Forum menu
Mashr
I have followed citizens advice and sent the final email as suggested. This is the one they have rejected again
I did start the section 75 rejection last night.
Did you pay for it all on the credit card ? I think you said earlier it was just a portion ? What about the rest of the payment ?
My opinion. Unpopular as it might be, you have allowed them to this point by not being firm enough.
They were entitled to repair, replace or refund because the 30d period had passed. If they opt for repair (as they have) they have one attempt, if it's not repaired then you can reject.
They failed to repair because they only fixed 1/3 of the issues. They 'deny' that you said about the others but you have email.
That's the point where you could reject but you left the door open for him to rectify the others and so it's a grey area but it's still kind of his first attempt now. So, IMHO you now have to take the car back, 6 hours away or not [edit, assuming he's fixed faults 2 and 3]
HOWEVER, AND WHAT I'D DO
I would be emailing him so it's documented to tell him
1/ when you will be there
2/ that your criteria for taking the car back is that all three issues have been resolved (list them, again, for avoidance of any doubt)
3/ if they have not been then you will be rejecting the car for refund there and then as per your statutory rights under CRA 2015 - they have been informed of the issues in your previous email and have been given ample time to fix them as allowed by CRA
4/ given the lack of confidence in them, taking the car back does not constitute final acceptance. If any of these faults recur, or new faults occur, within the 6mo period after purchase you will consider that they have failed to meet their opportunity to repair and you will expect a refund as per the CRA
5/ if they do not agree to the above you will be issuing a chargeback request to your CC and reserve the right to make a further civil claim for time and travel cost incurred in resolving this issue, and inconvenience as a result of being without the car.
The bits in bold type are a stretch on your stat rights but not without merit, but you might need to negotiate a bit and so ask for more than you really want. The bit about new faults is part of your stat rights as long as you're in the 6mo, but my interpretation is another repair, refund, replace then starts....might need a proper lawyer to really clarify that. A new fault isn't failure to repair existing ones.
The bit about costs and inconvenience - your choice to buy a car 6 hours round trip away, but they have messed you about.
Out of interest. I understand not wanting to name them but what sort of a place is it - main dealer, large garage or a small business trader? What's the car, I assume it's a bit of a rarity if you've gone 3 hours away to get it?
Cheers all. Its all so bloody confusing and as you have rightly pointed out I haven’t helped myself here either.
The garage in question is a car supermarket based in Bury Manchester they also have two other site locations.
Car isn’t that special. It’s low mileage for the year and a decent spec.
With regard to the section 75. I paid a 500 deposit but can claim the whole back via this method I believe.
I have asked numerous times for confirmation that all thread issues have been rectified as part of me collecting the car. Not one reply has been received. Trying to do a lot of it via email so a I have an actual account of what has been said.
Trying to do a lot of it via email so a I have an actual account of what has been said.
If you're not getting a reply then phone them and email a record of the conversation "As discussed in our call on DATE at TIME I am writing to confirm that you have informed me that the following issues are repaired... Please email by return if you disagree with my understanding of our conversation".
Trying to do a lot of it via email so a I have an actual account of what has been said.
Having that written record is of course a bloody good idea, but there's nothing to stop you ringing them, then summarising the discussion in a follow up email with a request to correct any misunderstanding. Of course if, (when) they don't reply to that, it's pretty much their acceptance of the statement.
I'd be more determined to my course of action outlined then. Send an email confirming your requirements and when you'll be there. That's not a request to them, it's a statement.
Bite the bullet and make the journey. And refuse to leave until resolved. Having a calm but assertive customer on their site isn't good for business as other punters see how they have let you down. Use it to your advantage but DON'T BE WISHY WASHY. THIS IS WHAT I WANT, AND IF I DON'T GET IT THEM THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
With regard to the section 75. I paid a 500 deposit but can claim the whole back via this method I believe
Kind of - as it's credit, the CC company is also effectively an interested party in the transaction. I'm not sure they refund the whole amount just like that, but they can bring their might to bear on resolving it according to the law. So in this case I *think* they'd refund you as it seems pretty clear and they then get it back from the dealer.
https://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/everyday-money/credit/how-youre-protected-when-you-pay-by-card
I think he should pay you the £500 and send you up there pretending to be him 😀
Well, spoke to the garage just now. Apparently both major issues (Oil consumption/smoking and the headlight leveling) are sorted. I am going to collect tomorrow and check it over.
