The consumer’s issue:
“In June 2020, I bought a used 14-plate high-performance coupé from a dealership for just under £17,000. Three weeks after buying the car, it developed a serious mechanical issue. I therefore returned to the business with the vehicle, where it stayed for six weeks in order for them to carry out the repairs. Following this, I went on holiday, and before I had reached my destination, the car broke down, and it took a day for it to be recovered and to get a loan car. There was also half a tank of fuel left when the vehicle developed a fault, which the business is refusing to pay for. In addition, I believe that I am entitled to compensation for the loss, upset and anxiety caused to my family whilst on holiday.
Upon my return from the vacation, I spoke to the dealer to explain that I was formally rejecting the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, and that I was seeking a full refund. The dealer accepted my request, but refused to give me back all of the money I paid for the car, stating they only offered me £12,500 for my part exchange which was not true. The deal provided was £13,500 for the part exchange, with the remaining £250 deposit and £3,240 to be paid by bank transfer.
To resolve my dispute, I am looking for the dealership to return the full amount of £16,990 that I paid for the car, plus compensation for a ruined holiday and for the fuel left in the vehicle when it broke down, so that I am not left out of pocket.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The purchase price of the vehicle was £15,990, as detailed on both the order form and the invoice, not £16,990 as claimed by the consumer.
- We offered the consumer £12,500 for the part exchange, leaving a balance of £3,490. This was paid for by an initial deposit of £250, and a further payment of £3,240.
- Unfortunately, the vehicle developed a fault with the gearbox, and we immediately brought it into our workshop and provided a loan car whilst a replacement gearbox was fitted.
- Unfortunately, a further fault occurred with vehicle, at which point the consumer asked to reject the car.
- We processed the rejection and returned the full purchase price of £15,990, and a signed copy of the invoice has been provided from when the sale was completed.
The adjudication outcome:
- The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator reviewed the evidence and noted that the business accepted that the vehicle suffered from a defect, and that it wasn’t of satisfactory quality at the point of sale. This constituted a breach of clause 7.4 of the Vehicle Sales Code.
- To put things right, the business accepted the rejection of the vehicle, which was a suitable remedy.
- However, the adjudicator remarked that the dispute was also in relation to the price paid for the vehicle. The adjudicator reviewed the invoice provided to the customer, which in fact stated that the purchase price was £15,990.
- As the business had refunded this amount, the adjudicator could therefore not ask the business to do anything more with regards to the refund.
- In relation to the stress and inconvenience caused whilst on holiday, the adjudicator remarked that The Motor Ombudsman is unable to provide compensation for losses which are not easily quantifiable, and could not make an award for this.
- In terms of the half a tank of petrol that remained in the vehicle when it broke down, the adjudicator said that The Motor Ombudsman would usually request a receipt as evidence of fuel purchased. However, on the balance of probabilities, it was not unreasonable in this case to suggest that the vehicle would have had petrol in it at the time of rejection.
- Based on the fact that the consumer’s vehicle had a three-litre engine, the adjudicator believed that filling the tank in its entirety would have cost around £70. Therefore, a recommendation was made for the business to award the consumer the sum of £35 to settle the complaint. As a result, the consumer’s case was partially upheld in their favour.
Conclusion
- Both the business and consumer accepted the decision, and the business was asked to contact the consumer within a 10 working-day period to arrange the reimbursement of £35. The case was then closed.
