I’m a wanderer, oooohhh a wanderer

[volvocat]

Surely, even if there was knowledge of previous damage/repair, the buyer has a reasonable expectation of the dealer selling him a car that is ‘fit for purpose’?

Also (and not saying this is relevant), if 215/50/17 is standard, shouldn’t a 45 profile option be on an 18in. rim? Otherwise the rolling circumference would be wrong for speedo. etc...

[AndyV7o]

Originally Posted by volvocat

Surely, even if there was knowledge of previous damage/repair, the buyer has a reasonable expectation of the dealer selling him a car that is ‘fit for purpose’?

Also (and not saying this is relevant), if 215/50/17 is standard, shouldn’t a 45 profile option be on an 18in. rim? Otherwise the rolling circumference would be wrong for speedo. etc...

Depends, if tyres are 225/45 thats the same rolling radius, if the width is 215/45 or 235/45 then thats slightly different, the 215 less, the 235 more. Still not a masdive change and a 235/45 may still read ok on the speedo as they tend to under-read.

[1monkey600]

Originally Posted by Mrs Wez

It’s 6 year old, but still is not what we should be experiencing. We have Avon zv7 235/45/17. It’s the option tyre. 215/50/17 is the other size listed for the car.
The car was fitted with 225/45/17 by dealer. As this is what was on the car originally when they got the car

What width wheels do you have on the car?
235/45 are for recommended width of 7.5-9"
225/45 are recommended for 7-8.5"
215/50 are recommended for 6-7.5"

https://tiresize.com/calculator/

If your wheels are only 7" wide you would be OK with either of the last two but your current tyres are wider than those recommended.

If they are too wide for the wheels the side walls will be flexing more, therefore getting warmer and warmer, causing even more flexing and possible wandering.

The above website also allows you to compare overall diameters and speedometer readings. All three are reasonably close up to 90mph.

[id5]

Originally Posted by volvocat

Surely, even if there was knowledge of previous damage/repair, the buyer has a reasonable expectation of the dealer selling him a car that is ‘fit for purpose’?
...

You are correct, there is, and it does not matter if they did or did not know about any damage. Both the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 have the provision. Quote from the House of Commons Briefing Doc

• It doesn't matter whether the consumer bought the goods before or after 1 October 2015 - in the first six months from purchase, the onus is on the seller to prove the good was of satisfactory quality when the consumer received it.
• It's not for the consumer to prove that the item was not of satisfactory quality in order to get it repaired or replaced during the first six months after purchase.

It is too late to reject it and get a full refund but the dealer has to repair in a suitable time frame. If the dealer cannot or the price is too prohibitive then the dealer will have to take back the goods and refund because they cannot fulfil their side of the contract as required by law.

[Mrs Wez]

Originally Posted by 1monkey600

What width wheels do you have on the car?
235/45 are for recommended width of 7.5-9"
225/45 are recommended for 7-8.5"
215/50 are recommended for 6-7.5"

https://tiresize.com/calculator/

If your wheels are only 7" wide you would be OK with either of the last two but your current tyres are wider than those recommended.

If they are too wide for the wheels the side walls will be flexing more, therefore getting warmer and warmer, causing even more flexing and possible wandering.

The above website also allows you to compare overall diameters and speedometer readings. All three are reasonably close up to 90mph.

All the tyre websites give the 2 options on 17”. 215/50 or 235/45. So does Volvo handbook

[Mrs Wez]

Good morning everyone, I know this post is old now but thought this was the best way to thank you all and let you know current standing.
We bought this car from Clive brook volvo in Huddersfield in March last year. They had the car for 3 1/2 months of the first 6 months of ownership. We kept telling them about the way it was handling and they kept telling us they had checked it and it was fine. Well it wasn’t but we had resided ourselves to putting up with it and then getting rid of car.
So. Mot time. It took 30 seconds for the mot guy to tell me the problem with the car. CB had fitted a incorrect rear arm. It was wrong size. This was done when we bought the car as a bush was knackered, that’s what they told us.
The handling is now very good. Steering much lighter and wandering gone. Towing the caravan is now a delight and I can actually get passed 50mph without the outfit trying to kill us.
What would you all consider to be fair recompense?
Car is due service. The front bumper that was meant to be painted never happened and I have a set of roof bars on order.