The consumer’s issue:
“I purchased a used 69-plate hatchback from a franchise dealer in April 2021, and when I took my car to an independent garage for its service in August 2022, it was found that the car’s sump plug thread at the base of the sump pan had been damaged due to it being overtightened by another dealership during the vehicle’s previous service in 2021.
As this was the first time I had serviced the car, and it was still within the manufacturer’s warranty period, I had it recovered to the selling dealership with its damaged sump pan in the boot for them to inspect, and asked for their assistance to fix the problem.
However, they declined to help me, as they said they could not be sure whether the damage was caused when the car was serviced prior to its sale to me, or by my repairer when they removed the sump plug to enable the oil service to be completed. They also refused to recover the car to back to my repairer so that I could have the sump pan replacement done at a lower price. This left me with no alternative, but to pay the dealership over £1,400 to have my car’s sump pan changed.
To resolve my complaint, I would like this cost refunded to me, as I believe the fault with the sump thread was there when the car was sold to me.”
The accredited business’ response:
- As we could not confirm whether the sump thread was damaged when the car was serviced before the sale, or by the customer’s repairer, we could not accept responsibility for the cost of replacing the sump pan, but we did offer a discount on the cost of the works.
- The customer accepted and authorised us to complete the necessary works at the discounted price offered.
- We therefore do not believe we are obligated to refund the full cost of these works (£1,427) to the vehicle owner, as per their claim.
The adjudication outcome:
- As the defect was reported by the consumer after the first six months of purchase, The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator explained that the consumer had the evidential burden of showing that the vehicle currently suffered from an inherent fault that was present at the point of sale.
- To agree that the selling dealership was obliged to refund the £1,427 the consumer incurred having the sump pan replaced in August 2022, the adjudicator needed to be satisfied that the vehicle owner had demonstrated, on the balance of probabilities at least, that these costs arose as an unavoidable consequence of a shortcoming that was present on their car at the time of the sale in April 2021.
- After reviewing the evidence provided by both parties, the adjudicator was satisfied the consumer had demonstrated the sump plug thread damage was discovered at the time of the car’s first post-sale service, suggesting it was unlikely the sump plug had been touched by anyone since the car’s sale to the consumer.
- The adjudicator also noted the consumer’s repairer reported discovering the damage to the sump plug thread while in the process of removing the plug to enable the oil service. He also noted the car was recovered to the selling dealership with the sump pan removed, which he thought appeared to validate the consumer’s repairer’s report the thread issue had been identified during the plug’s removal rather than during its reinstatement.
- As the adjudicator believed thread damage of the type found was more likely to have occurred when the sump plug was reinserted and overtightened in the past, and this likely occurred at the time of its pre-sale servicing, he felt the benefit of any doubt should be given to the consumer, and that they should receive a full refund of the cost they incurred replacing the damaged sump pan.
Conclusion:
- Both parties agreed with the adjudication outcome, and the consumer received a full refund of the costs they had incurred. The case was then closed.
