Home > General (L405) > New car with dents upon collection |
|
|
Flashman Member Since: 05 Jun 2011 Location: Windsor & Brentwood Posts: 1228 |
You'd think they would have picked it up on quality control inspection, but it seems the days of premium brand checks has gone out of the window. Tom
|
||
12th Apr 2016 3:40pm |
|
andyxxx Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 23 |
Yes, I agree and said as much when I collected it. The most badly damaged door is really bad and anybody doing a basic inspection must have seen it - I wonder if they thought I would miss it. |
||
12th Apr 2016 3:59pm |
|
XXXAngelXXX Member Since: 25 Mar 2007 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 4994 |
wow that sücks All my spelling errorz are belong to me!
|
||
12th Apr 2016 5:32pm |
|
Alistair Member Since: 11 Feb 2011 Location: Peterborough / Bordeaux / Andorra Posts: 7925 |
I find it hard to believe its the robots at the factory - they've been making them long enough to have ironed out those sorts of issues surely ? |
||
12th Apr 2016 6:09pm |
|
d3rm0 Member Since: 12 Feb 2012 Location: UK Posts: 438 |
What a load of b0ll0x! Reject it
|
||
12th Apr 2016 7:57pm |
|
andyxxx Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 23 |
Yes you would think so. It could be bxxxxxx about the robots, but whatever is causing it should have been spotted. d3rm0 - I am seriously considering rejecting it even if the bodywork comes back perfect. I understand the law allows thirty days from purchase date. The problem will be that I have sold my previous 405 so would be car less until the new one was built. |
||
12th Apr 2016 8:09pm |
|
babagee Member Since: 15 Feb 2015 Location: Somewhere between St. Helens & Kazakhstan Posts: 142 |
This would be an interesting one for the lawyers - why should you be without a vehicle when you have purchased in good faith |
||
12th Apr 2016 8:47pm |
|
d3rm0 Member Since: 12 Feb 2012 Location: UK Posts: 438 |
Andy if you are serious about rejection PM me as I have had fun with a reoccurring fault that ended in rejection. |
||
12th Apr 2016 8:50pm |
|
jonnyboy54321 Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: surrey Posts: 380 |
I wouldn't have thought that a bodywork issue, getting rectified, would allow you to reject under "not fit for purpose".
|
||
13th Apr 2016 7:07am |
|
Jkay Member Since: 12 Apr 2015 Location: Sydney, NSW Posts: 208 |
Guess they may need another robot that checks for dents.... 2015 SDV8 Autobiography - Black, Cirrus, 22" Style 707 Wheels |
||
13th Apr 2016 7:55am |
|
andyxxx Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 23 |
jonnyboy54321 - I have not spoken to a solicitor yet and you may be correct in that it doesn't meet the grounds for rejection.
|
||
13th Apr 2016 8:02am |
|
andyxxx Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 23 |
Yes - it can obviously be a bit heavy handed!! The main reason I placed this was to see how many other people have had the issue, but as yet no one - which is strange. The courtesy car I have been loaned (a new 405 with 500 miles) has the same issue but to a far lesser extent on 2 of the doors. |
||
13th Apr 2016 8:06am |
|
DeRanged Rover Member Since: 16 Feb 2012 Location: London Posts: 379 |
Maybe they've moved the robots from the Defender section to the Range Rover section?
|
||
13th Apr 2016 9:18am |
|
andyxxx Member Since: 29 Jan 2016 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 23 |
^^^^^^^
|
||
13th Apr 2016 9:29am |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis