note, and something that only occurred to me today, but presumably this means the dealer now have a CCJ against them? Is that something you can search for? (Credit check?) It seems to me it might be a good way to tell how well a dealer treats its customers in this situation, so if you're about to buy a car, maybe chucking £5 at Experian could be a useful investment alongside the HPI?
- Joined
- 14 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 17,596
- Location
- Newcastle U/T
Congrats
Always good to see another win over scum dealers
Always good to see another win over scum dealers
Congratulations on the outcome of this, well done for sticking to your post and beating the motor trade at their own game. They have a terrible reputation for very good reason.
I feel now is a good time to mention (from someone who has owned an awful lot of cars and touch wood never been burned) that buying from a dealer such as this is a bad idea, buy cars in the following three ways only in my opinion;
1) From a franchised main agent
2) From a private seller, knowing you have no comeback, and check the car properly yourself, judge the seller, ideally buy from the original owner of the car only to get a true indication of the cars ownership profile
3) From the trade but in auction format with zero comeback at your own risk - this is my preferred route and i will pay a price which reflects this and just take the risk
A CCJ does not work in this way, a CCJ is only recorded in this way if the garage were to default on their payment terms. Simply being ordered to pay someone money and then meeting those terms is not a recordable action.
I feel now is a good time to mention (from someone who has owned an awful lot of cars and touch wood never been burned) that buying from a dealer such as this is a bad idea, buy cars in the following three ways only in my opinion;
1) From a franchised main agent
2) From a private seller, knowing you have no comeback, and check the car properly yourself, judge the seller, ideally buy from the original owner of the car only to get a true indication of the cars ownership profile
3) From the trade but in auction format with zero comeback at your own risk - this is my preferred route and i will pay a price which reflects this and just take the risk
A CCJ does not work in this way, a CCJ is only recorded in this way if the garage were to default on their payment terms. Simply being ordered to pay someone money and then meeting those terms is not a recordable action.
Forgot to say, thanks for the support/useful links/kind words
I had totally forgotten about this after I originally posted 6 months ago.
Glad you found the various advice helpful and well done sticking to your guns.
Was interesting to see they tried the same 'tricks' as I experienced - 'good will gesture'.
I only avoided court action when my fault was repaired by a different garage with a free firmware update. Original dealer had diagnosed as £1500 fault which they would contribute a couple of hundred quid as a goodwill gesture. Like you, they also refused to acknowledge their legal responsibilities all along.
Hope everything goes smooth from here.