Consumer law gives the retailer sufficient chance to rectify the issue.

A TV is slightly different as it is most likely to be around the same cost to repair than it is to replace whilst replacing the engine in a car is a much smaller fraction than the cost of the car so it's almost a no brainer to replace rather than repair.

It's a very grey area and if you do want to pursue anything else other than the engine replacement I'd suggest getting legal advice before deciding on your next course of action, I personally reckon go with the engine replacement (and try and get the extended warranty to 5 years or free servicing as a sweetener).

You're fully within your rights to reject a vehicle as you could argue that the engine swap has affected the value of the car (no longer original engine number) and may have other effects.

I do however agree that if the ancillaries are being swapped over too, then the repair is the right path to take if you want your car as it stands.

The replacement new engine is supplied with the engine number blank, and the replacement engine is stamped with the same number as the original. The number on the original engine is then stamped over to make it void, thus only one engine exists with the original number. The value of the car will therefore be unaffected as the number on the V5 and engine bay will still match with no changes notified to the DVLA.

This has been discussed before and confirmed by other dealers who have already replaced several forum members engines in Octavia MK2's (CR170 VRS's after failed injector repairs) and Fabia MK2s (1.4TSI vRS) due to issues with these engines.

In order to reject a vehicle it must be deemed to be unfit for purpose. In order for it to be deemed as such, the consumer must allow the retailer/manufacturer reasonable time and attempts to repair/replace the fault.

It seems that in the OP's case, both the dealer & Skoda UK are doing everything that they can in order to rectify the problem - they have identified the fault and are replacing the engine. In the meantime you have an equivalent vehicle to use.

As for actually rejecting a vehicle as being unfit for purpose, I'm currently in the process of trying to do this and am being met with obstructions every which way I turn.

Which goes back to my earlier post..........namely that the motor trade acts as if it is outside the law, when it is not.

NB: good luck with your rejection.

There are plenty of unregistered 1.6 TDi SE Connect's in group stock.

I'd be pushing for a replacement car.

Irresepctive of the quality of the engine replacement any knock, rattle or bang will fill you with fear. Your experience with this particular car is now tainted.

The dealer can swap the engine and stick it on their forecourt.

There are plenty of unregistered 1.6 TDi SE Connect's in group stock.

I'd be pushing for a replacement car.

Irresepctive of the quality of the engine replacement any knock, rattle or bang will fill you with fear. Your experience with this particular car is now tainted.

The dealer can swap the engine and stick it on their forecourt.

A sensible and fair resolution

If you bought a tv from Currys and it was faulty, you would take it back to the shop and require replacement or full refund. Consumer Law avails you of these remedies.

The same law applies to the purchase of a new car.

The longer you delay, the more difficult it will be to apply your rights under Consumer Law. If in doubt, get some legal advice post haste.

I take you haven't taken actually needed to take a TV back then.

If you go ahaead and accept the replacement engine, which personally i would not under any circumstances accept, then i would also stipulate that any anccilliary through which engine oil circulates also be replaced without question, as mentioned in an earlier posting once metal shards get into the oil system then where ever the oil travels then any bearings etc through which the oil flows have the potential for early failure and thus cause further problems. This isn't, in my opinion, a clear case of engine changed and problem solved. There is far more to consider.

Nope I'd reject the car and ask for a new one I just wouldn't want to chance any further hassle with it personally if something else goes you'd always be wondering could it be related etc

Nope I'd reject the car and ask for a new one I just wouldn't want to chance any further hassle with it personally if something else goes you'd always be wondering could it be related etc

That of course assumes that nothing ever happens to the car between the factory and the dealer.

Ooooo skoda having another issue with engines. A batch of engines now on the octavia being faulty.

Id say its actually quite unacceptable. All the fabia 1.4tsi engines faulty and now a batch of octavia engines too.

Nope I'd reject the car and ask for a new one I just wouldn't want to chance any further hassle with it personally if something else goes you'd always be wondering could it be related etc

But they are not taking build orders any more. He'd have to settle for a low spec stock vehicle.

He'd be lucky to get close to his colour/trim requirements.

Ooooo skoda having another issue with engines. A batch of engines now on the octavia being faulty.

Id say its actually quite unacceptable. All the fabia 1.4tsi engines faulty and now a batch of octavia engines too.

To be fair, it's only one failure......bit early to say it's a bad batch of engines. Whereas the Fabia 1.4 engine has been suffering from serious issues for years.

Under the sales of good act part 2 section 14 or something along them lines.

