bad experience with we buy cars the dome

Non-Disclosure of Material Vehicle History and Breach of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) To: The Branch Manager We Buy Cars – The Dome Olievenhout Avenue Randburg Gauteng From: M. Matseoane Vehicle: Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.6L Overland Petrol (Maroon) Registration Number: JYT803NW Date of Purchase: 18 December 2024

1. INTRODUCTION This letter serves as a formal legal complaint and letter of demand regarding the above-mentioned vehicle purchased from We Buy Cars – The Dome on 18 December 2024, which was paid for in full in cash. The purpose of this correspondence is to formally notify your company of serious concerns relating to non-disclosure of material vehicle history, possible misrepresentation, and breach of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (“CPA”).

2. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SALE On 18 December 2024, I attended the We Buy Cars – The Dome branch where I was assisted by sales representative Jean-Pierre. During the sales process: • The entire transaction, including inspection and documentation, lasted approximately 30–45 minutes. • The sales representative briefly started the engine, reversed the vehicle from the parking bay, allowed it to run for a few minutes, and then parked it near the gate. • No meaningful explanation of the mechanical condition, prior repairs, or vehicle history was provided. • No significant mechanical issues were disclosed. Based on the information provided and the DEKRA inspection report dated 30 October 2024, which generally indicated that the engine and drivetrain showed no detectable defects during the inspection, I proceeded with the purchase.

3. DEFECTS DISCOVERED AFTER PURCHASE Within a few days after taking possession of the vehicle, I noticed a distinct rattling noise during engine start-up, which sounded as though it originated from the engine or fan assembly. The noise would persist briefly and then stop. Concerned about this issue, I took the vehicle to Arnold Chatz Cars Roodepoort on 2 January 2025 for inspection and servicing. Shortly thereafter, the noise temporarily disappeared. However, on 16 April 2025, after returning home from work and parking the vehicle overnight, the vehicle failed to start on the morning of 17 April 2025. The engine started briefly and immediately cut off, after which the vehicle refused to start again. The vehicle was subsequently towed by Budget Insurance to Arnold Chatz Cars Roodepoort, where it remains pending repair. During diagnostic investigation, it was discovered that: The engine had previously undergone engineering work, specifically that the cylinder head had been skimmed by a previous owner. This information constitutes material mechanical history that was never disclosed to me at the time of sale.

4. MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE Prior engine engineering work, particularly cylinder head skimming, is a significant mechanical intervention typically associated with serious engine issues such as overheating, head gasket failure, or other major engine damage. Failure to disclose such work: • Misrepresents the true condition of the vehicle • Prevents the consumer from making an informed purchasing decision • Artificially influences the purchase decision Had this information been disclosed at the time of sale, I would not have proceeded with the purchase, or would have required further independent mechanical verification before purchasing the vehicle.

5. BREACHES OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (CPA) The conduct described above appears to constitute violations of several provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, including but not limited to the following: Section 41 – False, Misleading or Deceptive Representations Section 41 prohibits suppliers from directly or indirectly making false, misleading, or deceptive representations concerning the condition or history of goods. Failure to disclose material mechanical repairs or prior engine work may constitute a misleading representation regarding the vehicle's true condition.

Section 55 – Consumer’s Right to Safe, Good Quality Goods Section 55 of the CPA states that consumers have the right to receive goods that are: • Reasonably suitable for the purposes for which they are generally intended • Of good quality • In good working order • Free of defects • Durable for a reasonable period of time A vehicle that becomes mechanically inoperable within approximately four months of purchase raises serious concerns regarding compliance with this provision.

Section 56 – Imp**** Warranty of Quality Section 56 provides consumers with an automatic six-month statutory warranty on goods purchased. Where goods fail to meet the standards described in Section 55 within six months of purchase, the consumer has the right to: • Return the goods • Demand repair • Demand replacement • Demand a refund These remedies exist regardless of any disclaimers or “voetstoots” clauses.

Section 29 – Prohibition on Misleading Marketing The CPA further prohibits marketing or representations that reasonably imply that goods are in a condition that they are not actually in. Providing a vehicle for sale while failing to disclose major historical mechanical interventions undermines the transparency required by this section.

6. REGULATORY CONTEXT It is noteworthy that the National Consumer Commission (NCC) has recently taken enforcement action against We Buy Cars following numerous complaints from consumers relating to defective vehicles and inadequate disclosure of vehicle conditions. This regulatory context further underscores the seriousness of the issues raised in this complaint.

7. CONSEQUENCES SUFFERED As a direct result of the issues described above: • I have been without a vehicle after approximately four months of ownership. • The vehicle was purchased in cash and paid in full. • I am now faced with significant potential repair costs for defects that appear to have pre-dated my ownership.

8. REMEDIAL ACTION DEMANDED In accordance with my rights under the Consumer Protection Act, I hereby demand that We Buy Cars provide an appropriate remedy, which may include one of the following: 1. Full reimbur*****t of the mechanical repair costs required to restore the vehicle to proper working condition, OR 2. Replacement of the vehicle with another vehicle of similar value and condition, OR 3. Cancellation of the sale agreement and a full refund of the purchase price. 4. To be supp**** with a courtesy vehicle in the interim whilst this matter is being resolved as I am prejudiced due to the vehicle being inoperable.

9. DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE You are hereby requested to provide a written response within 10 business days of receipt of this letter. Failure to respond or resolve this matter within the stated timeframe will leave me with no alternative but to escalate the matter formally by lodging complaints with: • The Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa (MIOSA) • The National Consumer Commission (NCC) • The National Consumer Tribunal I also reserve the right to pursue civil remedies to recover damages suffered as a result of this transaction.

10. CONCLUSION I trust that We Buy Cars will treat this matter with the seriousness required and will act promptly to resolve this dispute in accordance with the Consumer Protection Act and principles of fair consumer dealing. Please confirm receipt of this complaint and advise on the steps that will be taken to address the matter. Yours faithfully, M. Matseoane