Im about to follow up with an email containing the bits mentioned by theotherjonv above.
I really hope its sorted to be honest. apart from the issues found its a good little car and ideal for what I need.
What about the knocking from the suspension?
Two mechanics have supposedly driven the vehicle and cannot replicate the knocking issue. I can envisage that this will be lumped under a wear and tear issue
If you know how to make sure the knocking happens take someone from the dealer or garage out and demonstrate it. Otherwise it might be one to let slide
I can envisage that this will be lumped under a wear and tear issue
Is it reasonable to expect it to wear out in two months?
Once more with feeling: any fault in the first six months is deemed to be inherent unless the seller can prove otherwise.
So, just to update.
Made the trip to the dealer today after a phone call and email conversation yesterday where he said the car was fixed and that it had a new turbo fitted and headlight fixed too.
Went in and got the keys and started having a look at the car. Straight away I can see its filthy and covered in oil marks.
Popped the bonnet and indeed there is what looks like a new turbo. Then I spot the air intake hose into the turbo hasn’t been fitted correctly and the bolt is missing. Dealer manager says he trusts that the garage he used has done a proper job and basically says Im wrong. I persist and tell I have had four cars with the same engine and know that the intake isn’t fitted correctly and should have a bolt in it to keep it secure. Low and behold the intake pops out and then wont go back in as it wont locate in its keyway. So then he gets the mechanic on the phone who then admits it was one of his understudies that did the work and that he cant check all work before cars go back out. The manager then asks us to go and have a coffee at the Marks and Spencer next door and he will get another mechanic to sort it out. Which he duly did. It is now fitted correctly and bolted in place.
However, whilst the drive home was uneventful and returned good mpg, anytime the car goes onto boost you can hear the whistle of the turbo. It never did that before, and so I’m worried he has fitted a cheap reconditioned turbo to it.
When I got the car home a got a good light and started having a look about and spotted another missing bolt on something bolted to the turbo with an electrical connector. It only has two out of three bolts fitted.
Finally whilst at the garage I checked the headlight to see if that was working correctly and low and behold it isn’t. The levelling motor still doesn’t work and leaves the headlights out of alignment. When queried he says he sent the car off and they have fixed it. What they have actually done is done a headlight alignment using a mot light checker and not actually fixed the problem. He says as far as he is concerned the headlight is fit for purpose. I then point out that headlight levelling not working on LED headlights is an MOT fail.
I said I wanted to reject the car there and then but he was adamant I couldn’t as it was “fixed”. He then asked me to take the car home and get it booked into a local garage for them to diagnose the headlight and then speak to the warranty and he would authorise it.
As it stands I have the car at home and still have issues. I want to push ahead with the Section 75 as they have failed to repair correctly and then refused my rejection.
Take it back. Reject it using the forms from which magazine or cougars words. Its not fixed. They have had their chance. The law is on your side.
Why did you take it away?
Edit
My understanding is the cannot refuse the rejection.
Sounds like it's time for a letter before action...
He then asked me to take the car home and get it booked into a local garage for them to diagnose the headlight and then speak to the warranty and he would authorise it.
Two things:
1) You of course have all this in writing, right?
2) For the love of pete, IT IS NOT A WARRANTY ISSUE. Do not go down this road, here be dragons. Next up, accusations that the third party garage has aggravated the issues.
Bury, right? I'm away for a fortnight as of next week, if this is still rumbling on when I get back then I'll meet you there and I'll stick it up his arse for you myself.
Nope unfortunately didn’t get it in writing but my wife was there as a witness
I think my best course of action is to push forward with the section 75.
