Some people do not believe that good faith exists.

Prestige car dealers do not sell cars that have known problems. Why would they its much cheaper and less hassle to ensure a car is in "Good Order" before selling. Car dealers like to sleep at night too, we have your lives in our cars so to speak.

That's me finished here had enough. Quite depressing really.

Bed zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Well I don't make the laws when it comes to consumer rights regarding cars.

But if I was in the business of selling cars as a dealer then I would make sure I was fully up-to speed on consumer rights that I might be expected to adhere to.

Below are the consumer rights regarding second hand cars bought from dealers.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Second hand car from a dealer

When you buy a second hand car from a dealer, you have the right, under the Sale of Goods Act, to expect the car to:

be of satisfactory quality (taking into account its age and mileage)
meet any description given to you when you were buying it ( whether in the advert or in discussions prior to sale)
be fit for the purpose (for example, to get you from A to B safely).

If the second hand car does not meet these requirements, you have a right to claim against the dealer for breach of contract.

If something you buy is not 'as described', or if the seller is guilty of misrepresentation, you are entitled to:

give the second hand car back and get your money back, or
if you want to keep the car, ask for compensation (usually the cost of any repairs it needs)

But, if you buy a second hand car that was not described as being in excellent condition or good working order, and it breaks soon after you buy it, you don't have any right to reject it, or to claim compensation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was taken directly from:
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/pro...my-rights/

So I certainly would encourage XJR to seek a refund. Please feel free to supply contradicting evidence rather than opinion and hear say. As if a claim goes to court only facts and the the law will be taken into account, it doesn't matter how reputable the dealer is or how unlucky the dealer is with a car developing problems the onus and responsibility in law lays with the dealer. I would imagine any reputable dealer would not let things go that far anyhow and sort something out that was agreeable to both parties.

The key point here is " be fit for the purpose" The dealer sold a car that was not fit for purpose, whether it was by accident or intentional is irrelevant. The law states the dealer is responsible. While a warranty gives a secondary option here lets not forget the consumer laws are there to protect buyers purchasing cars from a dealer. It doesn't matter if your a main dealer selling prestige cars or small dealer selling low end cars, the law is the same.

Any car dealer selling cars that thinks that consumer law does not apply to them and a warranty will cover them is missing the point. Sure the buyer can choose to have the warranty cover to fix the car but the buyer is also still entitled to his rights under consumer law, warranty or no warranty.

Last edited by Prop on 9th Oct 2013 2:02am. Edited 1 time in total

Gary not sure why you would note either my friends or my own opinion and state you often do not agree with previous posts. Maybe some paranoia setting in. I didn't realise you were keeping a note!! All very strange if you ask me, and not really helping XJR in his original thread.

My comments on this thread were made before you and you chose to add yours after mine which were different. I am entitled to my opinion and you to yours, and I don't keep notes on it.

I will continue to use the word "We". Especially when I am trying to encourage someone who has been unfortunate enough to have had the issues that XJR has had. And just for clarity the word "We" just means plural, more than one in its context, and does not mean my opinion is in the majority so please refrain from making such inaccurate statements like, I was assuming my opinion was in the majority. I at no stage made such a statement and feel it unfair that you should turn a simple two letter word like we into that.

I didn't realise that this was a popularity competition and that I needed to get more folk to agree with my opinion than yours to win. That was not my intention, my only intention was to help a fellow forum member out, who must be going through a lot of turmoil at the moment.

I offered some advice, you offered some advice. I recommended early on that XJR should seek proper legal advice in this case and have stipulated that I am not an expert in law by any means. But it seems I can find nothing to say XJR does not have a case for holding the dealer responsible and nothing you have stated is backed up by anything other than opinion. maybe neither of us are qualified. But lets not forget XJR paid money for a car that from his brief description would appear to be far from satisfactory.

Let XJR get proper legal advice, that's the best advice I can give him. But I certainly would not tell him to not request a refund as you have. Surely he is entitled to get proper legal advice rather than yours or my opinion on the matter.

My point was/is that the car may have been perfect when it was sold we simply don't know when the engine failure problem, whatever caused it, started.

The law is the law but any breach has to be proved in court and I am pretty sure the dealer would defend himself rigorously. There is no automatic win here and many cases go the way of the dealer for lack of evidence. If he loses it will probably be to late to go the warranty route and will end up with an £8k bill.

The warranty contract was taken our for the specific purpose of repairing the car in the event of mechanical failure while policy in force.

Common sense say's It must make sense to pursue the warranty repair first and foremost although as you say this is the clients choice.

I genuinely hope that XJR Racer can get the TDV8 fixed ASAP and is able to enjoy the car in A1 condition as is his right.

