Rejected

[EPV 631]

Just now, Mojo121 said:

Probably. But as badly as having to give a full refund? If his position is that he'll provide a refund minus usage and they're saying no to that it might be worth contending for that alone. Even the ADR might side with him. Not to mention you get to keep and play with the money for a while.

Well yes, he can make a fair offer and it’s all negotiable at that point. If they refuse and want the full value back at that point they are in the wrong and i’d then say my offer is final and refuse to correspond any further. It would then surely come down to a judge to determine the amount the OP has to refund. 

[Area 51 33]

4 minutes ago, Arfur Dealy said:

Two reports stating major mechanical failure...... Refund and move on. 

Tend to agree... and having seen the words Mini and valve stems seals.. There is plenty on the WWW about this issue with this car! They will blue smoke after a period at idle and the engine revved. Can also blue AND white smoke after a period at idle! From WWW reports this is valve seals and head gasket.....

When reading up on these issues a lot of comments also suggest the engine using 1litre of oil a month... So if its been out for 10-12 weeks, it may be burned a good couple of litres if these faults are present and the billy isnt checking the oil levels.. TBH with a car new to him/her new MOT service etc.. why would they snout around checking oils levels in the first few months..?

The mileage on this reported problem seems to match the WWW reports of failing valve stem seals and head gaskets.. Mostly due to poor maintenance, incorrect oil being used in this engine..

I'd say get it back, get it checked properly and offer a settlement.. suggested repair costs seem steep mind

 

[Mojo121 229]

Just now, EPV said:

Well yes, he can make a fair offer and it’s all negotiable at that point. If they refuse and want the full value back at that point they are in the wrong and i’d then say my offer is final and refuse to correspond any further. It would then surely come down to a judge to determine the amount the OP has to refund. 

That's what I'd do if they're playing stonewall. I admit you're in the land of hope; getting a judge willing to listen to a usage argument is probably another toss of the coin.

[EPV 631]

Just now, Mojo121 said:

That's what I'd do if they're playing stonewall. I admit you're in the land of hope; getting a judge willing to listen to a usage argument is probably another toss of the coin.

I dunno mate, that one is black and white in the CRA. Difficult for even a bad tempered car dealer hating judge to negotiate around black and white law. The amount though is most definitely a finger in the air.  

[CPM 0]

6 minutes ago, Area 51 said:

Tend to agree... and having seen the words Mini and valve stems seals.. There is plenty on the WWW about this issue with this car! They will blue smoke after a period at idle and the engine revved. Can also blue AND white smoke after a period at idle! From WWW reports this is valve seals and head gasket.....

When reading up on these issues a lot of comments also suggest the engine using 1litre of oil a month... So if its been out for 10-12 weeks, it may be burned a good couple of litres if these faults are present and the billy isnt checking the oil levels.. TBH with a car new to him/her new MOT service etc.. why would they snout around checking oils levels in the first few months..?

The mileage on this reported problem seems to match the WWW reports of failing valve stem seals and head gaskets.. Mostly due to poor maintenance, incorrect oil being used in this engine..

I'd say get it back, get it checked properly and offer a settlement.. suggested repair costs seem steep mind

 

Fact is these reports are visual. No diagnostic equipment used. Are you saying you’d accept the car back going off a guess. I’m waiting for the car back for diagnostics but with the customer being 150 miles away and going through the broker then the lender, this has been time consuming and difficult 

Edited October 25, 2018 by CPM

[Mojo121 229]

12 minutes ago, EPV said:

I dunno mate, that one is black and white in the CRA. Difficult for even a bad tempered car dealer hating judge to negotiate around black and white law. The amount though is most definitely a finger in the air.  

Oh okay. I didn't know usage was specifically mentioned in CRA and mentions cars. Just found it. Thanks! Presume usage can only be deducted post month 1?

(8)If the consumer exercises the final right to reject, any refund to the consumer may be reduced by a deduction for use, to take account of the use the consumer has had of the goods in the period since they were delivered, but this is subject to subsections (9) and (10).

(9)No deduction may be made to take account of use in any period when the consumer had the goods only because the trader failed to collect them at an agreed time.

(10)No deduction may be made if the final right to reject is exercised in the first 6 months (see subsection (11)), unless—

(a)the goods consist of a motor vehicle, or

(b)the goods are of a description specified by order made by the Secretary of State by statutory instrument.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Mojo121

[EPV 631]

6 minutes ago, Mojo121 said:

Oh okay. I didn't know usage was specifically mentioned in CRA and mentions cars. Just found it. Thanks! Presume usage can only be deducted post month 1?