He is point blank refusing the rejection.
I have lost all faith in the car which is a shame.
Three things:
3) Document everything. Everything that's in this thread, put it into a timescale. Every phone call, every email, every promise, every lie, every day you're left without a vehicle, every time you've had to make a several hundred mile round trip, ever time you've had to take time off work.
WTF did you drive away in it?
It's a metal box with 4 wheels, **** it off either via Cougars info or Credit card75 and find another. It's Bury blokes problem not yours
+1000
The first time he failed to repair it you had the right to reject. But you gave a second chance, the moment there were bolts missing he has failed to do it again. Given you don't want the car the door wasn't even ajar and needing opening, it was wide open already and all you had to do was walk through by saying that he has failed to repair and therefore under the CRA you require a refund.
He has no say in this, you're giving him an entitlement that simply doesn't exist, and he's offering options he has no say over.
Take it back tomorrow and refuse to leave until the refund is given. If he refuses, loudly and clearly ask him (record it) to confirm that he is refusing to honour your statutory rights. Follow up in writing.
Nothing less.
Bluntly mate, grow a pair and stop fannying about with this dickhead.
Here you go, insert details and send it to them
**
Dear XX
In the following email I refer at times to the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 (CRA), and the Motor Ombudsman (MO) explanation of it. For ease the links to both are:
https://www.themotorombudsman.org/knowledge/what-is-the-consumer-rights-act/
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents
I bought [vehicle Reg/descr] from you [insert Trader legal name, it’ll be on your paperwork] on [Date] for the sum of [value]
On [date] I informed you that there were problems with the vehicle. This was by email, and [insert key points of what you said were wrong]
As this is outside the 30 day period specified in the CRA, as per the MO explanation I “have to give the selling dealership or garage one opportunity to repair or replace your car, with repair normally being the best option”
The car was returned to you on this basis on [date] and despite being clearly advised of the faults you did not address faults [x and y], only fixing the Turbo, which I was unable to verify for reasons further below.
When the failure to repair [x and y] was highlighted for a further time, for goodwill I agreed with you that you should keep the car and fix the further faults. This is why the repair to the turbo was not inspected at the time.
After you informed me that repairs were completed by [email / phone call / date] I returned to collect the car on Saturday Aug 23rd. On inspection, you had clearly again failed to repair the car as required, namely;
- Missing bolts / connections on the turbo fitting
- Headlight motor not replaced as required, your repair by realigning manually is not acceptable. The MOT requirements state that “Vehicles with high intensity discharge (HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted with a suspension or headlamp self-levelling system. If these systems have been fitted, they must work”
- I understand the testers were unable to recreate the third fault of knocking from the front. This is immaterial in light of the first two now.
Further, when I drove the car on Saturday the turbo does not appear fixed as it [describe fault] - given the substandard work on the turbo, as per faults above consequently I do not consider this aspect to be repaired satisfactorily.
Under the CRA after the 30 day period you have one attempt to repair. You have had repeated opportunities and the car is not repaired, consequently I am rejecting the car as per my statutory rights as outlined in the CRA
“If this fails because the same fault persists, or a new inherent fault has developed, you’ve then got two options: a price reduction, meaning you keep the vehicle and get back some of the money you paid for it or, to exercise your final right of rejection”
Consequently I require a refund for the vehicle [reg etc.] to be paid to me in return for the car. No other option is acceptable to me, and I will not enter further discussion about other options.
Please confirm your agreement by [return email, or if you go in person print off two copies and get it signed there and then]
If you do not agree to the above, I require in writing within 48 hours your explanation. Please included which parts of the CRA you feel do not apply, and why you are not obliged to provide me with my statutory rights as described above.
