Rejection charges

legal updates

We are often asked for guidance on what can be taken into account when calculating a deduction for use.

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.

In the event a trader accepts a final right to reject in accordance with s24 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 following a failed repair, the trader is permitted under s8)(10)(a) CRA 2015 to make a deduction for the use the customer has had of that vehicle. 

In these circumstances, we are often asked for guidance on what can be taken into account when calculating a deduction for use.  We suggest a good starting point might be the mileage the customer has covered in the car.  The HMRC mileage allowance of 45p per mile up to 10,000 miles could be a good starting point, but in this HMRC takes into account what the user has already paid in tax and insurance for example, which the rejecting consumer will argue they have also paid.  Another way may be to consider what car hire for the same period for the same car may have cost, but again, a consumer will often argue the full cost of what a rental would have been is an inappropriate deduction.

The truth is, each case spins on its own set of particular circumstances and obviously the condition the car is being returned in plays a large part in the negotiations.  Consult the guides, consider the current condition, consider the mileage and the reason for the return of the vehicle as well as the length of time the customer may have been without the vehicle whilst the initial repairs were taking place.  When you accept a rejection make sure it’s done in full and final settlement and that the relevant documentation is signed and dated. 

Impression Communications LtdPutting the motive in automotive

Impression works with businesses across the automotive aftermarket supply chain such as parts suppliers, warehouse distributors, motor factors and independent garages. Covering all aspects of automotive aftermarket marketing, including social media, event management, customer newsletters and PR, Impression is able to quickly establish itself within a client’s business and work towards their objectives.

Polly DaviesLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

The customer isn’t always right…

As it was a defect he knew about, he cannot now claim it renders the vehicle not fit for purpose or not of satisfactory quality.

Implications, assumptions, and confusion – why being clear on your actions could be key to winning

The diagnosis showed the third-party garage had failed to repair the vehicle to a satisfactory standard and this was relayed to the consumer.

Burden of proof? Get your evidence while you can!

The burden of proof reverses for issues raised between 30 days and six months of ownership.

On your Marks… Get Set… Doh!

The TSO told our member that the consumer ought not to have experienced a failure given the age and mileage of the car.

Claim Dismissed: No Proof of Fault at Purchase

Our member argued that numerous issues could have caused the overheating and ultimate failure.

Court Rules Against ‘Serial Returner’ in Distance Selling Dispute

It is clear from his evidence that his true intention was that he wanted the ability to reject the car at a time of his choosing.

Indemnities – Handle with Care!

Indemnity clauses are usually onerous by design and drafted in broad terms so dealers should not make the mistake of overlooking them.

Get in touch

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

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

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.