My son bought a 2008 STi from a yard in Christchurch. It was warranted last Monday 27 July and he picked it up from the delivery yard on Friday 31 July. He took it straight from the yard to have a post-purchase inspection carried out and the front right tyre was found to have cords sticking out of it, and a significant leak at the rack as well as a noisy wheel bearing. A report was given and photos were taken and sent to the selling dealer yesterday. They cam back offering to give him $100 to put towards a second hand tyre. Now, I know that they are legally bound by CGA to repair the car to WOF standard and repair defects for a period of 3 months, but as they are refusing where does he go to make this happen? For some reason they seem to think that as it was a VTNZ inspection they are not liable for the repairs. Interestingly enough the sticker on the windscreen is not a VTNZ sticker.
kazbanz,
Aug 5, 10:49pm
Ok mopsy Im sorry but why on earth would you get a POST purchase inspection done? The horse has as they say bolted. Sorry if Im lecturing but forget 3 months re CGA - the law does not in any way specify a time period the car is covered for. Clearly though the car has faults that require rectification. The tyre in my view is the least of them. The wheel bearing will only get worse as will the oil leak. So in black and white state the issues with the vehicle. State clearly the rectification you expect from the dealership State clearly the time period he expects a commitment from the dealer to carry out the repair. State that he requires a copy of the repair invoice from the workshop.
kam04,
Aug 5, 11:10pm
Was there a new WOF on the car when he picked it up? there should have been. If so, the problem should then swing back to the WOF issuing agent.
kevin.b,
Aug 5, 11:55pm
I know what you're meaning by the problem swinging back to the WOF issuing agent, but. the purchaser has a contract/dealings with the car dealer ,not the WOF issuer, so can only probably prove vehicle was no good after WoF inspection, not on the day of inspection.
Yes, it's highly unlikely anything happened to the vehicle in the 4 days from it getting a WoF to getting picked up by the new owner, so may be an issue with WoF issuer, but who knows what the dealer may or may not have done to the car themselves as well.
A tyre/wheel could easily have been swapped over after the WoF by someone at the dealership. As for the other 2 problems, they may have been failed to be picked up at WoF time,(if deemed bad enough to be a WoF issue) but if so, the dealership should be the ones to be asking questions of the WoF issuer about why the car passed inspection, and they should definitely take it further from there.
I do wonder if the dealer takes their vehicles to this WoF issuer because they know they may be more lenient(possibly to lenient) towards them. as $100 and no interest in seeing the car and following up on its faults is a worrying sign from the car dealer.
As has been mentioned, you need to outline the problems to the dealer and ask for everything to be put right. Most dealers would have organised to get the tyre replaced for you as part of good customer service, not just offer $100, as this may not even cover the cost of the tyre, let alone the fitting and balancing.
I'd take it back and tell them you want it sorted. also in future do the smart thing and get it checked BEFORE buying it
mopsy3,
Aug 6, 2:34am
While I hear what you are saying regarding getting it checked prior to purchase, one would expect a vehicle with a brand new WOF to actually be up to WOF standard. Unfortunately the car came from Christchurch to Auckland so not a lot of chance of it going back.
franc123,
Aug 6, 2:57am
Hang on, its either got a VTNZ wof or it hasn't! Did they say it was going there for a check and was this a factor in you not opting for a PRE purchase check, or did you insist that it went there as opposed to going to another inspection centre? Not that going to VTNZ means you are necessarily going to get a better inspection done, but if that's what you both agreed to and it hasn't happened they haven't exactly adhered to the sale agreement have they?
tamarillo,
Aug 6, 4:19am
Have you discussed further with dealer? Have you gone back and said you're not happy, mention you know your rights and you know the CGA etc. be assertive and clear you want better solution or you'll follow it up. I'm not a dealer but I'd be pushing a bit harder.
kazbanz,
Aug 6, 4:32am
Sorry you are wrong. The law states that the WOF needs to be no more than 28 days old. So the wof on the car does NOT need to be renewed on sale.In this case it wasn't.
kazbanz,
Aug 6, 4:49am
Im sorry Mopsy I was busy earlier. Your son made a fairly BIG mistake in my view. But you can't unbreak busted eggs. The fact is that there are three issues with the car. Two of three of them -Tyre worn out and steering rack leak should definitely have been picked up in a WOF check. The third -rumbling wheel bearing if it was a testing station WOF wouldn't have been noticed most likely - But if actually driven for the WOF brake test would have been. Either way you have three faults with a potential repair cost of over $1000 So my advice above stands except the added complication of distance needs to be worked around. SOOO in black and white state the issues with the vehicle and I would then also supply a quote for repair. State clearly the rectification he expects from the dealership. State clearly the time period he expects a commitment from the dealer to organise carrying out of the repair. I would suggest offering the dealership the opportunity to get their own inspection carried out State that he requires a copy of the repair invoice from the workshop the dealer chooses to do the work .
The comment I made re CGA was true but in this situation irrelevant given the short time span from purchase involved. The point I was trying to make was that on a 2008 motor car the CGA cannot be limited to a time span of 1 or 3 months.
sw20,
Aug 6, 5:14am
Let me guess, the car yard also shares it's name with a racing series in the USA.
mopsy3,
Aug 6, 10:28pm
Yes, tamarillo. Did this and after a bit of backward and forward they are paying up as requested. Thanks.
mopsy3,
Nov 9, 6:10pm
No, not at all. But they advertise extensively on here. Actually, their name is a dodgy as the WOF issuer and should have rung alarm bells. But, hey, they came to the party so can't complain.
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.