**
On the matter of the refund - up to you if you negotiate this in person but if you want it written I’d say
The CRA makes provision for “a refund of what you paid for the car minus a deduction for any usage you’ve had. This is usually calculated by looking at how many miles you’ve added to the vehicle, and charging a certain amount of pence for each mile driven”
I have owned the car for [period] in which time I have driven it [x miles - you said about 1500]. In that period it has been faulty and unusable, including at your garage for [period]. [x] of the miles it has covered have been incurred as a result of returning it to you.
Contract hire purchase usually provides for an excess mileage deduction of around 9-12p per mile. For the miles covered by me that are not as a result of returning the car for your work, I therefore consider the reasonable deduction to be [guess, about 1200] x 10p = £120. However, in light of the inconvenience and hardship incurred as a result of the car being of unsatisfactory quality I propose that this is waived and full refund made, and in turn I will waive any right to further claims for inconvenience.
Beautiful work.
The one thing I'd perhaps add is that "inconvenience" at the end includes travelling a not inconsiderable distance, at a cost, to try and get this resolved. Ie it's worth mentioning IMHO that the OP isn't just inconvenienced, he's out of pocket.
IIRC consequential losses are hard to argue for
Yep, so I'd agree for no deductions and no trying to claim for intangibles like time, etc.
TBH for ~£120 deducted I'd take just to be shot of this whole thing. Stings a bit given the story but I'd suck it up.
Agreed.
Many thanks for the above template.
I have filled it in and sent it off today.
I really appreciate it.
Fingers crossed it works
Many thanks for the template
I have completed it and sent it off. Let’s hope is has the desired effect
I really appreciate it.
There is no question about it working. Its your legal right. If he refuses you have a slam dunk in court. He would have no defense
All gone a bit quiet here - have you rammed it through the showroom window yet?
I sent off the letter as templated above on Sunday @19:30.
It gave them 48 hours to respond as to why they thought they shouldn’t refund me.
I still haven’t heard anything but given that it was the bank holiday should I allow for extra time ?
The credit card section 75 have asked for an independent report into the vechike and the issues which I need to sort now.
It gave them 48 hours to respond as to why they thought they shouldn’t refund me.
I still haven’t heard anything but given that it was the bank holiday should I allow for extra time ?
I'd get into them tomorrow, (Thursday) morning. How are you intending to proceed? 10k is 'small claims court' limit (money claim online now I think) after that you're into proper lawyers.
Just to update.
Ive booked an independent report at a garage that specialises in VW/Seat & Audi. That is being done next week.
I've spoke with Citizens advice and they have said to carry on with the Section 75 for now and then if that doesn't fall in my favour take it to the ombudsman.
Had another quick look over the car again tonight and found there are actually two bolts missing from the turbo installation, not only that but the engine undertray is now missing too. so they have mislaid that somewhere too.
Don't get a report done FFS. You have rejected the car. Its now the sellers issue.
If seller is refusing to honour their obligations, or even by the sounds of it not even discussing further then OP has now to involve third parties, in this case either the CC company by a chargeback and make it their issue as is allowed under finance rules, or they could go direct to legal and seek a court solution. Either way they need now evidence that the car is not repaired to an adequate standard hence IMHO they DO need an independent report*.
* CC company has asked for one to progress it. You could go legal without but then is your word against theirs and harder to 'prove' and the cost of the report will be part of the claim anyway. As indeed would legal costs too, AIUI.
OP has most recently done pretty much everything right and is still stuck in this
'but these are my rights' <-> 'I refuse to honour your rights'
impasse.
Any thoughts to actually name the dealer, other than a multibranch car supermarket in Bury, because I for sure wouldn't want to buy from them.
Ta jonv
Thanks all.
TO clarfiy: Its the credit Card that have asked for an independant report. As technically I have held them jointly liable(by virtue of paying the deposit on the CC) they need a report to show that the issues still remain.
The way I currently see it is this:
1, Oil usage and occasional smoking. Dealer diagnosed turbo and so got a garage to replace it. Garage have done a shite job and the issue still remains plus additional issues due to the replacement: Whistling noise when on boost plus missing bolts from install, hose left flapping and now the undertray is missing.
