If a Ford AVOID Powershift gearboxes have terrible reputation for failure.

All cars should have 'regular maintenance', new or old. If this car has had that (i.e. no skimping) it should not need to be replaced. Doing that would certainly cost more than keeping up the maintenance on the old one.

Absolutely agree. It should have at least five more years life - and even then it wouldn't be as old as our Focus is. If one is poor yet needs a car, the best thing to do is learn how to make a car last. It does not take much intelligence or skill to get under it and deal with early corrosion, grease the brake pipes, and change the oil every 10,000 miles which these days is virtually all you need to do. Even a ham-fisted vicar should be capable of going one stage further and changing brake pads when necessary. He is obviously a diametric opposite to the Catholic priest Ralph in The Thornbirds, who I seem to remember drove a Ferrari.

What about a 1.6 petrol Kia Carens?

There's a 2013 one with 52,000 miles for £8,000 if you search on the Kia website.

BBD - for IT problems kalpesh@honestjohn.co.uk is your friend.

Sent email this morning after trying unsuccessfully to link the Doblo earlier on. No response as yet, but will hopefully hear something back!.

It depends on what you mean by 'regular'.

John F advocates an oil change every 10,000 miles. In most cases I would agree with him, but where we part company is if those 10,000 miles are, say, spread over 5 years with the 2,000 annual mileage consisting of short journeys (which is what many people use their cars for, especially as they get older).

Volvo's service intervals are one year or 18,000 miles, whichever comes first. I think that's spot-on.

VAG's is 2 years or 19,000 miles: I personally think that 2 years is too long, but because VAG servicing is expensive, you can understand why most owners follow their programme, especially if they are not going to keep their cars long-term.

let's not forget that this potentially very useful thread is about a suitable car for a family which must be typical of many who might be reading this.

Very good thought

Reliability....petrol power because of the short journeys....mechanical handbrake....room for 5 people all of whom will soon be adult sized....but smallish footprint.

IMHO based on personal experience there is a simple (but unfashionable) answer.

Nissan Pulsar.

Bought one last year to replace the Focus and it was easily better than anything else we looked at. Got the 1.6 turbo petrol simply because diesel is not really suitable for us these days and whilst the 1.2 turbo petrol was probably OK for the small extra cost the 1.6 has more power than we will ever need.

Compared to the others we looked at (Mazda 3, Honda Civic, Toyota Auris, Seat Leon and another Focus) it has a bigger boot than all but the Civic, more back seat space than any of them, with the 1.6 engine better performance (the Mazda and Civic were very slow, the Auris a bit better, the Leon very good) and its no bigger externally. Getting in and out of the spacious rear is a doddle as well, the Mazda and Seat were notably poor in this respect. Overall the Seat came second but its not a car to carry 3 in the rear on a regular basis.

You don't sit as high as in an MPV but you are higher up than in other similar cars, we really like that about the car. Its also got a "real" handbrake as well.

Best bit was the price. We got ours brand new unregistered and it was £4000 less than the nearest competitor (we got about £6000 off list since it was being discontinued) and better equipped. Only downside is the diamond cut wheels, but they still look OK. I accept it will depreciate like a stone but do the sums and the actual £££'s loss over 5 years will be no greater than the alternatives.

Believe it or not there is more space inside than in the much more expensive (and fashionable) Qashqai.