(8)If the consumer exercises the final right to reject, any refund to the consumer may be reduced by a deduction for use, to take account of the use the consumer has had of the goods in the period since they were delivered, but this is subject to subsections (9) and (10).

 

(9)No deduction may be made to take account of use in any period when the consumer had the goods only because the trader failed to collect them at an agreed time.

 

(10)No deduction may be made if the final right to reject is exercised in the first 6 months (see subsection (11)), unless—

 

(a)the goods consist of a motor vehicle, or

 

(b)the goods are of a description specified by order made by the Secretary of State by statutory instrument.

I think it’s at any stage mate. If someone puts 2,000 miles on a car in 3 weeks it’s hardly reasonable to give a full refund?

[CPM 0]

8 minutes ago, Mojo121 said:

Oh okay. I didn't know usage was specifically mentioned in CRA and mentions cars. Just found it. Thanks! Presume usage can only be deducted post month 1?

(8)If the consumer exercises the final right to reject, any refund to the consumer may be reduced by a deduction for use, to take account of the use the consumer has had of the goods in the period since they were delivered, but this is subject to subsections (9) and (10).

 

(9)No deduction may be made to take account of use in any period when the consumer had the goods only because the trader failed to collect them at an agreed time.

 

(10)No deduction may be made if the final right to reject is exercised in the first 6 months (see subsection (11)), unless—

 

(a)the goods consist of a motor vehicle, or

 

(b)the goods are of a description specified by order made by the Secretary of State by statutory instrument.

Hadn’t seen this either. It doesn’t state what is a fair deduction or first 30 day period. What does it say about section (11). Sorry read it now 

Edited October 25, 2018 by CPM

[David Horgan 564]

Mini Cooper S engines wear the oil rings out quite quickly , 2,000miles  can wear them out , known fact , Probably not the head gasket but would be done at repair stage anyway .

Anyone repairing one of these engines needs to strip it , re ring it , de coke it , new stem valves , new gaskets , change oil twice and use proper proper oil not rubbish oil . 

They can use litres oil without smoking , You need it compression testing , diagnostics is not the way to go with this fault , its mechanical pal .

My suggestion is the rings were worn at the point you sold it , you just didn't see it coming , 2 k finished the job if Customer wasn't aware it was using oil . Get it back minus mileage charge , pay back , fix it properly and resell .

The Cooper S engines are little beggars , great when working but we have rebuilt nearly every one we've ever sold ,minimum they have is chain , tensioner and guides and a new turbo feed pipe . 

Lesson learned the hard way , but you need it back before the bills start getting silly , 

My view of course , but I know these little engines very well , they  are just so unreliable , even a joey mechanic fixing it wont go far enough and you will bear that problem too if its not fixed properly .

Edited October 25, 2018 by David Horgan

[Mojo121 229]

2 minutes ago, CPM said:

Hadn’t seen this either. It doesn’t state what is a fair deduction or first 30 day period. What does it say about section (11)

(11)In subsection (10) the first 6 months means 6 months beginning with the first day after these have all happened—

(a)ownership or (in the case of a contract for the hire of goods, a hire-purchase agreement or a conditional sales contract) possession of the goods has been transferred to the consumer,

(b)the goods have been delivered, and

(c)where the contract requires the trader to install the goods or take other action to enable the consumer to use them, the trader has notified the consumer that the action has been taken.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/24/enacted#section-24-11

[CPM 0]

4 minutes ago, David Horgan said:

Mini Cooper S engines wear the oil rings out quite quickly , 2,000miles  can wear them out , known fact , Probably not the head gasket but would be done at repair stage anyway .

Anyone repairing one of these engines needs to strip it , re ring it , de coke it , new stem valves , new gaskets , change oil twice and use proper proper oil not rubbish oil . 

They can use litres oil without smoking , You need it compression testing , diagnostics is not the way to go with this fault , its mechanical pal .

My suggestion is the rings were worn at the point you sold it , you just didn't see it coming , 2 k finished the job if Customer wasn't aware it was using oil . Get it back minus mileage charge , pay back , fix it properly and resell .

The Cooper S engines are little beggars , great when working but we have rebuilt nearly every one we've ever sold ,minimum they have is chain , tensioner and guides and a new turbo feed pipe . 

Lesson learned the hard way , but you need it back before the bills start getting silly , 

My view of course , but I know these little engines very well , they  are just so unreliable , even a joey mechanic fixing it wont go far enough and you will bear that problem too if its not fixed properly .

When I say diagnostics I mean compression testing ect I was always planning on opening it up anyway to see what’s gone on and the extent of the damage. Wasn’t smoking when I sold it and still isn’t which I haven’t come across before. They managed to do 1000 miles in the first month and it used a litre of oil. Since the complaint I’ve done a lot of research on the n14 and won’t touch one again. Are the n18 any better? Thanks for you expertise 

[trade vet 697]

1 hour ago, CPM said:

When I say diagnostics I mean compression testing ect I was always planning on opening it up anyway to see what’s gone on and the extent of the damage. Wasn’t smoking when I sold it and still isn’t which I haven’t come across before. They managed to do 1000 miles in the first month and it used a litre of oil. Since the complaint I’ve done a lot of research on the n14 and won’t touch one again. Are the n18 any better? Thanks for you expertise 

I am sorry,but I think selling an old Mini Cooper to a ‘special needs’ sub prime punter is asking for trouble.I think we get enough agrovation in this job without dealing with sub primers,especially with old stuff.Some people only do sub prime and are good at it,but it just gives me a headache thinking about it.Also,you have to make sure all the paperwork,invoices,finance agreements match or the finance company will just void the deal and it’s a full refund to them.

[andymc1973 199]

3 hours ago, CPM said:

 

Of course oil was bang on when it left and shows on the pdi

The only headache I get is the mrs, can you help with that? 

need pics first to determine the level of help

[Tom 164]

2 hours ago, CPM said:

Are the n18 any better? Thanks for you expertise 

Yes they are a definite improvement I only sell the N18 now, I've been raped by N14 once before it's a terribe engine. 

[CPM 0]

27 minutes ago, Tom said:

Yes they are a definite improvement I only sell the N18 now, I've been raped by N14 once before it's a terribe engine. 

Assuming you do a lot of Cooper s then? I’ve had about 10 n14 so far with only 1 chain and 1 fuel pump. I know Ive been lucky with them and this one could be a lemon. Any of the n14 traits the same with n18?

Edited October 25, 2018 by CPM

[trade vet 697]

Hi CPM

Out of interest,what was the deal.Cash Price,cash deposit,swapper,amount financed,term,APR etc,did you sell them a warranty or put it on the bill,same with road tax.....

[CPM 0]

18 minutes ago, trade vet said:

Hi CPM

Out of interest,what was the deal.Cash Price,cash deposit,swapper,amount financed,term,APR etc,did you sell them a warranty or put it on the bill,same with road tax.....

They arranged tax before collection and I supplied a 6 month warranty with Autoguard 

[Tim H 16]

 

Rory is spot on with this and I'm sure this scenario came up in a Lawgistics info update not too long ago... They suggested that the CRA responsibilities belong to the finance company, not you. The finance company is not recognised by the act as a "consumer". If they feel the need to unwind a deal, with or without your agreement, then that's up to them. Your agreement, by way of terms and conditions of supply, is what the finance company will then rely on. Whether you decide that the car was faulty or not at point of sale, if you agree to take it back, the mileage deduction conversation will be with the finance company not the end user.

Likely you won't get many deals passed by them in future if you don't play their way though !!! 

[NOACROSS 414]

1 hour ago, trade vet said:

I am sorry,but I think selling an old Mini Cooper to a ‘special needs’ sub prime punter is asking for trouble.I think we get enough agrovation in this job without dealing with sub primers,especially with old stuff.Some people only do sub prime and are good at it,but it just gives me a headache thinking about it.Also,you have to make sure all the paperwork,invoices,finance agreements match or the finance company will just void the deal and it’s a full refund to them.

I agree.  Cars not to buy...

Anyway, apologies if I'm missing this point-but are you suggesting to the customer that you'll potentially have it in for inspection and repair, or are you just looking to say it's wear and tear and you're not interested/take it up with the warranty company? Or are you saying 'jog on, there's nothing wrong with it'?

