Problem after purchase (1 Viewer)

[sticky130]

Hi, just wondered if anybody else had a similar issue as us and what they did about it?

Bought our motorhome last November, 3 year warranty, mentioned to the company that it seemed to have a slight list towards the passenger side but nothing major, they eventually suggested, after being told umpteen times to bring it in but then never looking at it, to take it to our local garage and get them to look at it and provide a quote for warranty, it actually turned out to be a weak spring which they said was no big issue and can be replaced further down the line.

This however has opened a huge can of worms!!

On looking for the spring issue, the garage has discovered holes beneath the wheel arch on both sides which he has said will be an MOT failure and it shouldn't have passed last year!!? 2 weeks later our MOT has failed and now we are sat with an unusable van

Marquis has requested a quote for the repair as they initially said "well if we have missed it then we should be held partly responsible", my garage said they were unable to provide quote as they have realised the job is too big for them to do, marquis has insisted on an estimate to get the ball rolling with a potential claim through the warranty company (which I don't think it will cover) and requested that the garage over estimate it to cover all costs.

This has come in at £2800!!!!!!!!

Now marquis are jumping up and down and said they have to discuss with directors and we just have to wait, as they now are saying that it's the MOT company problem (which they sorted) and trying to bounce it back to us. We know that the MOT company cannot be held responsible as there is only a three month window to claim.

Anybody else had an issue similar??

 

[alfandM]

it sounds like a time for professional advice,good luck

 

[Minxy]

My advice would be to get it to another garage, somewhere you trust, tell them your problem and get them to give it a good shuftie, it;s worth paying for an hours labour to get to the bottom of it. If there are such major issues as the other garage has stated already then something is seriously wrong - holes that would cost that sort of money to repair do NOT occur in one year!!

Might also be worth contacting Trading Standards first to see what they advise so that you know what course of action to take/details to keep for the record etc.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[wingman]

I'm sorry to hear your plight. I'm surprised that you haven't had more replies from funsters to this post. Problems with dealerships and warranties are common posts on here.

Though I did have a few minor niggling issues with a new van, they were all sorted out satisfactorily. Thank heavens, I haven't had a problem like this!

I guess you've bought a used vehicle? If it's any help, I've cribbed the following from the Trading Standards site.....

When you buy a used motor vehicle from a trader, you enter into a legally binding contract and you are entitled to expect that it is of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, and as described. An older vehicle with high mileage may not be as good as a newer vehicle with low mileage, but it should still be fit for use on the road and in a condition that reflects its age and price.
Traders cannot take away consumers' rights by using terms such as 'sold as seen' or 'no refunds'. If you buy a used vehicle from a trader online, you may have additional rights under the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000. You do not have the same legal rights if you buy a vehicle from a private seller or an auction.
If the used vehicle is faulty, you have a short time after buying it to reject it. You may have other remedies such as repair or replacement. If the vehicle is faulty then you need to write to trader you bought it from. You should confirm the details of your complaint and the remedy you are seeking and keep copies of all correspondence. As a last resort, you may need to consider taking court action. Remember, used vehicles may have some faults, but they should not be excessive. Fair wear and tear is not considered to be a fault.

As far as blame is concerned, this is a tricky one. The dealership (Marquis??? ) sold you the vehicle with a valid MOT. Can't see them re-inspecting every vehicle after an official MOT. They would simply sell the MH on the basis of a valid cert'. If the dealership was Marquis, then they are a national company and I can't see them willingly getting a 'dodgy' MOT for the sake of a sale.

What IS concerning, is that the vehicle was dangerous! The suspension could have collapsed at any moment. 'Holes' around the springs did not happen because of your negligence and they don't happen overnight either. This must have been evident at the previous MOT.

I presume that plates need to be welded above the suspension legs to make it roadworthy? At least it's winter and you've presumably not got holidays booked, so you have a bit of time to sort it

As you now have an 'unusable' van, it is not fit for purpose! IMHO the dealership should be jointly liable with the garage that gave it the MOT. That's just an opinion though.

You will need to give us a bit more info' on the age of the vehicle and the small print as to what the warranty does or does not cover.

James

 

[Badknee]

Any MoHo specialists down your way? What about taking some pictures of the sort of "holes" they are talking about? You are allowed to drive the vehicle to have repairs done if booked in beforehand as far as I know.

