We need a new car, so narrowed the search down to a particular model and went looking. After seeing a few terrible examples, we found a lovely car at a used car showroom. It only had an MOT until November so we said we'd buy it based on the fact that they provided it with a new MOT. We had noticed that the reverse lights weren't working nor one of the brake lights, so we were confident that these problems would be sorted before we picked the car up.
The dealership agreed to get a new MOT as long as we paid the full price for the car - we agreed. Anyway, we call yesterday to see if the car had passed and 'Yes it has.' I ask them to confirm that the lights were now working 'oh yes, it just needed new bulbs.
Great. We drive bloody 40 miles to pick the car up today (with all 3 kids), and we were presented with the shiny new MOT, paid the balance and got the keys. We had also asked them to get 6 months tax, so paid for that too.
We give the car one last check, and all the problems it had before were still there! No reverse lights, one working brake light. We were clearly really concerned because how on earth did the car have an new MOT when these still weren't working. If they hadn't been checked what else hadn't been...
The guy says, 'oh I forgot to put the bulbs in, my fault. The MOT tester told me too'. Changes the bulbs. The lights still aren't working. Seems to be a major electrical fault.
AIBU to suspect that the car was given a dodgy MOT? the guy was trying to suggest it was an intermittent fault. but why would the pass certificate have been issued if he had been told to change the bulbs. Surely a car can't pass an MOT in this way?
We asked for our money back. He agreed but refused to give us the tax money back. After much argument they eventually give it back.
Dodgy?