I’m in Scotland and would appreciate advice on my position under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and what I should do next.

I bought a used car online from a motor dealer for £6,000, including delivery. I paid a £1,000 deposit and the remaining £5,000 afterwards.

What was agreed before purchase

Before I purchased the car, I specifically agreed with the dealer that certain work would be carried out before delivery.

The dealer said:

So the timing belt, water pump and Haldex service were agreed as part of the £6,000 transaction, rather than being something I subsequently decided to purchase separately.

These works were also recorded on the dealer's paperwork/invoice.

There were also other matters agreed before delivery, including provision of a replacement fuel cap/filler cover.

The dealer subsequently promised to provide the original job sheets/workshop paperwork for the work carried out, but these have still not been provided. The fuel cap/filler cover is also still outstanding.

Delivery and problems

The car was delivered on 25 August 2026.

The initial test drive before delivery had only been on A-roads. Later on the day of delivery, once I drove the car further, I noticed:

• a definite low-speed clonk, apparently from the front;
• unusually loud engine/drivetrain noise.

I emailed the dealer at around 5pm on the day of delivery, reporting both issues and asking for them to be checked under the warranty. I also asked for paperwork showing what work had actually been carried out.

The following day, after driving it again, I was sufficiently concerned that I told my partner I was not happy to drive it and would need to contact a garage. The car was clonking/rattling/clinking and there was also an issue with the fuel filler mechanism which prevented me from refuelling normally.

Warranty issue

The dealer had told me that a 3-month warranty would be provided.

However, when I tried to obtain the warranty details after delivery, I discovered that there was no warranty policy actually in place.

The warranty was only activated after I challenged the dealer and threatened further action.

I understand that the warranty is separate from my statutory rights under the CRA, but I mention this because I had initially contacted the dealer asking for the problems to be dealt with under the warranty and there was, in fact, no active policy at that point.

Independent inspection

I subsequently took the car to an independent local garage for inspection.

Their written report identified numerous issues, including:

• transmission whine;
• multiple suspension defects and knocks;
• both front driveshaft outer gaiters damaged;
• a worn lower arm ball joint;
• worn front and rear drop link ball joints;
• a leaking rear differential;
• a leaking intercooler;
• significant brake wear, including lipped discs and front pads close to the limit;
• a missing brake backing plate;
• worn/streaking wipers;
• uncertainty over timing belt condition;
• stiff clutch;
• concerns that the Haldex had almost certainly not been serviced recently;
• heavy underseal around the Haldex.

The garage has declined to undertake repairs because of the extent of the problems. The mechanic has also told me that, in his professional opinion, the vehicle should not have passed its recent MOT.

I have the written report and photographs.

Haldex issue

I specifically asked the dealer for evidence that the agreed Haldex service had been carried out.

The dealer initially told me that on these vehicles the term Haldex is commonly used in VW Group cars and that servicing the rear differential was the equivalent job.

They later said they had not charged me for the Haldex service and that it had effectively been removed from the finance description.

There have subsequently also been comments from the dealer to the effect that the vehicle does not have a Haldex because Haldex is a VW thing.

The independent garage, however, has identified the Haldex system and considers it almost certain that it has not been serviced recently.

Rejection

I exercised my short-term right to reject under sections 20 and 22 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, within days of delivery and well within the 30-day period.

I told the dealer that I was rejecting the car and wanted:

1. the full £6,000 refund; and
2. collection of the car from my address.

I have not agreed to a repair, warranty remedy or price reduction. The car has been preserved in its current condition.

Importantly, this was not a change-of-mind cancellation. I rejected because of the condition of the car and the defects identified shortly after delivery.

Seller's response

The dealer has now refused to accept that I am entitled to the full £6,000.

Their arguments are:

1. The £1,000 deposit is “non-refundable”, because this was stated at the point of sale.
2. The delivery cost is allegedly separate and non-refundable because a third-party driver delivered the car.
3. The timing belt, water pump and Haldex work are allegedly “additional jobs/add-ons” that I personally commissioned and therefore should be excluded from any refund.
4. They asked me to provide the full diagnostic report before they would review the mechanical issues.

I have now provided the independent garage report.

I have disputed their position in writing and made clear that this is a statutory rejection, not a change of mind.

I have also specifically pointed out that the £1,000 deposit formed part of the £6,000 paid and that the agreed pre-purchase work was agreed for the £6,000 price, rather than being separately purchased add-ons.

My understanding

My understanding is that:

• the CRA gives me a short-term right to reject goods that do not conform to the contract, including where they are not of satisfactory quality;
• I exercised that right within 30 days;
• this is different from simply changing my mind or cancelling a satisfactory purchase;
• a term saying a deposit is “non-refundable” cannot simply remove a statutory remedy;
• the £6,000 was the total amount I paid for the transaction, including delivery;
• I am therefore not asking for £6,000 plus delivery;
• the seller should arrange collection of rejected goods;
• the warranty is separate from my statutory rights.

I am currently waiting for an appointment with Citizens Advice.

I have not yet sent a formal Letter Before Action. I have told the seller that if they continue refusing the statutory refund, I am prepared to send a formal Letter Before Action and, if necessary, pursue the matter through the Scottish courts.

Questions

1. Can the seller retain the £1,000 deposit simply because it was described as “non-refundable”, when I have exercised my statutory right to reject rather than changed my mind?
2. Does my initially asking them to investigate the problems under the warranty affect my right to reject, particularly given that the warranty was not actually in place at that time?
3. Does the fact that the £6,000 included delivery mean I am entitled to seek the full £6,000 rather than the dealer deducting a supposed separate delivery charge?
4. Can the seller retrospectively describe the timing belt, water pump and Haldex service as “add-ons” when they were expressly agreed before purchase as part of the £6,000 deal?
5. Is the independent garage report sufficient evidence to support the rejection, or should I obtain anything further before sending a Letter Before Action?
6. Does the fact that the promised job sheets and fuel cap/filler cover are still outstanding have any relevance to the overall contractual position?
7. As I am in Scotland and the amount is £6,000, what is the correct court procedure if the seller refuses to refund me?

I would particularly appreciate advice on whether the seller's “non-refundable deposit” argument has any validity where the consumer is exercising a statutory right to reject because the goods are defective/not of satisfactory quality, rather than cancelling because they have changed their mind.