How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask F E Smith Your Own Question
F E Smith
F E Smith, Advocate
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 9605
Experience:  I have been practising for 30 years.
18203470
Type Your Law Question Here...
F E Smith is online now

I recently purchased a Range Rover for £30000 from a large

Customer Question

Hi there, I recently purchased a Range Rover for £30000 from a large 4x4 dealership. The vehicle came with a full comprehensive RAC 6 month warranty. The vehicle then subsequently broke down twice in the first two weeks but seemed to reset itself after each event.
However during the start of the third week the vehicle once again broke down and as in previous circumstances It seemed to reset itself
On this occasion i insisted on returning the vehicle to the place of purchase (50 miles away) where they gave me a coutisey car. Due to erratic nature of the fault it took them some time to diagnose the problem. The fault did eventually reoccure and broke down during an engineers test drive.
Apparently after an investigation by the RAC they have refused to cover the remedial works required to rectify the problem, which are now incurre considerable costs.
The dealership refuse to accept these findings so are apparently disputing them. They have now had my vehicle for over 3 weeks. Longer than I had the vehicle.
They never return my calls and have given me no indication when or if I will get my vehicle back.
Now I would like for them to keep the vehicle and return my money. Do I have a case to I force this under my CR.
Kind regards
Graham
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  F E Smith replied 1 year ago.

Under section 22.3 of the Consumer Rights Act, and section 20, you have the right to reject the goods for a substantial fault within the first 30 days.

After 30 days, your remedy is compensation/damages which could be the value of the vehicle or the cost of a repair.

I don’t know whether you are outside that 30 day period or not.

However even if you are entitled to reject the goods and have a refund, actually getting out of the dealer, particularly a car dealer is going to be a job on its own because they do not routinely refund for defective vehicles, regardless of how major the fault is.

There may be an issue here with the RAC and the warranty because we don’t know why they will refuse to cover the cost.

However that’s between the dealer and the RAC, liability for this and having the goods provided of satisfactory quality, rests with the dealer.

If you paid extra for the warranty, you may be entitled to a full refund on that if it will not pay up.

The problem of course is that if they want refund you, you are going to have to take them to court.

Fortunately, you have the RAC report which is good evidence even though they are disputing it, it is likely that the court would believe the RAC report over any report prepared by the dealer who has a vested interest in saying that the RAC report is defective.

Can I clarify anything further for you?

Please rate the service positive. It doesn’t cost you anything but helps me greatly.

We can still exchange emails.

Best wishes.

FES

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Thank you for your response. The vehicle was purchased on the 2nd of July so is outside the 30 day period. However it was returned to them on the 25th July when it broke down and has been with them ever since. Would this make any difference to the 30 day rule?
What would you advise my next course of action? Should I contact the RAC for a copy of the report and would they be ablidged to have to issue me a copy as I am the registered owner.
Please let me know your thoughtsKind regardsGraham
Expert:  F E Smith replied 1 year ago.

Under section 20.5 & to 0.6 it says the following which is clear and which you don’t appear to have done:

(5)The right is exercised if the consumer indicates to the trader that the consumer is rejecting the goods and treating the contract as at an end.

(6)The indication may be something the consumer says or does, but it must be clear enough to be understood by the trader.

Hence, your remedy would be compensation/damages/repair and the extent of that could actually be the full cost of the vehicle if is completely unrepairable. You would also be entitled to a sum of money in respect of loss of use.