Oil leak - Reject car???

[siteguru]

Consumer Rights Act 2015 (i.e. The Law) says you only have to allow the seller ONE attempt to make the goods conform to contract, not 3.

If you're exercising your Initial/Short Term Right To Reject then you don't have to allow them ANY repair attempts. The flip side is that you have to prove the non-conformance exists, and existed at the time of sale. (With the oil leak issue this is a moot point).

 

[Cocijo]

And MG should pay for the oil to be cleaned on your nice block paved driveway…

 

[lfc958]

Consumer Rights Act 2015 (i.e. The Law) says you only have to allow the seller ONE attempt to make the goods conform to contract, not 3.

If you're exercising your Initial/Short Term Right To Reject then you don't have to allow them ANY repair attempts. The flip side is that you have to prove the non-conformance exists, and existed at the time of sale. (With the oil leak issue this is a moot point).

I DID NOT say that the law = 3 what I went through 7 years ago was advised a Fair number of attempts and my take on fair was 3 attempts. Please do not misquote me this unfair and disrespectful.
My experience researching before going this route and going through process with dealer, customer service from head office, I found that what I was doing would give the motor trade absolutely no way to wiggle out of me rejecting the car should it have come to it.
I have been buying new cars for over 30 years now and like a lot of people have had battles with dealers to get issues fixed despite the law.
Look around at how motor manufacturers behave, they have quoted virtually unachievable MPG, for years, even the WLTP for EVs have been shown to be theoretical, government will not take them to task, look at how they denied diesel gate existed, Vauxhall Zafiria faulty electrics causing fires to name but a few. Consumer rights act may be there but experience and lots of press show that they all consider that the law does not apply to them.

 

[siteguru]

I apologise if you thought I was having a go at you - I wasn't. I was merely explaining what THE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS.

It is your choice whether or not to follow such advice - taking "the hump" when no disrepesct was directed your way is on you not me.

 

[lfc958]

All I can reply to that is Beware what and how you quote from other posts, in an attempt to help others.
I and many others know how dealers and manufacturers work despite what the law actually says.

 

[bowfer]

Anyone still in here that has rejected their car?
I’m totally fed up of mine, final straw is my wife sending me photos of our drive and asking what the hell the mess is.
I’ve had it since 5/11, has only done around 309 miles, 120 miles of which has been collecting it, taking it back to them about the leak and vibration, then collecting it again.
They have said the breather will be fitted 29/11 but I can’t be bothered any more.

 

[CraigMcKMG4]

Anyone still in here that has rejected their car?
I’m totally fed up of mine, final straw is my wife sending me photos of our drive and asking what the hell the mess is.
I’ve had it since 5/11, has only done around 309 miles, 120 miles of which has been collecting it, taking it back to them about the leak and vibration, then collecting it again.
They have said the breather will be fitted 29/11 but I can’t be bothered any more.

Yes mine is gone. Sent a clearly worded letter to the dealer as follows:
"
Following on from my letter of 10th October, it is with some disappointment that I am writing to confirm REJECTION of the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Clause 22 Short term right to reject.

The car is clearly unfit for purpose due to the oil leak which continues to prevent the vehicle being used as intended. After five days of ownership, it failed and will be off road for potentially another four weeks waiting for parts totalling almost six weeks without use. Having noted that this is not a singular occurrence and seems to be very common on the first batch of cars within the UK, I have lost faith in the product.

I trust the above clarifies my position and equally trust you will now action this rejection without further inconvenience to myself. I expect the full payment of £32,190 to be returned into my account within 14 days of this letter via bank transfer.
"
Hope that helps

 

[HQW]

Yes mine is gone. Sent a clearly worded letter to the dealer as follows:
"
Following on from my letter of 10th October, it is with some disappointment that I am writing to confirm REJECTION of the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Clause 22 Short term right to reject.

The car is clearly unfit for purpose due to the oil leak which continues to prevent the vehicle being used as intended. After five days of ownership, it failed and will be off road for potentially another four weeks waiting for parts totalling almost six weeks without use. Having noted that this is not a singular occurrence and seems to be very common on the first batch of cars within the UK, I have lost faith in the product.

I trust the above clarifies my position and equally trust you will now action this rejection without further inconvenience to myself. I expect the full payment of £32,190 to be returned into my account within 14 days of this letter via bank transfer.
"
Hope that helps

Phoned the dealer and expressed my intention to reject. They insisted that a fault needs to be diagnosed by them first, and I need to prove the fault was not developed after the sales.

 

[siteguru]

By the letter of the law they're correct - if using the Initial Right to Reject it is for the consumer to prove that the non-conformance exists, and existed at the time of sale.

Re. the oil leak this will be easy to do - so much evidence available, and MG's own service bulletins re. this issue.

 

[4ND]

Yes mine is gone. Sent a clearly worded letter to the dealer as follows:
"
Following on from my letter of 10th October, it is with some disappointment that I am writing to confirm REJECTION of the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Clause 22 Short term right to reject.

