Corolla Conundrum

[Guest]

Can't go into huge detail about this yet, but I've just heard that a woman has got a loan to buy a car for £750 from a car dealer. It's a K-reg Corolla with 90K on the clock, think it might be an autobox but don't know for sure.However, on the invoice the dealer has written that no warranty is applicable or implied.Is it just me or is this a tad unusual? Without seeing the car it sounds like they've been thoroughly bent over to me, can they even sell it without warranty?A very curious situation I think.

[dollywobbler]

Fairly standard I think. A warranty is an option to have repairs done for nowt really isn't it? He's saying "if it goes wrong, it's your problem." After all, something sub-£1000 is likely to have at least something wrong with it. However, there are trading standards things I think that mean that if it's unfit for purpose or something, he can't avoid that. So if the engine fell out, I think there is some obligation to do something about it.

[pogweasel]

I think if you need to take out a loan to buy a £750 motor, you ought to really be catching the bus (or perhaps detained under the mental health act), but that's not really the issue hereAs DW said, at that end of the market a warranty is a potentially big liability for the dealer, they can still offer the car on a 'sold as seen' basis, and as long as it hasn't been grossly mis-sold or is dangerous/has a hookey MoT then that's the end of it. If the engine fell out, then maybe he would have to sort it. If the engine grenaded 800 yards down the road because the cambelt snaps, as long as he hasn't claimed it's been replaced then it's her problem.

[Father Ted]

^^^ What he said;If the clutch goes in a couple of hundred miles its unlikely that she would get any comeback (yeah, allright I know its an auto..), however if the brakes were borked when she bought it, or it had a serious mechanical defect then she would under the sale of goods act.Its got to be fit for purpous, and one would expect a £750 car to do 12 months without needing anything major. We paid £400 for a fridge freezer and it borked after 18 months ( 6 months after the warranty expired) tooke the retailer to the small claims court as you would expect a freezer costing £400 to last longer than 18 months - so clearly not fit for its purpous, judge agreed and awarded us £200 towards a new one or repairs.

[AnthonyG]

All commercial businesses have to provide goods that are fit for purpose. Saying/claiming it is a 'trade sale/on a trade basis/no warranty stated or implied' is legally bollocks, the product still has to be working, and not just for a day after the sale either. I don't know what the time limit is for major faults on this though, IIRC 6 months?Personally I agree with Pog - someone getting a loan out to buy a £750 16 year old car is mad, even if it is a Toyota!

[Pillock]

What they said.The reason Traders have to identify themselves as such in classfied adverts is that they legally have to give a greater level of protection to the buyer. Goods have to be fit for the purpose they are sold for - if the car is not identified as 'spares or repair' then it is agreed that it is capable of being driven and has no known faults preventing this. However a 'warranty' usually implies a further level of protection, sort of insurance or goodwill repairs. So if a fault did develop two days later which cannot be proven as existing before the sale, the dealer may repair it under his 'warranty'. I'd say he's going over and above what he needs to, for there to be any form of warranty it needs to be explicitly stated. He's pretty much just making sure you know this fact, if he advertised it without that statement you'd have no more or less rights. He cannot remove statutary law from his contract of sale either, so it still needs to be fit for purpose (even if that purpose was 'breaking for spares').

[FredTransit]

Yep, consumer law states goods (including used cars) have to be 'of merchantable quality', in other words fit for the purpose they were sold for, Just saying they are not going to honour the law is not a get out clause.

[Guest]

It definitely isn't being sold for salvage, it's been invoiced for as a used car and it has tax/test etc.I'm just curious about the legality aspect since it is coming from a rather dubious car lot. I've never heard of a used car coming from a dealer with it firmly set out that there is no warranty unless it is being sold as salvage, which in this case it most certainly isn't.As for the loan bit, God knows, sounds a bit mad to me.

[gallondrunk]

.

[garycox]

I always thought that if it was under a certain amount (say a grand) that they could just sell it as 'sold as seen' with virtually no comebacks. Otherwise why would they bother selling old PX shitters for a couple of hundred? Would surely be more trouble than it's worth.

[FredTransit]

Consumer law is consumer law, it doesn't have a lower limit for price.

[Parky]

I have an "L" Reg one of those which I bought in 2002. My Dad has it now but after 6 years of ownership it has basically cost me a few gallons of oil in servicing and a fan belt. These Toyotas (AE101 I believe) are bulletproof and I honestly wouldnt expect to have any major issues with it.The Kiwi's love these - there are loads over there and everyone loves them. Is Stuno or Fotorabia our Kiwi contributor? I cant remember which. Ask them to clarify!