The goods you bought were not of satisfactory quality. My dealer said i had every right to send my fabia back after the engine chance at 700mile. After constant problems i sent my car back at 10,000. I cant see you having a problem. Right a letter stating the sales of goods act to your dealer and it should be no problem.

Did OP not say skoda have said it could be a bad batch?

Did OP not say skoda have said it could be a bad batch?

Not quite....They said is could have been a bad batch of diesel fuel.........subsequently ruled out when they realised the little end of one of the con rods was making a bid for freedom!

But they are not taking build orders any more. He'd have to settle for a low spec stock vehicle.

He'd be lucky to get close to his colour/trim requirements.

As has already been mentioned there are plenty of unregistered, brand new Octavia SE Connect's in group stock across the UK.

It isn't possible to add options, there is only one engine choice and only two colour choices.

The chance of finding an exact replacement ready for immediate delivery I'd say are quite high.

Not quite....They said is could have been a bad batch of diesel fuel.........subsequently ruled out when they realised the little end of one of the con rods was making a bid for freedom!

My apologise.

If the OP needs any advice on my experience with rejecting his car or a replacement vehicle, feel free to ask as I sent my fabia vrs back and now have a octavia vrs.

Ooooo skoda having another issue with engines. A batch of engines now on the octavia being faulty.

Id say its actually quite unacceptable. All the fabia 1.4tsi engines faulty and now a batch of octavia engines too.

Can any one shed light on the failure of the Fabia 1.4 TSI engine, first I've heard of the problem.

Is this the same engine as fitted to the Octy year 2010. If so then it may be that my engine could be at risk.

Can any one shed light on the failure of the Fabia 1.4 TSI engine, first I've heard of the problem.

Is this the same engine as fitted to the Octy year 2010. If so then it may be that my engine could be at risk.

I believe its just the 180bhp, high oil usage.

Can any one shed light on the failure of the Fabia 1.4 TSI engine, first I've heard of the problem.

Is this the same engine as fitted to the Octy year 2010. If so then it may be that my engine could be at risk.

Didn't the early ones also suffer from premature piston ring wear too?

Didn't the early ones also suffer from premature piston ring wear too?

That was the problem, scraper rings, therefore cars were using alot of oil, in my case 750ml in 300miles.

I'd be inclined to reject the car if it were me, as a faulty engine that needs to be replaced straight away is not fit for purpose.

The new engine will almost certainly be fine, but theres a lot of parts that need to be detached and reassembled to swap it over (including any other parts that oil flows through). Do you want a car where all that work has been done in controlled conditions in the factory, or by a couple of techs in your local dealer?

I'd be 50/50 on this. Part of me would want a new car but (the sensible) part of me would be willing to accept a new engine plus ancillaries.

The reason I would be minded to accept this is that you are relying on a fair bit of skoda goodwill to even get a replacement. Unfortunately the Sale Of Goods Act is one of the most misunderstood pieces of legislation I know of - many people who quote it would be laughed out of court if they tried to claim on it. That said, I think you have a reasonable case for rejection and the alleged ease with which skoda could fulfil this is in your favour.

One thing I think we all agree on is that if they suggest replacing only the main engine components and leaving the turbo etc in place (not that I assume they would but I have no basis for that assumption) I'd suggest you use this as a reason to push for a new car........

Yup, been watching this thread, and the only reason i'd give them the car back is how much do you trust the mechanics fitting it as opposed to the guys who do it day in, day out at the factory? Personally, i'd prefer the latter, especially if i've just spent a lot of money on brand new, plus the log book having different engines codes would rankle me a bit.

Mind you, when I got mine, they would have been relatively easy to get a direct equivalent replacement ordered.

Under consumer law you have to give the seller the option of repairing it which by replacing the engine they are clearly doing. If you wanted to reject the car it might be a long battle. Firstly it should have been formally rejected before the repair was undertaken, you would have to refuse to drive it once repaired but the dealer would be in a position having repaired the car to ask for the loan car back, it would then be a case of how long you are prepared to wait without a car to resolve it. I still feel the dealer is doing the proper thing in this case so it would be hard to fight in a court. Also remember your contract is with the dealer, not with Skoda so no point is trying to drag Skoda through the courts. At the end of it there can be faults in anything you buy & if the seller without quibling repairs it to a satisfactory standard you have no real case against them.

The web is a great place to preach what we think we are entitled to but in real life it has to be what can be fought for reosnably within existing consumer laws which are there to be fair to the customer as well as the seller

Edited 29 November, 201213 yr by Stuart_J