Leased 66-plate Mitsubishi L200, rejection attempt

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    • #128905 Reply
      AvatarPaul Masters

      Hi All,

      Looking for advice. Trying to reject my leased car, on the basis of it’s not of satisfactory quality and not as described. The saga is described below.

      Back in October 17 car went in for its annual service as per manufactures recommendations, all seemed ok, November 17, I was travelling in the vehicle and the oil light came on, followed by a sequel and a lot of smoke out the exhaust. Called lease company and they sent recovery. Turns out the vehicle had lost all its oil and had had a subsequent turbo failure. Garage replace turbo and refilled oil. 4 weeks later oil light came on, pulled over and called lease company and they sent recovery, same problem the vehicle has lost all its oil, and took it to garage. Garage carried out checks and tried to determine where oil was going, to no avail. They called sought advice from Mitsubishi in Japan. Mitsubishi advised the garage keep the vehicle for a 4 week road test, Which they did. 3 weeks into this road test problem occurred again, vehicle had lost all its oil. They sought advice again from Mitsubishi. Two months later after much diagnostic and sending photos to Mitsubishi Japan, they determined that the engine had suffered gudgeon pin failure and scored and damaged all four bores. Mitsubishi authorised garage to install a new “Bottom End” of the engine, however this is where the next issue beings, I was advised from Mitsubishi that the required parts will not be available til May!

      What are my rights in rejecting this vehicle? It’s a Mitsubishi L200 Barbarian with 12,000 miles on the clock and reached 12months.

      The lease company have agreed to end my contract with Hitachi Capital Vehicle Solutions from 1st March 2018 at wave the termination costs, but they are not going to refund as required by regulation a proportionate amount of the initial rental back.

      What are my rights with this?

    • #128917 Reply
      Stuart MassonStuart Masson

      Hi Paul. In terms of your rights, you have the Consumer Rights Act that allows consumers (ie – private buyers, not business buyers) to reject a car that is faulty or not as advertised.

      The window of where this works favourably for consumers is six months. After that, the weight of the law shifts to favour the seller. You are clearly beyond this six-month window.

      I’m not sure which “regulations” you are referring to in terms of refunding you a proportion of the initial rental, but I doubt you have a right to anything.

      If you have used your vehicle for business purposes of any kind, even if it’s only for a small fraction of the time you’ve had it, you are not covered by the Consumer Rights Act anyway.

      • #128934 Reply
        AvatarPaul Masters

        Was the lease co that said they were bound by regulation to refund a proportion of the initial rental.

        Some good news, lease company have agreed to an early termination due to the car not being repaired in a reasonable timescale and waived the termination charge. Have refunded some of the initial payment (using some weird calculation, which doesn’t work in my favour), they have not included the maintenance plan in the refund, can they do this. Its been a costly journey though and sort of left in no mans land now.

    • #129038 Reply
      Stuart MassonStuart Masson

      If they’re doing the calculations, it will almost never work out in your favour…

      I’m glad you’re getting something back. Leasing companies can be notoriously difficult at issuing refunds, even when the vehicle is clearly broken.

Viewing 2 reply threads
Reply To: Leased 66-plate Mitsubishi L200, rejection attempt

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Your information: