Judge not satisfied the failure of a water pump was evidence a car was unsatisfactory

legal updates

The engine number recorded on the V5C differed from the engine number found on the block.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

The Claimant sought damages for the cost of repairs to a car purchased from the Defendant, a Vauxhall Insignia, 4 years of age, with an accumulated mileage of 74,000.  The car broke down around 13 months and approximately 16,000 miles after purchase.  

The repairs were extensive following the breakdown of the car’s timing belt, which arose from the failure of the water pump according to the written evidence of the mechanic who carried out the work.  

The Claimant’s charge was based on the apparent replacement of the original engine in the car with an engine sourced from a breaker’s yard.  The District Judge found there to be credible evidence this was the case. 

The engine number recorded on the V5C differed from the engine number found on the block.  The Claimant stated the likely engine replacement rendered the car unsatisfactory by reason of the failure and by reason of the engine change. 

The District Judge, however, did not find in favour of the Claimant and was not satisfied that the presence of a specific engine number on the V5C required a term be implied into the contract that it is this engine and no other in the car.  The Judge went on to say that even if he were wrong about this, the measure of the damages has nothing to do with repairs.  The measure of the damages would be the difference in value between the car with its original engine as opposed to the value of the car with a replacement engine.  The Judge could not find that the replacement of the engine amounted to compensation for breach of contract. 

The District Judge found that a 4 year old car with nearly 74,000 miles on the clock cannot carry with it any implied warranty in relation to the water pump.  It was the water pump failure which apparently caused the need to replace the timing belt.  The Judge was not satisfied that the failure of the water pump, more than a year after sale, was evidence the car was unsatisfactory at the point of sale.  The case was dismissed.  

Please note that the DVLA require the V5C is updated if any of the following are changed on a vehicle:


Leading experts in print, promotional clothing, staff uniforms, branded merchandise and PPE. Involution is your brand partner for promotional marketing and workwear, a one-stop-shop for your branded marketing needs for any business size and industry.

  • colour
  • engine
  • cylinder capacity (cc)
  • fuel type
  • chassis or bodyshell (replaced or modified)
  • seating capacity
  • weight of a large vehicle, for example, goods vehicle or campervan

Polly DaviesLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

How would you like to pay: cash, card, or crypto?

Crypto is a virtually unregulated payment method and does not have any statutory backing, unlike the S75 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Consumers will be unable to request an “undo” on the transaction and rely entirely on the seller to willingly provide a refund.

The law is not an exact science

We have all had surefire winners fail due to the smallest issue, but equally, we have all won cases that we had no right to.

Why bother with Pre-Delivery Inspection Forms (PDI)?

It is easy to go around a vehicle, giving everything a cursory glance and just ticking the boxes to say you have looked at it.

A reasonable price to be paid for a service

The defendant paid only a portion of the invoice, promising to pay the remainder in good time, and took the vehicle.

It’s official – the Civil Procedure Rules are no longer “New”!

One might reasonably ask oneself: “Why is any of this of interest to me?”

Can an entire family bring court proceedings for an alleged defective car?

Luckily the Ruffles’ family dog didn’t turn up either as no doubt Pooch would have been allowed a woof on the witness stand too!

The court finds car dealer partly liable for damage caused by the removal of a sticker!

Due to COVID-19, the court held an Early Neutral Evaluation, a 30-minute telephone assessment of each party’s position.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

01480 455500

Vinpenta House
High Causeway

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.