The car is clearly unfit for purpose due to the oil leak which continues to prevent the vehicle being used as intended. After five days of ownership, it failed and will be off road for potentially another four weeks waiting for parts totalling almost six weeks without use. Having noted that this is not a singular occurrence and seems to be very common on the first batch of cars within the UK, I have lost faith in the product.

I trust the above clarifies my position and equally trust you will now action this rejection without further inconvenience to myself. I expect the full payment of £32,190 to be returned into my account within 14 days of this letter via bank transfer.
"
Hope that helps

An excellent decision.

 

[CraigMcKMG4]

Phoned the dealer and expressed my intention to reject. They insisted that a fault needs to be diagnosed by them first, and I need to prove the fault was not developed after the sales.

Not in the first 30 days you don't. If a fault shows itself in this time, the law works on your side by stating it existed on purchase and the seller cannot ask you to prove otherwise.
Personally, I would stay off the phone, put everything in writing, clearly dated. They don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[siteguru]

I suggest you read the actual legislation ... if you invoke the Initial Right to Reject (30 days) the seller can require the consumer prove that the fault exists (if the seller is rejecting for a full refund). So they have a very stable, legal, leg to stand on. You're thinking about the normal situation re. burden of proof (between 30 days and 6 months).

But as I said before, proof in this particular case should be very easy.

 

[CraigMcKMG4]

I suggest you read the actual legislation ... if you invoke the Initial Right to Reject (30 days) the seller can require the consumer prove that the fault exists (if the seller is rejecting for a full refund). So they have a very stable, legal, leg to stand on. You're thinking about the normal situation re. burden of proof (between 30 days and 6 months).

But as I said before, proof in this particular case should be very easy.

I believe this term covers from purchase to 6 months and therefore within the first 30 days too by default.
"If you discover the fault within the first six months of having the product, it is presumed to have been there since the time you took ownership of it - unless the retailer can prove otherwise."

 

[siteguru]

See note (97):

Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Explanatory Notes

www.legislation.gov.uk

(The 6 months burden of proof applies except when the short-term right is invoked)

 

[BugEyed]

Anyone still in here that has rejected their car?
I’m totally fed up of mine, final straw is my wife sending me photos of our drive and asking what the hell the mess is.
I’ve had it since 5/11, has only done around 309 miles, 120 miles of which has been collecting it, taking it back to them about the leak and vibration, then collecting it again.
They have said the breather will be fitted 29/11 but I can’t be bothered any more.

Sorry to hear that you feel like this, but I know where you are coming from. I too rejected my car within the 30 days, the dealership were very reasonable about it and accepted the car back giving me a full refund the same day that I took it back to them.

Good luck. FWIW I still intend getting an MG4 and have likely lost out on the "privacy glass fitted in error" on the early cars, but it wasn't worth risking the faults continuing beyond the 30 days "simpler" rejection period.

 

[HQW]

Not in the first 30 days you don't. If a fault shows itself in this time, the law works on your side by stating it existed on purchase and the seller cannot ask you to prove otherwise.
Personally, I would stay off the phone, put everything in writing, clearly dated. They don't have a leg to stand on.

See note (97):

Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Explanatory Notes

www.legislation.gov.uk

(The 6 months burden of proof applies except when the short-term right is invoked)

Thank you both for your help!

I gave up on reading the Act as I'm not a native speaker, which makes it even more confusing. I ended up with Car Problem - free Which? tool, which (no pun intended) gives you a well-formatted letter.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 makes it an implied term of the contract I have with [Dealer name] that goods be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality.

As you are in breach of contract and I've owned the vehicle for less than 6 years, I am within my statutory rights to ask for a refund at no further cost to me.

I look forward to hearing from you within 14 days with details of how you plan to resolve this matter.

It is interesting that Which uses 6 years, but I've changed it to 30 days.

Also I've added bits and bobs into my email, with the help from some useful sources, in case anyone needs to reject theirs:

Your legal rights | AA

Buying a used car is a great way of cutting costs as most new cars lose value in the first year. But you need to know your legal rights.

www.theaa.com

Can I Reject A New Or Used Car? l Consumer Law Blog l Nelsons

A number of people who have purchased a new or used car, may ask "can I reject a car and return it"? Nelsons' Dispute Resolution team provides some answers.

www.nelsonslaw.co.uk

Letter to complain about faulty goods bought from a company

Letter to complain about faulty goods and ask for a repair, replacement or refund.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk

 

[HQW]

Thank you, I knew someone would clarify the position,

I have looked under the car and there is some sort of streaking (if that’s the word) of oil so it’s booked in for Wednesday for an inspection together with the TPMS detecting low pressure on rear left.

This reminds me that my TPMS is constantly reminding me of abnormal pressure on the rear right, even after I got them checked and pumped yesterday.

 

[BugEyed]

You need to be prepared to take the car back to them and stop using it as soon as possible once you have made the decision to reject it.

 

[siteguru]

That Which? letter is appalling - sorry.

• 6 years is the statute of limitations, it is not in any way the length of any warranty
• A full refund only applies for the first 30 days (for vehicles - for other consumer items it is 6 months)

The letter posted earlier by @CraigMcKMG4 is way better