Sold a glugger!

gerrymadden1

A friend, who is a pensioner, was buying a 2006 Toyota Corolla car in Dublin from a very well known dealeship (I won't name them just yet). He asked me for my opinion. I live in Limerick and hadn't seen the car so I couldn't offer much advice except the fact that the reputation of the dealer was good.

Boy, did I get it wrong!

He's only had the car 2 or 3 weeks and it's been back to the garage on a number of occasions. For some strange reason, a number of door seals & the windscreen seal needed to be replaced??

He came to Limerick for Easter & when he arrived there was a putrid smell from the car. Something was obviously burning but we couldn't determine what.

We left the car to cool down & discovered a small pool of oil on the road.

In summary, the car is as rough as a bear's a*rse. There's 57k miles on the clock but the car looks like its doone 150k. Now he has the problem of getting back to the garage in Dublin with an oil leak.

I'm no mechanic but I believe he has been shafted. Is there any way that he can simply give this car back???

drunkmonkey

Did he get a Warranty, if he did i'd expect the garage to pick it up and fix it or else pay for a local garage to sort it out. The seals wouldn't really bother me as the may have become cracked from the elements.

road_high

God I would have thought myself you could not go wrong with a 06 Corolla brought from a main dealer, but there ya go I guess.

colm_mcm

Did he get Toyota Dealer Cover warranty on the car?

checklist here:
http://www.toyota.ie/downloads/Dealer%20cover%2056-point%20check%20sheet.pdf

Atlantic Dawn

Doesn't say he got it from a main dealer or a Toyota main dealer.

Stinicker

Its a typical junkbox Toyota, people in Ireland are blinded by their mythical "reputation" but this is down to marketing eg. Munster Rugby and the GAA and such monikers as "The best built cars in the World". The mileage is probably correct and it is another example of how crap Toyotas actually are.

drunkmonkey wrote:

Did he get a Warranty, if he did i'd expect the garage to pick it up and fix it or else pay for a local garage to sort it out. The seals wouldn't really bother me as the may have become cracked from the elements.

would this not be a case of Caveat Emptor? Seals should not go in a 3 (late 06) to 4 (early 06) year old car. There are cars on the road for 10 or 15 years and there seals have not gone.

I think people need to wake up and smell the manure that Toyota have been churning out of Japan with the last decade. Give me a Honda:eek: anyday over those Japanese junkboxes.

Atlantic Dawn

Stinicker wrote: »

I think people need to wake up and smell the manure that Toyota have been churning out of Japan with the last decade. Give me a Honda:eek: anyday over those Japanese junkboxes.

Yes since they stopped making them in Japan and switched to Europe quality has gone to the dogs.

gerrymadden1

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Doesn't say he got it from a main dealer or a Toyota main dealer.

I wasn't sure so I checked... Not a Toyota main dealer... Main dealer for 2 other makes...

gerrymadden1

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The seals wouldn't really bother me as the may have become cracked from the elements.

I know what you mean but after 4 years??? This isn't Antartica!! :P

Seriously, I'm driving a 04 2.0 Mitsubishi Carisma Diesel since new. OK, I keep it reasonably well but it looks like a new car compared to the Toyota which is 2 years newer!

Zorba

Putrid smell and all the seals need replacing, would the car have been in the sea for a few hrs by any chance ??

kasper

has the car current nct ? if it has when and where was it tested ? and how many miles were on the nct cert ? sounds like it was abused and clocked . when i am buying second hand i inspect the tax book find the last owners name and address and contact them before buying

Tigger

if the ar was sold as a deal between a dealer and a cutomer he has protection


From a garage or car dealer
In this situation you, as a consumer, are protected by the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 as you are buying a car for your personal use from a person whose normal business it is to sell cars. As a consumer you have the same rights if you buy an item second hand as if it is new. In this case if you find a fault with the car after you have bought it the dealer is the person who must set matters right. If you buy a commercial vehicle or a tractor from a dealer you may not have the same protection under the law. If you are offered an extended warranty on a used car think about the cost of the warranty versus the cost of repairs that the car is likely to need.



the science bit

13.—(1) In this section "motor vehicle" means a vehicle intended or adapted for propulsion by mechanical means, including—

[GA] ( a ) a bicycle or tricycle with an attachment for propelling it by mechanical power, and

[GA] ( b ) a vehicle the means of propulsion of which is electrical or partly electrical and partly mechanical.

[GA] (2) Without prejudice to any other condition or warranty, in every contract for the sale of a motor vehicle (except a contract in which the buyer is a person whose business it is to deal in motor vehicles) there is an implied condition that at the time of delivery of the vehicle under the contract it is free from any defect which would render it a danger to the public, including persons travelling in the vehicle.

[GA] (3) Subsection (2) of this section shall not apply where—

[GA] ( a ) it is agreed between the seller and the buyer that the vehicle is not intended for use in the condition in which it is to be delivered to the buyer under the contract, and

[GA] ( b ) a document consisting of a statement to that effect is signed by or on behalf of the seller and the buyer and given to the buyer prior to or at the time of such delivery, and

[GA] ( c ) it is shown that the agreement referred to in paragraph (a) is fair and reasonable.

[GA] (4) Save in a case in which the implied condition as to freedom from defects referred to in subsection (2) is either not incorporated in the contract or has been effectively excluded from the contract pursuant to that subsection, in the case of every sale of a motor vehicle by a person whose business it is to deal in motor vehicles a certificate in writing in such form as the Minister may by regulations prescribe shall be given to the buyer by or on behalf of the seller to the effect that the vehicle is, at the time of delivery, free from any defect which would render it a danger to the public, including persons travelling in the vehicle.

[GA] (5) Where an action is brought for breach of the implied condition referred to in subsection (2) by reason of a specific defect in a motor vehicle and a certificate complying with the requirements of this section is not proved to have been given, it shall be presumed unless the contrary is proved that the proven defect existed at the time of delivery.

[GA] (6) Regulations under subsection (4) may apply to motor vehicles generally or to motor vehicles of a particular class or description (defined in such manner and by reference to such things as the Minister thinks proper) and different forms of certificate may be prescribed for different classes or descriptions of vehicles.

[GA] (7) A person using a motor vehicle with the consent of the buyer of the vehicle who suffers loss as the result of a breach of the condition implied by subsection (2) in the contract of sale may maintain an action for damages against the seller in respect of the breach as if he were the buyer.

[GA] (8) The Statute of Limitations, 1957 , is hereby amended—

[GA] (I) by the insertion in section 11 (2) of the following paragraph—

[GA] "(d) An action for damages under section 13 (7) of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980 , shall not be brought after the expiration of two years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.";

that says that if the sellerf is in the business of selling then the car should be fit for purpose ie should be as good as people think 2007 toyotas are

i woukld be demanding her swaps the car AND THIS TIME BRING AN EXPERT

jimmyw

Stinicker wrote: »

Its a typical junkbox Toyota, people in Ireland are blinded by their mythical "reputation" but this is down to marketing eg. Munster Rugby and the GAA and such monikers as "The best built cars in the World". The mileage is probably correct and it is another example of how crap Toyotas actually are.



would this not be a case of Caveat Emptor? Seals should not go in a 3 (late 06) to 4 (early 06) year old car. There are cars on the road for 10 or 15 years and there seals have not gone.

I think people need to wake up and smell the manure that Toyota have been churning out of Japan with the last decade. Give me a Honda:eek: anyday over those Japanese junkboxes.

Hmmmm!! Honda is Japanese, made in the uk and so is Toyota.

pajo1981

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Yes since they stopped making them in Japan and switched to Europe quality has gone to the dogs.

Care to back this up with stats?

Thought not.

Guy:Incognito

jimmyw wrote: »

Hmmmm!! Honda is Japanese, made in the uk and so is Toyota.

Yeah but all the bad Japanese people make the Toyota's

I dont see how the nationality of the person assembling ther parts can make any car better or worse. I'd imagine that what happens is cost cutting in various areas coincides with moving production which then looks like the lads working in the new location are monkeys.

The toyota factory in Derby is a World Class manufacturing facility, they charge folks from other industried (including medical device companies that make catheters, stents and pace makers etc) to go over and have a looksee, and companies are queing up for it, rightly or wrongly.

Atlantic Dawn

pajo1981 wrote: »

Care to back this up with stats?

Thought not.