Gary no one is suggesting XJR has an automatic win, but judging from XJR's description of events he certainly has a case in my opinion.

You keep mentioning that the dealer wins many cases for lack of evidence, could you please elaborate or supply examples. I would assume that XJR has proof of the previous issues mentioned and certainly he will have proof of the head gasket failure. My understanding of the law in this regard is that XJR does not have to prove that the dealer deliberately supplied a faulty car, but that the car was not fit for the purpose it was bought for, in this case to get from A to B.

I get the impression you are trying to put XJR off from looking at returning the car, and almost scare mongering by making statements like dealers often win. Surely a legal expert would be better off advising XJR. XJR can then make a decision based on expert advice rather than speculation and hear say that dealers win many cases.

As you state the warranty should cover mechanical breakdown etc, but in this case XJR's consumer rights may offer him better protection than the third party warranty, so no its not common sense to seek a warranty repair. It is common sense to seek legal advice, and not to discourage XJR from doing what is best for him and not the dealer.

It concerns me Gary that you do not make a single reference to XJR seeking professional legal help in all your posts regarding XJR's dilemma, and what is most likely a very stressful time for him. All you have added to this thread is a doom and gloom approach of your gonna lose if you try and seek out the dealer. Why do you insist he should go through the warranty company when it may be offering him less rights than the law provides him. Surely he is better off seeking professional advice than either you or I can supply. I get the impression you are taking a very one sided view without knowing all the facts. My advice to XJR is seek legal advice then and only then make your decision based on that advice.

In the end XJR is stuck at the moment with a car that has a wrecked engine. He has had little use out of the car in the 12 weeks of ownership which has ended in the vehicle needing a new engine. We should be offering him support and unbiased advice that is in his best interests, and on this point I will whole heartedily disagree with your comments and approach which I feel could be scaring XJR into making the wrong decision. XJR should be seeking legal advice end of. And if the legal advice is to seek a return of the car for a refund then surely that would be better than having the engine replaced. XJR could then get another car and start afresh.

I have express'd my opinion that a warranty is there to be used when required no more and not specifically advising XJR one way or another.

Small dealer getting an £8-£10k bill could put him out of business. Two sides to every story.

I will say no more on the matter but you can post as many long replies as you wish.

PS: Legal advice is always a good thing especially if free.

PPS: What happens if XJR takes your specific advice and sues for return of car and loses - having missed chance to claim on warranty. XJR could be out of business. Common sense says warranty first.

IMHO Gaz is talking sense. I'd be minded to listen to good advice when it's offered.

Gary glad to see you agree that legal advice is a good thing. Just a shame you didn't do that at the beginning instead of your Devils advocate approach which I don't think helps XJR in any way.

I am afraid you expressed a lot more than "a warranty is there to be used when required no more and not specifically advising XJR one way or another. "

Your quotes:

"Any number of related or unrelated things could have caused the Engine Failure. How far back to you go in the blame game?"
"I understand UK courts often find in favour of the Dealer if there is no clear evidence they were at fault at point of sale."
"Blaming Dealers for every fault a car has post purchase can at times be just a little unfair."
"Prestige car dealers do not sell cars that have known problems. Why would they its much cheaper and less hassle to ensure a car is in "Good Order" before selling."
"No we should not be encouraging him to request a refund."
"There is no automatic win here and many cases go the way of the dealer for lack of evidence. If he loses it will probably be to late to go the warranty route and will end up with an £8k bill."

And Gary your PPS comment on your previous post "What happens if XJR takes your specific advice and sues for return of car and loses" is completely wrong and inaccurate. At no stage have I given XJR specific advice to sue the dealer. I did say that XJR should ask for a refund, but that's a far cry from suing the dealer don't you think?. I did state that XJR should seek legal advice. Now that legal advice could be to sue the dealer or not to sue the dealer, but at no point did I ask XJR to sue the dealer. Why would I, I'm not a legal expert and have maintained that XJR's best course of action is to seek legal advice.

Please stop with the inaccurate and incorrect statements in my name, if your having difficulty reading the post and absorbing the facts then maybe you should refrain my making statements on my behalf that are totally wrong.

XJR, please except my apologies regarding this thread and the direction it has taken. But I feel that some of the advice given has not been in your best interest.

Lets try and get back onto the important things, re your situation.

I can only offer you my advice and that is to firstly approach the dealer to seek a refund. If this fails which I suspect it will, then you should seek legal advice to establish your best course of action. This should be decided by someone with legal expertise and not by IMHO or any other opinions for that matter. Again the decision is entirely your own, and you may want to keep the car and have it repaired but as the warranty company has already refused your claim you would still be needing legal advice anyhow. So establishing if you have a case to return the car for a refund should not be ruled out if that is what you would prefer, and your legal advisor should advice you if you should seek a warranty claim or refund.