2. Headlight levelling. Garage just did a headlight alignment which as expected wont repair a levelling motor issue.
3, knocking from front suspension: Dealer couldnt replicate. I can feel/hear it over rough tarmac and speedbumps.
Well strangley Ive just had a reply from the dealer manager.
This is what I sent:
FINAL LETTER OF REJECTION
Dear Gregory Jackson (General Manager),
In the following email I refer at times to the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 (CRA), and the Motor Ombudsman (MO) explanation of it. For ease the links to both are:
THEMOTOROMBUDSMAN.ORG "https://www.themotorombudsman.org/knowledge/what-is-the-consumer-rights-act/"
What is the Consumer Rights Act, and how does it affect my vehicle purchase? - The Motor Ombudsman
If you bought your car after 01 October 2015, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies. This means that, when you buy the vehicle, it has to be of satisfactory.
LEGISLATION.GOV.UK "https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents"
Consumer Rights Act 2015
An Act to amend the law relating to the rights of consumers and protection of their interests; to make provision about investigatory powers for enforcing the regulation of traders; to make provision about private actions in competition law and the Competition Appeal Tribunal; and for connected purposes.
I bought WU19ZSZ 2019 Seat Leon FR estate from you Motor Trust Bury on 17/05/2025 for the sum of £14969
On 19/07/2025 I informed you that there were problems with the vehicle. This was by email, and the following issues were noted:
1, Smoking from exhaust & use of oil.
On start up, the car smells quite badly of oil and occasionally fuel. Once the car is up to temperature and after prolonged idle, when pulling away there is a large amount of blue/grey smoke from the exhaust. If stuck in slow moving traffic and then pulling away again there is smoke from the exhaust. If I leave the car running on the drive and then pull off the rear screen gets covered in smoke. In 1400 miles the car has gone from max to min on the dipstick twice. I can see no evidence of oil leaks anywhere. Occasionally there is smoke from the exhaust when revving the engine higher into the rev range as well. More often than not the cooling fans are always running after a drive and continue to run for about 5 mins. When this happens the front of the car always feels hot. Coolant has dropped slightly over the same 1400-mile period. Stop start does not work. The smoke is normally worse before 3000rpm before the turbo starts spooling.
I have not noticed any smoke on start up from cold, but it does smell quite badly of oil and fumes if the windows are down when starting the car.
2, Passenger side headlight levelling motor inoperative.
When turning the car on in dark conditions the headlights do a self-levelling check. The passenger side light fails to do this. When switching to full beam the headlights adjust up slightly. The passenger side light fails to do this. When in operation I was getting flashed by oncoming vehicles due to the glare of uneven headlights
3, Knocking from front suspension over rough roads.
When driving on rough roads that have uneven surfaces there is noticeable knocking com-ing from the front suspension. Possible drop links?
As this is outside the 30 day period specified in the CRA, as per the MO explanation I "have to give the selling dealership or garage one opportunity to repair or replace your car, with repair normally being the best option"
The car was returned to you on this basis on 26/07/2025 and despite being clearly advised of the faults you did not address faults 2 & 3, only fixing the Turbo, which I was unable to verify for reasons further below. When the failure to repair issues 2 & 3 was highlighted for a further time, for goodwill I agreed with you that you should keep the car and fix the further faults. This is why the repair to the turbo was not inspected at the time.
After you informed me that repairs were completed by email on 21/08/2025 I returned to collect the car on Saturday Aug 23rd. On inspection, you had clearly again failed to repair the car as required, namely:
1, Missing bolts / connections on the air intake to turbo fitting (Subsequently rectified whilst we went to get a coffee) Further, when I drove the car on Saturday the turbo does not appear fixed as there is a pronounced whistle from the turbo whilst the engine is on boost, this points to either a boost leak or failing bearings inside the turbo. Additionally, on inspection when we got home there is a further bolt missing from a component fitted to the new turbo and there was a hose not connected correctly and left dangling in the engine compartment.
