Can dealers sell perfectly good cars with a clause in the paperwork that says "suitable for parts only" to escape comebacks and the CGA! I know they cannot 'contract out' of the CGA, but if you agree to this, is it technically 'suitable for the intended purpose' and your on your own if trouble ensues! What do you think!
carlz05,
Jun 25, 9:04am
If its registered and warranted, then its fit for the road, and the fit purpose is driving on the road.If its suitable for parts only it should be de registered. My thoughts anyway.
xs1100,
Jun 25, 9:40am
+1 the dealer is just trying to make sure that there are no comebacks and that you understand that you are buying it for "parts" should you be able to repair and make road worthy good on you. other option is should you wish to have the cover of the cga then save more money or HP your car
jgoater,
Jun 25, 8:32pm
I am talking 5-10 year old cars with under 100k's. Obviously they are more 'suitable for parts only' and seems they are contracting out of the CGA. Was told this is a way of ensuring no come backs if a fault occurs. What do you think Kaz!
kazbanz,
Jun 25, 9:06pm
Sorry to sound cynical but sure as eggs is eggs some smart alec will spoil the plan. Basicly the problem isn't the typical old school kiwi where you shake hands and both know clearly theres no comeback. Its the new "empowered" version who buys something at a bargain price then comes back anyway. That person goes straight to MVDT -Their reply is simple and clear cut. You CANNOTsell to the public and contract out of the CGA or soga. My personal view is that the CGA etcneeds to be revisited with regards to second hand goods.
tgray,
Jun 25, 10:00pm
If both parties agree that it's suitable for parts only' at the time of sale however, and something goes wrong later on, is that really contracting out of the CGA! If it's say, a 1986 mirage with 240k's and no WOF, I can't see an issue. What if it's a 2008 BMW worth $20,000!
mrfxit,
Jun 25, 10:09pm
LOL yea, gotta LOVE those "empowered" & " I know my rights" versions
Same sort that when the offspring borrow YOUR car & prang it while boozed/drugged/ loaning it to a mate , then take YOU to the cops for giving them an old fashioned 'clip around the ears"
mrfxit,
Jun 25, 10:12pm
Can't see a problem with that idea as long as the conditions are VERY CLEAR (in bold at the top of every page) of the contract/sale doc.
. . not buried in small print at the bottom of the last page (4 pt font)
robotnik,
Jun 25, 10:15pm
Insisting on your rights under the CGA is nice in theory, but in reality the retailer can tell you where to get off. Like the time my new fridge died 1 month after its 12 month warranty expired. The well known appliance retailer refused to help as it was out of warranty. Nevermind 'acceptable use' or whatever under the CGA. I had to go to the Disputes Tribunal to get redress.
kazbanz,
Jun 25, 11:05pm
Its a fair bit easier in the car world because there is the MVDT specifically there for disputes regarding a motor vehicle. But again the question is WHY was there even a seconds doubt in your case! Its because the laws are so wishy washy and imprecise in my opinion.
kazbanz,
Jun 25, 11:19pm
I think this is what the OP was talking about. Not the end of its reasonable life stuff. Reading between the lines they are refering to a way aroundthe new law being introduced.
bitsy_boffin,
Jun 25, 11:28pm
For your example of a somewhat modern vehicle, registered.
It would be pretty transparent that the intended purpose is for the vehicle to be used, and that the dealer is aware of this intended purpose, and that the dealer has sold the vehicle for this intended purpose.
So any deal with a contract that said otherwise, would be a pretty transparent attempt to contract out I think.
Putting stuff in contracts is all well and good, but unfortunately people often don't read or understand the contracts they agree too (and before you all say "more fool them", when you last installed some software on your computer, did you read all that fine print), and of course dodgy dealers could try and gloss over the sneaky clauses.That's one good reason why there is no contracting out.
That said, if the dealer was abundantly clear "this vehicle is not suitable for driving, this vehicle is only suitable for parts" and I mean, without any nudging, winking or anything, completely straight faced, he really believes this and makes sure that the customer fully understands this. then he would be foolish to sell the vehicle to the customer who wanted to go against that.
kazbanz,
Jun 26, 6:03am
Actually BB- The sweet innocent buyer you are alluding to is pretty much a thing of the past. (yea there are exceptions) Frankly the sort of buyer who would look to buy a 10k car under theese conditions is generally pretty street savvy no matter how innocent they pretend to be.When its all going good -all great. The first sighn of a problem with the carI betcha they suddenly "remember" their rights undedr the law.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.