EPV

https://www.gov.uk/car-tax-disc-without-v11-reminder

The post office should do it. The DVLA website even states this.

What sort of a man let’s his wife tell him what’s wrong with a fuckin car? Or worse, believes her?

I don’t think she needs a car, a fucking straight jacket more like.

Out of curiosity, what was the story behind the stroppy one?

I’ve noticed that almost every assured report on BCA that pertains to a Mini or a certain age/mileage contains the comment under “Engine Running” as being a warning.

Waiting? My birds parents house is in Totnes, not far from you, and their dog has been rolling around in 2 inches of the stuff. has Exeter moved to the moon?

I’ve got a few strange ex’s.

It’s not about being dragged to court mate it’s about knowing our rights and knowing when we can refuse a customer certain things they aren’t entitled to?

This should be made a sticky. Exactly my understanding of the situation.

I think we may be arguing the same side of the coin here. If the consumer wants to exercise their right to a refund within 30 days they must prove the fault was there at the time of sale. If the dealer has been lazy with his paperwork that should be easy. If however the dealer has done a proper pdi, MOT, had an independent garage carry out an inspection AND got the consumer to sign the pdi and receipt saying the goods are without fault and they have been given a test drive and a chance to inspect the car themselves then the consumer will have a hard time proving the fault was there. They HAVE to prove it and they dealer can disprove it.

+1. Concise and to the point.

+1

is the issue he is having now different to the issue which was fixed?

In this case I would personally buy the r back from her, keep the GTI and move on. This isn’t someone with a case of buyers remorse I don’t think, it’s a known fault which can be repaired under warranty. If she doesn’t want the car repaired, irrespective of the CRA and what she is and isn’t entitled to, i’d Give her a refund. It's VW's financial problem but as bcars sold the Golf it's on him to deal with the situation as any good dealership would I think.

I agree but in that specific case I'd send one letter back saying you do not believe you have misrepresented the car as it's the manufacturer that makes that particular claim regarding MPG and they do so on the basis of selling new cars not used ones and that you won't be entering into any more correspondence on this particular subject. I'm buggered if I'm going through the hassle of buying and reselling the car on the basis of someone else's misinterpretation. +1

Sorry but I beg to differ. In order for the customer to exercise their right to a refund they have to prove the fault was present at the point of sale. If you have not done your job properly this will be easy, the customer will just say "yeah there was a fault with the EML, the dealer told me it was nothing to worry about" or some other excuse. If however, you have done your job properly and the customer wants a refund because the EML is on, they can't have a refund unless the can prove the EML was on at the point of sale. Bloody hell. I can't believe someone would actually get a solicitor in for that! I assume it's a no win no fee jobby, surely the solicitor must realise that for their claim to have any weight at all, the car would have to be calibrated, manufacturer test conditions recreated etc?

He doesn't need to be an engineer. He knows there is a fault with the car, it's xyz. He wants to reject the car for a refund but to do so he has to prove the fault was there at the point of sale.

If you have done your dillegence in your prep a customer would find it very hard to prove the fault was there at the point of sale. As I said though, the reality is that as a business you would be doing all you could to remedy the situation, offering to fix the fault etc. It’s only when you were on the end of an unreasonable customer who refused to let you carry out a repair and demanded a refund would you reluctantly stand your ground and get all contractual. Others may see this differently but I personally don’t want the aggro or the bad rep. That said i’d stand my ground if a customer was trying to drum up a reason to get a refund because of buyers remorse or some other unrelated reason. On your pdi form. If you use a pdi form that is comprehensive, states that everything is working as it should and the customer signs the sheet below the carefully worded statement “this car is bloody perfect” (or words to that effect) then that is proof that the fault didn’t exist at the point of sale. It’s up to the customer to prove it did exist, assuming they want a refund.

It’s lower than “great price”

http://www.lawgistics.co.uk/read-news/865#sthash.kxx08vCH.dpbs

I'd avoid multi vendor sales and perhaps controversially, BCA Car Group sales.

They have the right to reject the car for a refund but in order to exercise this right they have to prove the fault was there when they purchased the car which if you have done your job correctly, they would find it very hard to do. The fault cannot be assumed to be present at the time of sale if you have a PDI signed by the customer as you have proven that the fault was not there and they have agreed it wasn't by signing to say so, if your PDI is worded correctly. The reality of this is that anyone taking this seriously and had a desire to build a good reputation would just sort the issue out for the customer. But if they start to get all shitty and demand a refund they have to prove the fault was present at the point of sale. Happy to be corrected but that is my understanding of the situation.

My understanding is they can only do that if they can prove the fault existed at the point of sale.

I would say auctions aren’t the place to be buying ten year old cars with 90k on. You can do that privately and get it cheaper and do a decent appraisal on it. There’s usually one reason why a car like that is going through an auction and it’s because it’s a shed and people know that when it goes through auction, the buyer won’t know it’s a shed until they are safely away from the vendor with no recourse.