In my example, the finance company categorically told me the car 'was not their property' and they were only really interested if the customer defaulted. They also were very quick to side with their customer initially, until I spelled it all out to them and provided the documentation etc. proving that i) The point of sale paperwork and checks were comprehensive and ii) I suggested we get it in for an independent check.

[CPM 0]

8 minutes ago, NOACROSS said:

I agree.  Cars not to buy...

Anyway, apologies if I'm missing this point-but are you suggesting to the customer that you'll potentially have it in for inspection and repair, or are you just looking to say it's wear and tear and you're not interested/take it up with the warranty company? Or are you saying 'jog on, there's nothing wrong with it'?

In my example, the finance company categorically told me the car 'was not their property' and they were only really interested if the customer defaulted. They also were very quick to side with their customer initially, until I spelled it all out to them and provided the documentation etc. proving that i) The point of sale paperwork and checks were comprehensive and ii) I suggested we get it in for an independent check.

I’m only dealing with the broker since the customer made the complaint. I’ve requested the car back for inspection only. I presume the “audible noise” reported by scotia is a result of oil starvation which is why I want it back asap. If I’m right then I’ll be laughing down the phone. If I’m wrong and it’s wear and tear or sudden failure I’ll take it on the chin

[David Ayers 171]

Curious to know how this deal came about.

Did the customer come through the broker (Zuto?) to you?

Or did he come direct with his own finance?

6 minutes ago, CPM said:

In my example, the finance company categorically told me the car 'was not their property'

That's hilarious!

I take it they have never read a finance document or the invoice which is addressed to them and deliver to the customer.

 

[CPM 0]

3 minutes ago, David Ayers said:

Curious to know how this deal came about.

Did the customer come through the broker (Zuto?) to you?

Or did he come direct with his own finance?

That's hilarious!

I take it they have never read a finance document or the invoice which is addressed to them and deliver to the customer.

 

I use close and the declines go straight to a broker. The customer did no research on the car they were buying and didn’t even put down a deposit. Never again

[trade vet 697]

1 hour ago, CPM said:

They arranged tax before collection and I supplied a 6 month warranty with Autoguard 

Just what I thought.Which proper finance company would advance 100% at 15% on an old Mini.Its called irresponsible lending,the punter has no money.They probably don’t want the car any more,sub prime mentality.Why don’t you ask the punter to prove they have kept up their instalments on time.If they have not,you are wasting your time repairing it and it could still bounce back later on.

[David Ayers 171]

3 minutes ago, CPM said:

I use close and the declines go straight to a broker. The customer did no research on the car they were buying and didn’t even put down a deposit. Never again

A lot of subprimes don't even see the car before collection in my experience.

If you do a lot with Close I would speak to your rep. He should be helpful, the more business you put his way the more helpful!, especially if you have to negotiate a return.

Whatever the customers motives he needs to be dealing with Advantage. Adavantage should then pursue you. It seems to me Advantage are fobbing the customer off by saying you won't accept a rejection. Which is why he is still driving the car. He should have written to Advantage rejecting it etc within the first 30 days.

The only thing I would be wary of is the suppliers declaration.

2.7 "The goods are good condition,safe and of satisfactory condition and are fit for purpose under the provisions of the CRA 2015.

And

3.1 "If any of the statements declared above are untrue..."

3.2 " Subject to clause 3.1 above. we shall indemnify you against all loss, damage and costs you sustain ....."

 

 

[grant8064 219]

3 hours ago, trade vet said:

I am sorry,but I think selling an old Mini Cooper to a ‘special needs’ sub prime punter is asking for trouble.I think we get enough agrovation in this job without dealing with sub primers,especially with old stuff.Some people only do sub prime and are good at it,but it just gives me a headache thinking about it.Also,you have to make sure all the paperwork,invoices,finance agreements match or the finance company will just void the deal and it’s a full refund to them.

Each to their own but we find sub prime as easy as near or prime, usually easier and more thankful tbh. Nice enough people usually, grateful for a car, often working hard but on a low income. They don't scream any louder or more often than anyone else. Frankly if sub prime punters weren't catered for then I reckon 70% of the UK wouldn't be buying cars.

The paperwork is the same for any grade of strap...it's not like you have to be extra careful with sub prime, treat them all cautiously . These days with online portals it's pretty hard to cock up a finance deal so long as you stick to procedure.

 

On the subject of strapping up an old Cooper S though I completely agree. The very thought of just stocking one makes me sweat but strapping it up is giving me the shivers!