So I have a real issue with this 2014 Mazda 3 that I’m planning to buy from this used car dealership. So basically, I already put down a non refundable deposit of £200 last week but before purchasing the vehicle, I had a comprehensive AA check on the car for peace of mind.
The AA check broght up zero red issues but a few in the Amber section, the primary one of which was something to do with the master brake cyclinder. It says “visible leaks seen possibly from the master brake cyclinder, requires further investigation” So that worries me as that could be potentially dangerous but it wasn’t classified as red. Everything else seemed OK. Some general wear and tear on the tyres, offside rear brake disc show signs of pitting and wear and tear, mechanically car drives fine, exterior and interior is fine etc.
The other concern I have is that when I checked the MOT history, it did fail last in early 2022 due to front brake pipes being corroded, rear brake side pad less than 1.5mm thick - dangerous defect, parking brake lever has excessive movement. Now according to the history this was all corrected on the same day as it then says pass on the same day and driven a mile. The last MOT done in Feb of this year was a pass and driven an extra 6000 miles. So based on that I’m assuming the serious errors were all fixed otherwise no way it would have been driven. BUT there is no service record apparently and thus no evidence that they were indeed fixed.
So I’m guessing I need to obtain the V5C number in order to get these details. And I should push the dealership to provide all the documentation and fix that master brake cyclinder before I even considering buying the car.
Johnmazda:
The AA check broght up zero red issues but a few in the Amber section, the primary one of which was something to do with the master brake cyclinder. It says “visible leaks seen possibly from the master brake cyclinder, requires further investigation”
So they don’t even know if it’s coming from the master cylinder? It ain’t hard to check, it either is or it isn’t. It’s not possible to have a “possibly”, either brake fluid is weeping from the base of the reservoir or from the connections to the brake pipes or internally on the back of the master cylinder where the brake pedal pushes it or it isn’t.
The other concern I have is that when I checked the MOT history, it did fail last in early 2022 due to front brake pipes being corroded, rear brake side pad less than 1.5mm thick - dangerous defect, parking brake lever has excessive movement.
Sticking rear brake caliper caused both the pad and handbrake issue. Caliper piston doesn’t retract so the brake pad wears out and because the piston is sticking the self adjuster can’t do its self adjusting you end up with higher handbrake travel.
So based on that I’m assuming the serious errors were all fixed otherwise no way it would have been driven. BUT there is no service record apparently and thus no evidence that they were indeed fixed.
If the stuff you see on the MOT isn’t present on the next one then it’s been fixed. Getting a fail, getting it fixed and re-tested with a pass on the same day is not uncommon. My wife’s van has had a few MOT failures and they’ve been fixed and it passed the same day. This year it was a wheel bearing, 2 years ago it was a corroded brake pipe, the one that goes all the way from the front to the rear, the year before that it was a seized rear brake caliper with excessive travel, 5 yeas ago it was the same again but on the other side. All fixed and retested same day.
And I should push the dealership to provide all the documentation and fix that master brake cyclinder before I even considering buying the car.
You’re buying it, show them the report and see what they say. If they’re not prepared to address it and they can’t show you there’s no problem then ask for your money back. Regardless as you’ve bought it from a dealer you’ve automatically got a 6 month guarantee under the Consumer Rights Act despite anything they may say.
I remember buying a Ford cortina gt for £150 , it’s looked rough , sounded rough but went upto Glasgow multiple times , Cornwall , Devon etc
I had a Ford cortina estate that had no inner / outer seals ( just loads of black mastic plastered everywhere
Christ I had Vauxhall vivas , triumph 1300,s , cortinas , capris , Mondeos etc etc , £100, £200, £300 , held together with all sorts .
Your worrying too much op
You’ve put a non refundable deposit down (i wouldn’t have), the car has no service history apprently, but the MOT history sounds fair to decent and you’ve had the car inspected from which nothing is ringing alarm bells, so long as you arn’t paying top book don’t worry too much.
There’s always a few jobs need doing on a used car, most of us don’t spend up to our max budget to keep some money aside for getting it up to scratch.
Remember the car has 6 months warranty automatically from a trade seller, common sense applies here don’t expect them to pay for a blown headlight bulb in July, getting them to honour any large problems can be awkward so hopefully you’ve done due diligence reading regarding reputation of the trade seller.
You just put a deposit on a car you never checked first. I always take my mechanic to give the car a once over. He does a good job.Pay a deposit when you are happy with your purchase
WheelsofCardiff:
You just put a deposit on a car you never checked first. I always take my mechanic to give the car a once over. He does a good job.Pay a deposit when you are happy with your purchase
Surely it’s equally pointless to spend £££ on an inspection when the seller sells to the next interested party because you didn’t secure it with a deposit?
WheelsofCardiff:
You just put a deposit on a car you never checked first. I always take my mechanic to give the car a once over. He does a good job.Pay a deposit when you are happy with your purchase
Surely it’s equally pointless to spend £££ on an inspection when the seller sells to the next interested party because you didn’t secure it with a deposit?
Put a deposit on “subject to inspection”.
Put a “non-refundable*” deposit on only after inspection.
see Juddian`s post about right to refund from a trader.
They will argue!
rule of thumb: trader happy means trader is getting too good of a deal, trader unhappy means buyer is getting a good deal. Traders are fishermen, it is about patience, some fish will bite the bait at their price range
I have seen traders not putting any added value on the vehicles whatsoever, they just expect to get the extra money for being sold by a trader, without even cleaning the engine bay, not clearing the modules’ codes, I saw coolant reservoirs empty and one filled with just plain water, not knowing the vehicle’s faults, list goes on.
Yet, they charge as a trader, and they will keep doing so as long as there’s fish in the pond
PS: Well, I appreciate they just put on sell the motor as they got it from the auction or wherever, it is best for me to diagnose it and try to bargain. But it does not work for me, they just see I am not the right buyer and not even thank me for the free assessment…
If advertisement shows pictures of car, check for free the MoT test history. Anything fixed the same day is likely minor.
Anything on last test as an advisory requires extra attention when you see the car.
.
I saw an ad for a car once, checked its history. Failed on corrosion. One week later retested and comments included summat like "Could not properly examine underside because of excessive underseal". I didnt bother going to see it.
.
I wouldnt go far to see a car without knowing its test history.
I can undersatnd advertisers keeping numbers off of ads, but if you ask a trader, as a possible buyer, and he refuses, again walk away.
Hi everyone, sorry I didn’t get back to all of you about this but I have been busy…basically finishing the purchase on this Mazda 3. And I got it on Tuesday. So far I’ve driven it around 55 miles and it’s fine, drives well and I’m enjoying it. However, I have an issue which came up today which I’ll start another post about shortly…
