Okay dokay

There are known cases dealers have won, Lawgistics publicise them in their “news” section often. We don’t make a habit of retailing bangers, but some are worthy of retail (obviously without the benefit of hindsight when they go kaboom)

Exactly this. Also, surely a buyer should apply common sense when buying, at the same price point a much newer more reliable vehicle could have been sort, buying an old lumpy German whip with lots more to go wrong naturally poses more element of risk.

Let me play devils advocate here...could you give an example of a fault that it couldn’t be argued is wear and tear - on a 14 year old car with 120k? Total engine failure perhaps? But engine failure will happen at a point in a vehicles life span at some point no? And where would that point be assumed to be on a petrol engine of this age and miles?

This was my understanding Mike, until yesterday and the replies to this thread indicated otherwise. Only wear and tear absolves us, new faults are still on us.

Feel free to leave the thread, plenty of good input from others. Your self importance and time management is of less concern to traders on here than the subject matter of the topic being discussed. The status of the vehicle is unknown fully, Lawgistics can only work with what we have, we are not preparing legal defence yet - it’s too soon. The idea of the thread was to identify what the law requires conclusively.

That’s fair enough. If we were talking about a 2013 car with 40k it would be a lot harder to argue wear and tear. But 14 years old and 120K miles? I guess a judge would have to decide.

Ah, but there’s the rub - apparently we are still obliged to repair new faults even if not present at POS! But the gearbox has lasted longer than 3 months, it’s lasted 14 years and 3 months. The clock doesn’t restart on a part every time a car is sold. Lawgistics from what we/they know yes. But they are not jury and judge on these things, a claim can be filed in court regardless of what Lawgistics think - you are missing the point.

Please show me where you are buying 2004 E60 Autos with big engines for £1000 They are agreeing we are not culperable - plus the guy let a garage have a go at an EML problem 4 weeks ago and spent £600 which didn’t cure issues, we were never informed / given opportunity to see car or help. Introduction of 3rd party repairer distances us further from being responsible in our view. Ill be honest I did interpret the CRA incorrectly, I thought we were only obliged to fix if faults present at time of sale, I didn’t realise it’s any new faults too (not inc wear and tear) according to some on here.

I have tried. Just needed to correct the daily comment, daily or not, it’s been driven since fault occurred. I know what my view is, the idea of the thread was to see what the law says we have to do. It would seem slipping between gears is likely to be a clutch pack, torque converter, or valve body issue because of wear and tear. It’s my view CRA doesn’t apply.

Apparently slipping between 5th and 6th gears making it unfit for intended purpose (motorway commuting)

That is more of an assumption since the bloke has driven it to the garage and we have in writing he continued to drive with EML /gearbox light on after switching off and on. I was probably incorrect to suggest still in daily use I don’t have anything concrete on that. But I do know it did not break down, a recovery was not carried out, and it was driven further.

Thanks for all the replies to everyone. to add a few facts - 3 month warranty with third party warranty company was included - but the claim limit is £1500. Customer has been told new gearbox required at £2500 by local garage, however it’s in daily use with gearbox cog sign warning on display. Customer is demanding refund of car or repair. We are already Lawgistics members and they are familiar with the case and it’s ongoing with them issuing correspondence. What I hate about this game, is a punter thinks a £200 car should come with the same rights as a £5K car. If you choose to buy a car nearinng the end of its life - how can a dealer be held responsible for 6 months to shell out for any new faults - which is actually 6 years according to Lawgistics! I agree we need test cases. Selling used cars is harder than selling drugs or guns - the same rights on a decade old motor as a new kettle from Argos is just insane. Apparently a hot topic! Pleased to stir some conversation on the topic - there needs to be clarification on what we legally are obliged to do. Don’t get me wrong - we do lots as goodwill for customers, but running and maintaining the car for them I just think is a piss take.

Not sure, wasn’t born until 86

I read so many differing points on this and have one at the moment - vehicle driven for 3 months, no faults at POS, vehicle is 14 years old and covered 120k miles and develops Auto gearbox fault - billy been quoted £2500 to replace box, only paid £2800 for said vehicle (BMW 5 series Auto) now legally, If fault not present at POS and can be proven as such - what are our legal responsibilities? Surely we should not be expected to fix? Surely a punter paying one tenth of a vehicles new price, that is in the twilight of its operational life and covered starship miles should be expected to go wrong one day? Please only respond on what you know to be legally factual - and not opinion.

Where does everyone source windscreen stickers from - e.g “AUTOMATIC”, “FSH”, “NEW MOT” etc?