I really wish you the best of luck with your issues and my heart truly goes out to you. Whats happened to you is rare I hope, but that doesn't mean you should be left disadvantaged. I am fairly sure that the law is there to protect buyers from this exact type of scenario, so seek legal advice if you need to and let them advice you of the best course of action.

Best of luck.

"Just to add insult to injury the engineer has stated that the fault wasn't present at time of purchase therefore hampering our claim against the dealer under the sales of goods act."

There is no way an inspecting engineer can make the above statement re the fault not being present at the time of purchase.
He didn't inspect the engine at the time of purchase therefore his statement is not competent.
The head gasket may or may not have had a fault at time of purchase which then subsequently progressed to total failure but as no-one inspected the head gasket at time of purchase, why would they?, nobody is in a position to state catagorically the condition of the head gasket at purchase.
I trust you checked the oil and coolant levels before your trip.
Imo straight forward warranty claim whatever the warranty co says, in the circumstances don't think the dealer has any liability.
Head gaskets do fail progressively possibly allowing coolant into the oilways and thus ruining bearings etc thro deficient lubrication before a warning light may alert the driver to stop the car. to stop a car within one minute of warning lights appearing whilst driving on a busy motorway imo is perfectly reasonable in view of the need to stop safely.

Am I missing something here?

XJR has bought a car 3 months ago. The car is only available to him for 5 weeks out of that 3 months he has owned it due to various faults that occurred on the car almost immediately after purchase.

Then the car suffers a head gasket failure which wrecks the engine. I think this atleast is worth getting professional advice on as to whether the car is fit for purpose. If as XJR states the engine is now beyond repair then either the dealer or the warranty company should be held to account if user neglect is ruled out.

My point being is that XJR purchased a car that has been off the road more than its been on the road during his brief ownership. Regardless of warranty he has bought a car that has not been available for him to use and finally the head gasket goes taking the engine out.

Should XJR not at-least seek legal advice in this matter? Would it not be better for him to return the car if he is legally entitled to and start afresh?

+1 what nicedayforit says...
Been reading this and don't want to get involved in the bickering.
IMO..... If you bought the car from a reputable dealer he would sell the car in good faith. He would also provide a warranty. Which he did. If the warranty company refuse a claim due to customer misuse then it's not really the dealers fault.
If you go legal on him, He will just use the defence of the engineers statement that the OP is at fault.
I think the OP must complain to the warranty company, or an ombudsman, about the stupid statement that the car was ok when sold and that he was in some way to blame... It really does sound like a warranty claim but they are trying to get out of paying. Previously..
Vogue SE TD6
Defender 90 2.4
Defender 110 TD5
Vogue 3.5 EFI

Having been down the route of having a dispute with a dealer myself. I suspect that the advice from a solictior will be get an independent engineers report and persue a repair under the warranty. The warranty is provided to cover these kind of unexpected failures so the garage has probably shown due care.

Given the potential bill I would be taking legal advice immediately as any delay may prevent a proper claim being made against the warranty company or the dealer.

One point which I don't think has been picked up is whether the warranty would cover the full cost of a replacement engine, some warranties have a maximum limit per claim, who would pick up the balance if this were the case the dealer? or XJR? 56 TDV8 Vogue SE
9 Freelanders, 2x 2002 TD4ES, 2001 TD4, 2002 1.8GS, 2000 XEDI, 2x 2000 1.8ES, 2004 1.8 & 2000 1.8 GS (rolled)
91 Lotus Carlton (sold)
90 Lotus Elan (BRG)

So the prior history of the car being unavailable to the new owner for the majority of his ownership is the new owner or the warranty companies fault? It cant possibly be down to the dealer?

I am not saying that the head gasket failure on it own is the case here. It's the whole history from date of purchase to head gasket failure. Let alone the fact that XJR is now in a position where once again the car will be unavailable to him for a long period of time, so XJR cannot use the car for the purpose he bought it for, getting from A to B.

Does this not warrant getting some legal advice in regard to returning the car to the dealer? Seems to me that the warranty company are currently refusing his claim anyway so XJR may need legal help to progress. But with all the previous off the road time since ownership he may well have a case to return the car. Should he not let this avenue be considered? Surely if the law entitles him to something and legal advice if taken confirms this then he should have the option to return the car.

After all the warranty fixes the car but does it make it available for him to use if for the purpose he bought it for? He didn't buy the car to have it sitting in a garage for 2/3rds of his ownership time and finally have the engine wrecked.