Disappointingly there is still an issue of smoke coming from the exhaust after being stuck in traffic and the cooling fans are still cutting in a lot/The car appears very hot.
2, Headlight motor not replaced as required, your repair by realigning manually is not acceptable. The MOT requirements state that "Vehicles with high intensity discharge (HID) or LED dipped beam headlamps may be fitted with a suspension or headlamp self-levelling system. If these systems have been fitted, they must work. Whilst we were at stale mate over rejecting the car you suggested that we take the vehicle to a garage local to us to diagnose and then contact the warranty company for approval. Initially we considered this option but on reflection and after finding the issues with the newly fitted turbo we are not going to do this. The fault was clearly described in the original email listing the faults and the car has been at your dealership for 4 weeks which is a reasonable time to repair the issue.
3, I understand the testers were unable to recreate the third fault of knocking from the front. This is immaterial in light of the first two now.
Given the substandard work on the turbo, as per faults above consequently I do not consider the vehicle to be repaired satisfactorily.
Under the CRA after the 30 day period you have one attempt to repair. You have had repeated opportunities, and the car is not repaired, consequently I am rejecting the car as per my statutory rights as outlined in the CRA
Consequently, I require a refund for the vehicle WU19ZSZ to be paid to me in return for the car. No other option is acceptable to me, and I will not enter further discussion about other options.
Please confirm your agreement by return email.
If you do not agree to the above, I require in writing within 48 hours your explanation. Please included which parts of the CRA you feel do not apply, and why you are not obliged to provide me with my statutory rights as described above.
The CRA makes provision for "a refund of what I paid for the car minus a deduction for any usage I've had. This is usually calculated by looking at how many miles you've added to the vehicle, and charging a certain amount of pence for each mile driven"
I have owned the car for 3 months in which time it has covered 1915 miles. In that period it has been faulty and unusable, including at your garage for 4 weeks. 369 of the miles it has covered have been incurred as a result of returning it to you and use whilst at your dealership.
Contract hire purchase usually provides for an excess mileage deduction of around 9-12p per mile. For the miles covered by me that are not as a result of returning the car for your work, I therefore consider the reasonable deduction to be 1546 x 10p = £154.60.
However, in light of the inconvenience (includes travelling a not inconsiderable distance, twice, at a cost, to try and get this resolved) and hardship incurred as a result of the car being of unsatisfactory quality I propose that this is waived, and full refund made, and in turn I will waive any right to further claims for inconvenience.
Kind regards
Ant his is his reply:
Dear Steve
Thank you for your email and it was great to meet you on Saturday.
I have read through this and have provided you with the invoices for the work completed. Please as our agreement Saturday get the diagnostic on the auto leveling headlight and let me know the costs and i will authorise through your extended warranty as we discussed.
Kind regards
Again not responding to the rejection and trying to get me to put it though warranty. to caveat: we did initially consider doing this but after finidng the other issues decided against it and just want to reject the car
Invoices for work that was clearly substandard and an offer to pay for a warranty repair in return for you keeping a car that whistles and smokes is contemptible. Tell him to **** off, politely.
I would suggest:
Dear Gregory.
I refer you to my previous correspondence. I clearly state that you have had more than one attempt to repair and have failed to do so, consequently I am exercising my statutory right to return the vehicle for refund. As per my email "No other option is acceptable to me, and I will not enter further discussion about other options"
Further, also as per my email "If you do not agree to the above, I require in writing within 48 hours your explanation. Please included which parts of the CRA you feel do not apply, and why you are not obliged to provide me with my statutory rights as described above"
**
I havent got the fight in me tonight.
Ive got the car booked in for wednesday next week so fingers crossed that will prove useful.
I wouldn't bother with that last paragraph, just gives an option for more to and fro. Id be stating that the your next correspondence will be a letter before action.
Or I might just send that now.
It’s definitely LBA time. Invoices for work do not prove it was completed satisfactorily, which it clearly wasn’t. He’s taking advantage of your reasonableness - it’s time for him to abide by the law and pay up.