Ask an expert

Hi there

I purchased a car late last year and noticed afterwards the stereo system is faulty. the system would freeze and reset itself every 2 minutes or so. This then effect the reverse camera that came with the car.

I have not done anything regarding either of the mentioned to cause it any damage. My assumption is that the faults occurred prior to my purchase but they did not point it out to me.

I bought this up with the dealer recently (been busy with work and been out of the country) but they said they are not liable but would refer me to one of their garages to have them check out the electrical wiring.

My question is, are they (as they said) not liable for items such as reverse cameras and onboard entertainment systems? And if they not, if I take it to their garage to have the electrical wiring checked, are they liable for any cost incurred as result of this (i.e. repair costs, replacement parts)

Many thanks in advance.
T

Edit: I saw this on the Consumer Affairs website
From the Courts
In a case about a second-hand car the Court decided that, just because the car had a current Warrant of Fitness, this did not mean that a trader could claim the car met the acceptable quality test.
A Warrant of Fitness is "information about the goods". In this case, it meant that the vehicle was safe when inspected. It does not mean that a trader may not have to provide a remedy for a problem unrelated to the Warrant of Fitness – eg, a problem with the car’s CD player.

does this mean the dealer IS in fact liable?

Firstly, I'll go to your last point. A trader can't opt out of the CGA by claiming that because a car had a WoF (which is merely a saftey inspection - nothing else), he's not responsible for other defects which may occur, and which he may be liable for under the CGA - which includes all defects including the audio system. In other words, don't confuse a WoF with the CGA obligations. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the dealer in your case is liable - there's more to it.
The dealer's obligation under the CGA is to provide a remedy for defects that occur within a reasonable timefreme. And it's the reference to "reasonable" which could catch you out here as it would have been preferable for you to have notified the dealer immediately.
You don't say what type of car, age, mileage when purchased, mileage now, price paid or exactly when you purchased it. These are all relevant factors, as despite your claim that the audio system was faulty when you purchased the car, you (as the consumer) also have obligations under the CGA, one of them being to make the dealer aware of the defect and give him the opportunity to provide a remedy.
However, while the dealer is not necessarily liable, he may possibly be.
The CGA isn't endless, but could still apply after 3-4 months, or even longer depending on the value and age of the vehicle and the nature of the defect.
You say you bought the car late last year. If it is a low value vehicle which you bought last September, you've now had the car 6 months and only just reported the defect. Under these circumstances, the dealer probably has no obligation to rectify. If it's a high value vehicle which you bought at the end of December, then I'd say you have a fair claim.
So, to answer your question about who should pay the repairer. If the dealer has rejected your claim, but you took the car for repair anyway (it is irrelevant that the dealer recommended the repairer) you are liable to pay the repairer.
If you want to dispute the matter with the dealer, you can refer the matter to the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal .

Hi there,

Thank you for replying to my post.

Yes of course I should have been a bit more specific with the type of car I have.

I purchased the car at the beginning of December, but due to a number of factors I didn't (I really should have I know) contact the dealer as soon as I discovered the faults. I contacted the dealer after I had 3 flat battery within a week, and they told me to replace it (which I did). This was in mid February.

The car itself is a 2007 Subaru Outback with just over 80000k when it was purchased. purchase price was $16995.

I am yet to take the car to the garage they recommended, as I want to see if they are liable at least partially remedy the cost before I do so. Tight budget really puts limit on things..

thanks for your help. If you believe I have a good case and is worth referring to the Dispute Tribunal please let me know (hope this doesnt seem over the top)

Regards

As the dealer has refused to pay, if you plan to claim against him in the Disputes Tribunal, the best advice is to notify the dealer of your intention to claim, telling him you are paying for the repair but intend to seek costs after the fact via the Tribunal.
As to whether or not you have a strong case, due to the timeframe and nature of the defect, I believe this would be a line ball call and could go either way in the Disputes Tribunal. However, if it turns out to be an expensive repair, your chances may be higher as it could be considered a significant defect.