My sister's car (Second hand 4 years old 80K full dealer history - out of warranty) decided to die about 6 weeks ago. it was recovered to a main dealer who quoted £2000 for replacement parts ie :Blown turbo, Intercooler etc.
Unfortunately she just brought a house and hadn't any cash so sold it ebay "advertised as for spares repair" with a full list of parts needed.
Chap buy's it for £2.5K off ebay - it was worth may be £5.5K in perfect condition. This week the guy phones here up and reports that after fitting all the new parts it doesn't start and that he took it to his local dealer who diagnosed it need one new injector (£233 including fitting although the dealer recomended all 4 new injectors at £500 incl fitting in total and said that the other dealership didn't know what they were talking about.
A) can he sue her ..I think not becasuse of auction and it was adverised as a none runner but more importantly
B) can she take the orginal dealer to the small claims for £3K as she could have just about afforded £500 and she ditched a decent car on the "expert view of a main dealer"
any views welcome
|
A) Private Sale Purchaser has no comeback on your sister
B) Very difficult as she should have pursued the supplying dealer and sued him / given him a last chance to put the car right. Dealer under obligation to fix a "reasonably priced 2nd hand car" within a "reasonable time".
I cannnot say she would succeed with a claim against supplying garage.
If it had been a £500 car and a few months since purchase - NO Chance
If it had been a £10K car with 20K mls - she would have an excellent chance
A 4 yr old £5K car with 80K mls on the clock?
Some BR will have a better knowledge than I.
However small claims court is a "nominal fee" and you represent yourself (+ your own expert witness!) so worth a go - especially if you have witnesses/written proof to dealer's refusal to repair car.
|
|
|
This doesn't make sense.
The buyer replaced all the notified faulty parts from the eBay advert/sale, then took it to 'local dealer' who said it needed new injectors in addition - of course it didn't need turbo, intercooler - they'd just been replaced! What's the beef with the 'main dealer' in that case - he could well have been correct.
From the facts supplied (..and I've understood them correctly):
- private buyer has no claim on you - sold as spares/repair.
- you've no claim against the 'main dealer' - as he may have only neglected to diagnose new injectors required in addition to the rest - the 'local dealer' only saw car after new parts fitted.
This is a free consultation - Merry Christmas.
|
'local dealer' said it needed new injectors in addition
The suggestion is obviously that main dealer misdiagnosed the problem. If someone still has the old turbo/intercooler then they may be able to show to the satisfaction of a court (balance of probability etc) that there was nothing wrong with those parts.
It all seems more trouble than it is worth though. Live and learn - second opinions are good!
|
|
|
- you've no claim against the 'main dealer' - as he may have only neglected to diagnose new injectors required in addition to the rest - the 'local dealer' only saw car after new parts fitted.
Sorry woodbines this may make it clear
Car was sold with "problems" new buyer takes it to mate/ small garage who go on what the main dealer said ... order and fit new parts as requested by the new owner. They then can't get the car to fire new owner told me he was faced with a choice it was either a recon engine or take it to his main dealer which he did.
I've just got off the phone with the last dealer to see the car (main dealer) suggest the problem is nothing to do with the turbo but they cannot confirm this as they didn't put it in but the new injector is fitted and the car is running fine.
|
> but they cannot confirm this
There you go. Those few words would kill any attempt to get money from the garage that told you it needed a new turbo.
------
< Ulla>
|
|
|
Given that the car has now had lots done at it then who can say what really needed to be done?
I cant see how you can have a sensible claim. You should have got a second opinion before selling it.
Would need to know what the agreement was between you and your buyer to know if there is a claim, but I doubt it very much. They bought a non-runner. It needed extra work? Tough.
they had the chance to look it over befor buying.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry I ment to say can she take the dealer to court who first looked at the car after it was recovered. It was they who said it needed £2000K worth of work when according to another it only needed £233 or £500 at worst.
Therefore would she have a case against them ?
|
Paul, is the second garage saying it didn't need all the original stuff changed ie turbo etc and that it only needed injectors?
--
2007 Seat Altea XL 2.0 TDI (140) Stylance
2005 Skoda Fabia vrS
|
|
|
No. you said the new buyer changed them, found it it wasnt needed and then changed the injectors as well. Who is to say that ALL of it wasnt needed.
you really are on a looser to nothing on thjis one.
------
< Ulla>
|
I think she did surprisinly well getting £2.5K for a car that needed £2K of work and would have only have been worth £5.5K in perfect condition.
On the original question: the buyer trying to sue the seller would seem to be a non-starter.
Regarding suing the dealer who diagnosed the problem: as others have said, those parts have been replaced anyway, so who is to say they weren't faulty. Turbo failure at 80K is not unheard of.
You could write to the dealers and make a claim, you could even pursue it in the small claims court (MoneyClaimOnline)and *maybe*, if it's a big group they'd settle before it went to court, but you'd have to be prepared to walk away the moment it started to get complicated.
|
|
|
|
"it needed £2000K worth of work "
Wow, that's some repair cost! ;-)
|
|
£2000K: Head on collision between a Veyron and an F16?
|
I wonder which car died at 80k miles at 4-yr only! Any chance you can reveal the car details?
Edited by movilogo on 19/12/2007 at 10:37
|
|
The car is a mitsuibishi grandis ? people carrier type ..
|
Isn't this the one with the VW PD engine??
Better to have taken it to a VW independent.
Hard to prove anything one way or the other now its been messed about with so much. I would have thought that whoever did the (substantial) repair work would have had the nous to spot whether the turbo was shot or not...
|
If I read your tale right, you say that the engine died, and I take it that the engine would not fire.
If the main dealer diagnosed a " blown turbo and intercooler" then I would have said, why does not the engine at least run but with reduced power ?
After all, the purpose of the turbo is to increase the intake air pressure and the purpose of the intercooler is to cool the intake air.
Even if the turbo seized, the engine would still run. And how do you "blow" an intercooler .
In any case, when a turbo fails. symptoms are usually evident like an increase in noise from the bearings etc.
Nice little earner for a dishonest dealer if you had accepted their diagnosis and paid up. As it stands, you lost out.
I would say that you have been done, but do you have the stomach for action against them ?
I know I would not just let it go without at least getting another opinion of the so called faulty turbo and intercooler.
|
|
|
would have had the nous to spot whether the turbo was shot or not...
Along with the integrity to say, hey guv, you don't want this work, must be the injectors or summink... Or might he just think, money's money, the s/h turbo and intercooler are worth £N, nice little earner if you aren't too scrupulous. I'm not suggesting Aprilia that everyone is like that, but we know some are.
The tragedy in all this is the helplessness of the owner. Even knowledgeable owners can be done over. Knowing it's happening doesn't prevent it once things have passed a certain point.
|
A) I don't think he can sue her as firstly its a private sale and he bought a car as a non-runner, so it never was in any roadworthy state for him to have any comeback.
B) I think you are on a hiding to nothing by chasing the original dealer who may or may not have given a dodgy diagnosis. The car has passed through too many peoples hands and everyone has been tinkering with it. No-one really knows what has or hasn't gone on with it each time someone has played with it.
Finally I don't really see what the problem is, apart from you think that your sister has lost out. Looking at the figures, the guy bought the car for £2500, it would have cost another £2000 at the main dealer to fix the turbo problem but this guy had his mate do the work so it would have cost him significantly less. He then had to spend an extra £233 having the injector done. In total the guy can only have spent a maximum of £4733 on it all (I suspect in reality it is a chunk less than this), and you say that in perfect working order the car is worth £5500. What is this guys problem? He should be well into 'profit'.
|
What is this guys problem? He should be well into 'profit'.
The guy's problem is he sounds like a total peasant. There are too many around like him sadly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
