We, as consumers, have the choice of repair, refund or replace in the event of goods bought by us being defective or damaged at the time of the sale.

One of the branches of the Law that we specialise in is Consumer Law and often regarding defective motor vehicles. The inquiry was sent to us yesterday.

“Can I sue a dealer who has sold me a defective motor vehicle? My attorney told me to sue them for damages and wanted a  R 15000.00 deposit. What are my options? I bought the vehicle on the 20^th January 2018 and it now has a seized engine as a result of a defective water connection pipe and I have been quoted R 66400.00 for repairs. Please advise me in this regard.

Defective Motor Vehicles:  The choices of a repair, replacement or a refund.

The Consumer Protection Act No 68 of 2008 (CPA).

One of the matters that we, at The Legal Advice Office, specialise in is the topic of defective motor vehicles.

We get many queries at The Legal Advice Office each week from people you want our help regarding the purchase of defective or damaged motor vehicles.

This last week we got a rather cryptic inquiry:

“ I have read in one of your blogs of some time back that if I were to buy a defective motor vehicle, or “ a lemon” as you referred to it as; that I have the choice of a repair, a replacement or a refund at the dealer’s expense. Is this true; and if it is; when and how do I go about doing so; as I have definitely bought “a lemon” from a dealership in Boksburg?”

Within six months after the delivery of goods, a consumer may return the goods to the supplier without penalty and at the supplier’s risk and expense

We did a blog last week on the difference in approach now under the CPA and the previous situation where a consumer could only rely on the common law for a remedy if they bought a defective car and in response, we received the following query:

“Please explain to me how the implied warranty in terms of the Consumer Protection Act works as I also recently bought a defective motor vehicle which has now cost me R 37500.00 to repair and is still not 100%. What are my rights in this instance?”

The supplier’s written guarantee does not replace the warranty created and contained in the CPA.

A Case Study

In response to our last blog on the consumer’s right to a repair, replacement or refund; we received the following query on Saturday morning.

“I read your blog on section 56(2) of the CPA on Facebook. My situation is different. I bought a new vehicle from a BMW dealer in Benoni in a cash transaction. Within a period of 6 months, the vehicle had to go in for repairs on two occasions, the last time was on the 22^nd March 2018. On both occasions, the dealership repaired the vehicle at their own expense. In both instances; the repairs related to mechanical problems with the vehicle's transmission. In the last week the vehicle has again broken down and I am now at my wit's end. Do I have to allow them to repair the vehicle yet again or can I still insist on a replacement or a refund of my money?”

Within six months after the delivery, the consumer may return the goods to the supplier, without penalty

The Consumer Protection Act No 68 of 2008 (CPA):

Section 56(2):

In our last blog, we had a look at section 56 (1) of the CPA especially as it relates to the purchase of defective or damaged motor vehicles which have been bought by a consumer from a service provider.

Today; we turn our attention to section 56 (2) of the CPA and we will be looking at this important section.

This is a long blog which I was initially going to do over three blogs, but have decided to complete it in one long blog so as to keep continuity. I hope you do not mind.

The reason for this is that this subsection is probably the most important when it comes to your choices in the event of you having bought a defective motor vehicle or any other product for that matter.

Your right to a repair, a refund or a replacement of a faulty vehicle and where that right comes from

What are your remedies in law and in particular in terms of the Consumer Protection Act No 68 of 2008 (CPA) and also the common law; if you have bought a vehicle which now has material defects?

At The Legal Advice Office we still get numerous queries from members of the public regarding defects in vehicles which they have recently purchased from a dealership or even from a private individual and where there are clearly material defects in the vehicle or where they have been misled as to the condition of the vehicle or were not told about previous accident damage or other material issues.

In these circumstances, the consumer has the protection of both the common law of contract and also the CPA.

If a further failure is discovered, the supplier must either replace the goods or refund the consumer.

Section 56 (3) of the Consumer Protection Act, No 68 of 2008 reads as follows:

“If a supplier repairs any particular goods or any component of any such goods, and within three months after the repair, the failure, defect or unsafe feature has not been remedied, or a further failure, defect or unsafe feature is discovered, the supplier must: - (a) replace the goods; or (b) refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer for the goods.”