 

[MikeD]

I doubt you have a claim against the MOT bay. If I remember correctly they are only allowed hand pressure and the "micky mouse" hammer they have to check this sort of thing.

But there are MOT guys on the forum and they may expand that statement.

The fitter in the dealer may well have used a crow bar or a big hammer to find the corrosion and bashed the hole in the wheel arch.

For me it is the dealer that is liable for the repair. They sold it with the fault whether they knew about it or not.

I assume that they may try to reclaim some of the costs from the MOT bay. But that is their problem not yours.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[MikeD]

Any MoHo specialists down your way? What about taking some pictures of the sort of "holes" they are talking about? You are allowed to drive the vehicle to have repairs done if booked in beforehand as far as I know.

https://www.gov.uk/getting-an-mot/after-the-test

If your vehicle fails the test
You’ll get a ‘notification of failure’ from the test centre if your vehicle fails the test. The failure will be recorded in the secure central MOT database.

You can still drive your vehicle if it fails the test and its existing MOT certificate is still valid (ie you got it tested before the expiry date). However, you might be stopped by police and prosecuted if your vehicle is unroadworthy.

If the vehicle fails the test and the certificate has expired, you can only drive it to:

• have the failed defects repaired
• a pre-arranged MOT test appointment

 

[Minxy]

Thinking about this some more, and reading MikeD's reply (2 above this one) I must admit that I agree with him ... if the fault was pre-existing it would come under excluded 'wear and tear' and therefore the warranty will not cover it regardless of what you or the dealer thinks, so that is a red herring. The issue is that they sold you a MH which must have had these holes well on the way to developing into what you have now, how it got an MOT I don't know but that is something that they need to sort out, not you.

Another thing you could try is finding out from the previous owner what the van's condition was when they sold it, indeed they may recall telling the dealer, or the dealer telling them of the faults to reduce the PX they got! It may even be on their PX paperwork! When we bought our current camper from a dealer it was less than 3 months old but I insisted on speaking to the previous owner to get the full story as to why he didn't' want it.

 

[FJmike]

Having worked in a dealership I know that all big dealers give the van a mechanical once over before delivery. This should have highlighted the listing to one side problem. Don't be fobbed off by the dealer

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[sticky130]

Thank you so much for all your input!!

The van is 2004, an A class which we bought for just under 30k, so not something that I would particularly put down as old with lots of expected issues.

When our garage originally inspected it he discovered that the holes had been covered up with some sort of black mastic, I honestly don't think it's going to cost that much to do, it's just Marquis wanted a quote for the work so they literally have just put down a weeks worth of labour!! We genuinely feel that if the MOT peeps had failed the MOT for the van initially, Marquis would have done the work no questions asked, but for the last 12 months they have also been completely unaware that there was an issue also, and now we're worried that they may still pull the caveat emptor card!!

As for holidays, we travel all year round! we are supposed to be going to Snowdonia on the 27th!!

 

[Badknee]

Oh dear Steve, that's rotten through and through, the mastic could have been factory fitted to cover a welded joint supposedly to stop water getting in but has failed, it may not be a " cover up" job. But having said that it should have been seen before it got that bad IMO.

 

[daveandsan]

That looks like a serious bit of corrosion for a 10 year old motor.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jollyrodger]

What is the base vehicle,that looks like a whole load of pre-excisting rust .transits were renowned for it .
With the amount you paid for it I personally would be hounding Marquis for money back.
How long did they have it in stock?
Has vehicle been submerged due to flooding? (Lots have)
I have just bought a 1994 that is almost mint on the chassis this is 2004 !
Hope you get a satisfying solution soon .

 

[CWH]

Don't forget, your contract is with the dealer you bought the MH from. You need to follow up with them, and them alone.
If it's not their fault, they can then pursue those that THEY have a contract with.

 

[sticky130]

It's an Autotrail Luxor, and we've heard nothing but good things about them, everywhere else seems fine and after the service the damp readings were really low, so no worries with damp so I don't think its ever suffered with flooding either but who knows??

Base vehicle is Fiat/Peugeot. From the outside of the van it's all spotless, just this inner skin on the wheel arch, everywhere is else is fine.

Just want it sorted asap so we can get back to enjoying it....

