The consumer’s issue:
“I bought a used 16-plate executive car from a dealership in April 2019, and following the purchase, there was intermittent vibration when braking at high speeds. The issue persisted and remained unresolved until it was finally agreed that I could hand the car back to the dealership in October 2020 for a refund after 12 visits to the dealership for diagnostics or repairs. However, the way that the refund was calculated left me out of pocket by £4,298 due to the usage deduction that was applied.
However, I do not think the refund I received was fair, as it did not take into account the fact I’d been repaying the finance agreement I’d used to buy the car. As a resolution to my complaint, I would like the dealership to offer me compensation in light of what happened, so I do not incur a loss.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The customer had their deposit of £500 and part-exchange value of £5,000 refunded, plus a 10% goodwill gesture of £477.63, totalling £5,977.63. This exceeded the car’s market value at the time of rejection.
- The finance arm of the manufacturer explained that they would have been paid monthly payments by the customer, who stated that their payments during the ownership of the vehicle were £4,298.
- Albeit it was in the workshop to fix the fault, the customer had the car for circa 19 months during which time they added a further 12,533 miles to the 9,935 recorded when they purchased the vehicle. This meant that it was returned with 22,468 miles on the clock.
- In addition to the points above, it should be noted that the customer was always provided with a like-for-like courtesy vehicle, and was not charged for mileage or insurance.
- When the car was returned, there was a corroded alloy and small chips on the paintwork, which were not recorded by our dealership or bill sent to the customer, as we were trying to facilitate an amicable return of the vehicle.
- As a result, we believe the refund to be fair and reasonable, and we will not be increasing the amount owed to the consumer.
The adjudication outcome:
- The adjudicator explained to the consumer that, if they exercised their right of rejection more than 30 days after the car was purchased, a refund is subject to a usage deduction for the miles travelled during ownership, regardless of whether the car was bought outright or on finance.
- This meant that the amount of finance repayments made was not relevant to the calculation of the refund owed to the customer.
- As the refund received by the consumer exceeded that which would be recommend in similar circumstances, the adjudicator was happy with the usage deduction applied by the dealership.
- So, while the adjudicator noted that the Vehicle Sales Code had been breached, he was satisfied that the business accepting rejection of the car less a reasonable deduction was a fair resolution to the customer’s complaint.
Conclusion
- Neither party objected to the adjudicator’s findings, and the case closed.
