Problem with a car dealership

Not so. The Sale of Goods Act will give reasonable protection for goods sold. So provision would depend on how old the vehicle was and what could reasonably be expected from it. But the Sale of Goods Act doesn't cover for the actions of the purchaser or the misuse of the product.

 

6 months on a used car would seem adequate.

 

An extended warranty is a piece of paper. It is an insurance policy on certain parts of a car under rather strict conditions. It certainly isn't the same as a liability on behalf of the retailer. I suspect that Evans Halshaw have a pretty good idea of where their responsibility starts and finishes.

Perhaps I misunderstood, were you suggesting that the car which had been in the flood had been subsequently sold by a dealer (as this is a thread about a car bought from a dealer). Or that it had been in the flood and the same owner was trying to claim for the damage under warranty?

If a dealer sells a car, it's irrelevant what happened to it before they sold it. They are liable for it being fit for purpose. The Sales of Goods act has been superseded by the way by the Consumer Rights Act.

Perhaps I misunderstood, were you suggesting that the car which had been in the flood had been subsequently sold by a dealer (as this is a thread about a car bought from a dealer). Or that it had been in the flood and the same owner was trying to claim for the damage under warranty?

 

If a dealer sells a car, it's irrelevant what happened to it before they sold it. They are liable for it being fit for purpose. The Sales of Goods act has been superseded by the way by the Consumer Rights Act.

None of that really matters as extended warranties are unlikely to come under the act and extended warranty providers are bound by the Competition and Markets Authority guidelines, and what is covered by them is entirely dependent on what the provider decided was covered.

Everything that you read on Sheffield Forum on these matters is one person's version of events, and not necessarily the full story. I would very much doubt that Evans Hallshaw are attempting to sherk their responsibilities, and it is quite possible that smear tactics are being used in order to extract rather more from a warranty than the agreement covers.

I bought a 55 plate Renault Megane from Evans Halshaw in Jan 2008 so the car still had around 8 months left on the manufacturers warranty. They offered me a 2 year extended warranty which I accepted, however whilst checking the paperwork before signing it I noticed that the warranty started immediately so I was only getting a year and a few months for my money as it overlapped with manufacturers warranty. Realising they had been rumbled they changed it for me

That extended warranty paid for itself at least 5 times over after various faults were repaired, especially one major electrical one that cost well over a grand

and it is quite possible that smear tactics are being used in order to extract rather more from a warranty than the agreement covers.

Are you suggesting I'm being dishonest?

Anyhow, to everyone else, the car has now been fixed. It was a problem with the starter motor, and took them a day to sort it out. I think my sister needs to join a car recovery service...

None of that really matters as extended warranties are unlikely to come under the act and extended warranty providers are bound by the Competition and Markets Authority guidelines, and what is covered by them is entirely dependent on what the provider decided was covered.

 

Everything that you read on Sheffield Forum on these matters is one person's version of events, and not necessarily the full story. I would very much doubt that Evans Hallshaw are attempting to sherk their responsibilities, and it is quite possible that smear tactics are being used in order to extract rather more from a warranty than the agreement covers.

Given the common behaviour of car dealerships I'd think it entirely likely that they are trying to shirk their responsibilities.

Given the common behaviour of car dealerships I'd think it entirely likely that they are trying to shirk their responsibilities.

You do realise that an extended warranty is an insurance policy, and in the event of a breakdown the insurance company pay the dealership to repair the vehicle?

Yes, I know how extended warranties work thanks.

Yes, I know how extended warranties work thanks.

OK. So explain what would motivate a dealership to turn down a legitimate claim that's covered by an extended warranty if they are going to be fully reinbursed for labour and parts used?

Given that there's a need to contact the garage at all suggests that it's their own policy.

The standard 3rd party extended warranties require you to contact the company that has issued it.

Depending on the age of the car, EH might be well aware that if they don't rectify the problems then they will have a Consumer Rights Act problem, warranty or not.

The fact (as we've been given it) is that they HAVE now repaired the car, "under warranty", so whatever excuse they gave at first, they've changed their mind.

Some interesting reading about EH and their extended warranty here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3216400

and an entirely different motoring enthusiasts forum has the same opinion

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=1213712

Oh, and to show I wasn't cheating, I didn't google for negative posts about it

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=evans%20halshaw%20extended%20warranty

Just simple "evans halshaw extended warranty", and the results are full of people who have been ripped off.