Nicky

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

There is NO WAY that those holes were NOT there a year ago! As for it being mastic applied by the converter ... not a chance! It was covered up to hide it ... whether it was done by the previous owner or them I don't know but when dealers take vehicles in PX they get them checked over very well indeed by one of their chaps/esses for anything they can to reduce the price they give in PX so IMV they MUST have known! If they by some miracle did NOT know then they have some really, really cr@p staff working there!

 

[B-well]

Agreed with previous posts, those holes are long term corrosion, not happened within a year. I live on south coast loads salt corrosion possible but my Hymer 1996 has no indication of mass corrosion around the vulnerable chassis areas. It does appear for someone to cover area with underseal type base that main agenda was to prevent further corrosion as apposed to rectifying the main problem by cutting out and/or replacing.
Most worrying time for you to have to content with this ongoing issue, i hope it comes to an acceptable agreement on all sides. good luck.

 

[martin2603]

I t looks like flood damage through serious water corrosion, have you checked the vehicles history? Has it been subject of a previous insurance claim. Suggest you obtain the services of an Automobile assessor to do a full report on it. It will not cost a fortune but it will stand up in Court. Such Assessors a listed as Consulting Engineers there is an Industry body to which they are all affiliated. The offence is selling vehicle in a dangerous condition no doubt at all it was like it on purchase . I would suggest you seek a full refund from the seller,
after all you do not know how much corrosion is present elsewhere. From your photographs I would think quite a lot.
Trading Standards would be my next on my calling list.

Good luck .

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gellyneck]

Really feel for you Steve and Nicky.
Hope the dealer steps up to the plate and resolves the issue to your satisfaction.
One thing you may want to keep in the back of your mind if you do have issues with the dealer is if you paid less than a total cost of £30k and more than £100 of the total cost by credit card you may have redress under Consumer Credit Act as section 75 of this Act makes the credit card company jointly liable for faulty goods.
Best of luck.

 

[jollyrodger]

Another thing should the dealer not refund is have you got legal cover on your car/camper or home ins you could well seek help for no extra outlay.
Was the dealer selling their own stock or where they selling on behalf of a client (they do).
The garage you took it to originally, what in their profesional opinion was the length of time /caused so much Corrosion .
All ammo to your cause .

 

[sticky130]

Well it was bought for £5 under £30k and just checked we paid £250 deposit by CC so looks like we fit!!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[gus-lopez]

Next port of call is CC company & alert them to the facts.
good luck with it all.

 

[davejen]

Where did the previous owner live? (check on V5) was it perhaps somewhere that has flooded in the last year or two? may be a clue to why it is so bad.
Defo sale of goods act- not fit for purpose.
Best of luck with your case,
Cheers, Dave

 

[Badknee]

Where did the previous owner live? (check on V5) was it perhaps somewhere that has flooded in the last year or two? may be a clue to why it is so bad.
Defo sale of goods act- not fit for purpose.
Best of luck with your case,
Cheers, Dave

Not sure that happened in the last year or two DJ, seems very bad to go clean through the steel.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[dave newell]

The Luxor is an Auto-Sleepers model not Autotrail, also known as "Mirage" and they are generally considered to be among the better built motorhomes, I believe they are actually Italian built and the Auto-Sleepers bit is "badge engineering".

D.

 

[sticky130]

just checked v5, says last keeper Marquis Southampton!

 

[sticky130]

The Luxor is an Auto-Sleepers model not Autotrail, also known as "Mirage" and they are generally considered to be among the better built motorhomes, I believe they are actually Italian built and the Auto-Sleepers bit is "badge engineering".

D.

my mistake!! don't know why I put Autotrail, damn well know it's Autosleeper!!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Wildman]

I'd be looking for a full refund there could well be much more rust to find yet, as said looks like flood damage.

 

[tonyidle]

From what I can see from the photos that can't easily be patched & should be repaired by replacing the damaged part. As others have suggested that amount of corrosion is unusual for its age and I'd agree that a professional inspection and report is essential. There will more than likely be other nasties lurking.

 

[markh]

Ah Marquis, yes they polish your motorhome and ignore any mechanical defects knowing you'll come back and have them fixed under warranty, when I collected mine there was a thump on start up.... That's the step retracting sir, turned out the rear engine mount was faulty! They had it repaired but I had to spend 2 days at the dealership while it was done (along with a list of other faults)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}