Andy you make some good points.

The one thing that I still struggle with here is the warranty is there for sudden failure, but in this case we have a car that has suffered multiple issues possibly culminating in a sudden failure. These have all occurred in a short space of time and almost immediately after purchase. The new owner has bought a car that has been unavailable to him for various reason for approx 8 weeks out of the 3 months he has owned the car. And yet no one seems to feel the dealer has any responsibility.

I guess its not for us to decide, and hopefully a solicitor will be the best course of action for XJR to take, but he should not rule out the possibility of making the dealer take the car back.

Given the choice for me personally and if a solicitor advised me, I would certainly go down the avenue of returning the car. If on the other hand the solicitor advised to claim from the warranty company then I would take that advise too.

But lets not close the doors on either choice until expert advice has been sought.

I think some of the above conversation is of no assistance to Steve who is in a terrible predicament.

I'm a big believer in gathering information and evidence and recording it correctly - bearing in mind all this may end up being decided upon in court.
I would make a chronological record of what has been done and said so far. I would require a copy the Engineers report and findings. I would consider having the car's brain interrogated for fault codes. I would approach a professional body with a view to having an independent assessment carried out.
At each stage I would let the dealer know what is happening and of my intentions. This is fair to both parties.

Legal protection on household insurance may be worth pursuing.

Trying to pre empt what may or may not happen is in my opinion not helpful at all.

 Where do you go after one of these . . . ?

Very good points TugRR.

Please keep this on topic chaps.

Also respect that there may be valid views which don't back up your own. Differing view points do not automatically make someone wrong.

Cheers

SOGA - quoted here - Fault wise - it was my understanding that if the failure was within the first 6 months of ownership the fault would be assumed to be there and the supplier would have to prove it wasn't - after six months the burden is reversed with the owner having to prove the fault was already there

Jim. I had a brief look at the SOGA checklist for second hand car dealers, and indeed you would appear to be correct if I am understanding this correctly.

Taken from the following PDF which is the specific SOGA (Sale of Goods Act) that Second Hand Car Dealers are required by law to follow.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1242.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------
SoGA
The SoGA is the main piece of law helping
consumers to obtain redress when their
purchases ‘go wrong’. As a second hand
car dealer you need to know how the law, in
relation to the sale of vehicles, affects you
and your customers.
Essentially, the SoGA states that the vehicles
you sell must be of satisfactory quality, fit for
their purpose and fit their description and that
you must have the right to sell the vehicle.
If not, you – as the seller – are legally
obliged to sort out the problem. The customer will be
entitled to a number of remedies against you,
which may include a full refund or a repair or
replacement vehicle.

Where a customer requests a repair or
replacement within the first six months
after the sale and you dispute their claim,
it will be for you to prove that the fault
(or inherent cause of the fault) was not
present at the time you sold the vehicle.

------------------------------------------------------
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1242.pdf

I might be mistaken but this would appear to offer a much better option and solution to XJR's current situation than attempting to get the car repaired under warranty. Of course this is entirely for XJR to decide.

The SOGA documentation does not state that the buyer needs to prove anything, in fact its the opposite. In the case of a head gasket failure I would imagine it would be extremely difficult to prove the fault (or inherent cause of the fault) was not present at the time the vehicle was sold.

I think the problem you may have here though is the engineer stating that unfortunately the total failure of the engine was caused by the customer driving the vehicle after the gasket failed until the engine was effectively damaged beyond economic repair. However if you read the owners handbook all data ie speed,temp & all sensors record & are stored in the vehicles ECU. this information can be retrieved by the police with a valid court order or with your permission by landrover. in fact the first ever death by dangerous driving was successful using this info against a RR driver. Big brother is in your car & that info retrieved would prove who was right. for instance if the temp/low coolant level etc were present many miles earlier it would be difficult to argue, but if they only activated a short time before stopping then your case against the warranty company is secured. Worse things happen at sea! Well thats what swmbo said when WRENS came to sea!!!

having read my statement above I would like to clarify the first ever prosecution based on on-board stored data was on a RR not the first ever prosecution for death by dangerouse driving Worse things happen at sea! Well thats what swmbo said when WRENS came to sea!!!

Interesting to know that while we can use the on-board stored data for our own benefit, it can also be just as easily used against us. Scary stuff!!

If XJR needs to establish and prove the wrecked engine was not due to him driving the vehicle excessively after the head gasket failure, then a warranty claim while open as one avenue is certainly not the only one open to him.

Not sure I would want to continue with this car given the previous off road time, let alone the time it may take to have the engine replaced. If it is proved that no negligence was shown in regard to the engine being beyond repair then SOGA would appear to offer XJR the alternative option of returning the car to the dealer for a refund which a warranty claim would not, allowing him to then start afresh.

Even if XJR does decide to go down the warranty route, would the fact the engine has been replaced be detrimental to the value of the car? or could it make it worth more? I guess some consideration and thought is needed in regard to this.

For example if and when XJR comes to selling or p/x the car would the fact a new engine has been fitted make it more difficult to sell or p/x, and could this affect the value of the car negatively.

As to the head gasket failure I struggle to see that an engineer can prove one way or anther that the car was driven on causing further engine damage without looking at the stored data. And who knows maybe the head gasket failed due to something else going wrong within the engine and this in turn caused the head gasket to fail. Hopefully an independent inspection should establish the facts.

A lot to consider I guess. Lets just hope things work out for XJR.

Hi XJR, just wondering if there is any update with your car?

TDV8's are a common failure in the SSRR im afraid and has been noted a few times that there are shortages of the engines from LR to replace ones blown in warranty and as someone who has been there and seen a new engine blow it is quite concerning but i stay adamant that the FF installation is more solid longterm than the SSRR due to space around the engine for passive cooling during sitting in traffic and possibly due to the driving each vehicle attracts being different. FFRR MY06 facelift With TDV8 Alloys Zeros/ATR's
Mantec Sump Guard, Rigid Load liner, MY10 BT upgrade.

^ Nearly all RRS I believe KP not heard of many L322.

I've seen/heard of only 2 failures of a TDV8 3.6 in an RR.

One was on the doncaster dealers workbay area - apparently it had munched a turbo, started running on sump oil, thus over revved and killed itself.

The other was on this forum somewhere.

Thats it, but CTC would probably know of more if you asked him

OH CTC!!?!? FFRR MY06 facelift With TDV8 Alloys Zeros/ATR's
Mantec Sump Guard, Rigid Load liner, MY10 BT upgrade.

What has happend to xjr Steve ?

Hi guys,

Apologies for not replying sooner, haven't been around. Thanks for all the replies, the current position is that we have sought legal advice and are not in as strong position as we thought. We can't reject the vehicle under SOGA / breach of contract as we covered some 2,500 miles between purchase and failure (most of it in France!).

Tbh the solictor appointed under our legal expenses took forwever to respond and would only judge on the facts presented and so the most damning piece was the engineers report, which he feels will count against us and therefore not give the over 51% chance of success that they require to proceed.

So, we are now commissioning an indepdent engineers report to see if it comes to a differing conclusion or backs up the TWG's engineer. To repair the car is estimated around 8K, so we will probably proceed with the repair and then take both the dealer and the TWG to the small claims court to see if we can get any redress. The most helpful guys in all of this have been citizen's advice who basically said you don't need a solicitor, just take them to court anyway and the judge may find in your favour.

The thing that has made me most angry is the continual assertion that I continued to drive the car knowing a major fault had occurred which to be frank is horse excrement. I've owned countless classic and P38 rangies and as all RR owners know, at the first sign of overheating STOP!