No stats to back it up but from family and friends owning a good 20 or more Toyotas over the past 15-20 years I can say that those from the 80's and 90's had far little going wrong with them than the models in the last ten years. Having said that the models from years back were as basic as it gets and had little or no electronics in them to go wrong so could possibly have been lashed together and would still be super reliable.

ZiX ZiX ZiX

It's very unlikely a 3-4 year old car would have 150k+ miles unless it was a taxi or commercial vehicle which a simple motorcheck or one of those sites where you put in the reg will tell you.

Also agree about the new toyotas not being as good build quality. Here's an example of the old corolla (1999) with 250,000 miles and still looks in reasonably good cond. Although it is a diesel which generally last longer anyway. http://www.carzone.ie/search/Toyota/Corolla/2L-DSL/200927194474412/advert?channel=CARS

pajo1981

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

No stats to back it up but from family and friends owning a good 20 or more Toyotas over the past 15-20 years I can say that those from the 80's and 90's had far little going wrong with them than the models in the last ten years. Having said that the models from years back were as basic as it gets and had little or no electronics in them to go wrong so could possibly have been lashed together and would still be super reliable.

The Toyotas of the 80s and 90s were for the most part boxes with wheels attached.

I appreciate what toyota have done for cars, but I wouldn't be so quick to place them on a pedestal!

slimjimmc

Tigger wrote: »

that says that if the sellerf is in the business of selling then the car should be fit for purpose ie should be as good as people think 2007 toyotas are

Actually, the section you quoted doesn't say that at all. It says that the car must not have any dangerous defects which the customer is unaware of. That is not the same as being fit for purpose.

there is an implied condition that at the time of delivery of the vehicle under the contract it is free from any defect which would render it a danger to the public, including persons travelling in the vehicle

colm_mcm

Just to set things straight, some Corolla hatchbacks are built in Japan, some built in UK, the saloons are built in Turkey, and some in Japan.
I sold them for years and the country of origin has no bearing on how good they are.

There's something obviously wrong with this car, and I suspect it's down to a dodgy past rather than build issues.

That generation Corolla were ultra reliable, with the only real issue I remember being rattly inlet manifolds on the early ones, in itself more an annoyance than anything else.

you could built old model Renault Meganes in Japan and it wouldn't have much of an effect on quality, it's the bits that the car is made of and the technology in the factory that makes the difference.
The much lauded Carina E was built in the UK!

gerrymadden1

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Doesn't say he got it from a main dealer or a Toyota main dealer.

Correction to my earlier post... the car dealer is indeed a Toyota main dealer... which makes this even worse!

cadaliac

ZiX ZiX ZiX wrote: »

It's very unlikely a 3-4 year old car would have 150k+ miles unless it was a taxi or commercial vehicle which a simple motorcheck or one of those sites where you put in the reg will tell you.

Also agree about the new toyotas not being as good build quality. Here's an example of the old corolla (1999) with 250,000 miles and still looks in reasonably good cond. Although it is a diesel which generally last longer anyway. http://www.carzone.ie/search/Toyota/Corolla/2L-DSL/200927194474412/advert?channel=CARS

In fairness, anyone who pays 2.5k for an 11 year old car with 253,000 miles on the clock needs their head examined. Toyota or not.

corktina

Zorba wrote: »

Putrid smell and all the seals need replacing, would the car have been in the sea for a few hrs by any chance ??

i thought similar....especially seeing we had serious floods recently...

Tigger

slimjimmc wrote: »

Actually, the section you quoted doesn't say that at all. It says that the car must not have any dangerous defects which the customer is unaware of. That is not the same as being fit for purpose.

i posted the whole thiung for completeness
i don't want people buying privatly missunderst anding

[GA] (2) Without prejudice to any other condition or warranty, in every contract for the sale of a motor vehicle (except a contract in which the buyer is a person whose business it is to deal in motor vehicles) there is an implied condition that at the time of delivery of the vehicle under the contract it is free from any defect which would render it a danger to the public, including persons travelling in the vehicle.

if the person is in the business then srtandard customer rights apply

si_guru

gerrymadden1 wrote: »

Seriously, I'm driving a 04 2.0 Mitsubishi Carisma Diesel since new. OK, I keep it reasonably well but it looks like a new car compared to the Toyota which is 2 years newer!

Made in Holland right? with a Renault engine.