Broken Timing Belt ruined engine three days after purchase

[Zigner]

Thank you!!!! I was just looking at that page too.

The mechanic just called and said the motor's junk. I asked him to tow it to an inspection station and get a rejection sticker.

I'll send the letter this weekend, after I get the inspection report.

"The motor is junk" may not be good enough. You need a specific diagnosis and quote. What, EXACTLY, destroyed the motor? Will the mechanic certify that it was through no fault of yours (ie: You didn't run it without oil or something...)

I think you do have a good case. Have you contacted the seller yet at all?

 

[PaulMass]

"The motor is junk" may not be good enough. You need a specific diagnosis and quote. What, EXACTLY, destroyed the motor? Will the mechanic certify that it was through no fault of yours (ie: You didn't run it without oil or something...)

I think you do have a good case. Have you contacted the seller yet at all?

He said it was an interference engine and that the valves smashed into the pistons, damaging both. I'll ask him to check the oil. I hadn't even filled the gas tank yet, so hadn't checked the oil either. I only drove the car about 15 miles.

I left a message with my insurance agent to see if she made a copy of the title. I only have the seller's cell phone number and he dropped the car off at my house, so I don't know where he lives.

 

[Zigner]

He said it was an interference engine and that the valves smashed into the pistons, damaging both. I'll ask him to check the oil. I hadn't even filled the gas tank yet, so hadn't checked the oil either. I only drove the car about 15 miles.

I left a message with my insurance agent to see if she made a copy of the title. I only have the seller's cell phone number and he dropped the car off at my house, so I don't know where he lives.

The timing belt would not be your fault...I just wanted to be sure you have it diagnosed as the timing belt breaking which caused the damage, a quote to repair (exceeding $200) (won't be a problem) and a note on the estimate stating that this was NOT due to any negligence on your part can't hurt!

 

[LillianX]

From what I can tell, the timing belt is relevant only if the buyer can prove the seller knew about it in advance. The timing belt issue is an "as is" situation with a used car sale. If the buyer can prove the seller knew the issue existed (and it's something that very well could have been discovered by having it checked out by a mechanic beforehand, for the record), he has recourse under Massachusetts' Used Vehicle Warranty laws. (See here for a good summary: Used Vehicle Warranty Law)

If he doesn't have recourse under that law, he might have it under the Lemon Law in MA. It appears as though he would have recourse if the car wouldn't pass inspection within 7 days for reasons OTHER than the timing belt, which seems to be something that just breaks sometimes. The fact that the car doesn't run alone is cause to fail the inspection, but if the reason is mechanical, it doesn't count. The car has to fail inspection for other reasons, and those reasons have to cost more than 10% of the purchase price to repair. In that case, a refund is due. See here: Lemon Aid Law

 

[Zigner]

In order to pass the emissions related portion, the valves would have to be replaced...get it?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

MA gives a lot of consumer protection for used car sales

Here in the People's Republik of taxachusetts, we get a lot of consumer protection for everything.

Unfortunately, my timing belt went two weeks after I bought (and inspected) the car. The repair cost is 150% of the purchase price.

I'm having a real crappy car year. This is the third engine replacement (wife and son ran out of oil) and I blew a tranny too (that was on a minivan that was totalled two years ago, so it owed me nothing).

 

[LillianX]

In order to pass the emissions related portion, the valves would have to be replaced...get it?

He's not going to have a hard time getting an inspection station to assist him, that's for sure.

OP, once you get the documentation you need, present it to the seller. He or she will probably balk, and you'll end up in small claims court. Provided you have the documentation, it's an easy win.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

In order to pass the emissions related portion, the valves would have to be replaced...get it?

Too complicated.

From your earlier link:

"Cars that do not run automatically fail inspection"

A car with a broken timing belt does not run (trust me on this one).

 

[LillianX]

Too complicated.

From your earlier link:

"Cars that do not run automatically fail inspection"

A car with a broken timing belt does not run (trust me on this one).

Right, but as far as the lemon law is concerned, the mechanical issue isn't relevant. The car has to fail inspection independently of the mechanical issue, and that failure has to result in repair costs of at least 10% of the purchase price.

 

[Zigner]

Too complicated.

From your earlier link:

"Cars that do not run automatically fail inspection"

A car with a broken timing belt does not run (trust me on this one).

Yes, but just the fact that it's "non-running" doesn't mean it falls under the Lemonade law in MA. It has to ALSO require emissions or safety related repairs that need to be done that exceed 10% of the purchase price. Read the link. Let's say that you purchase a car that doesn't run because the battery is dead. You can't get your money back just because it's not running...even if the cost of the battery exceeds 10% of the purchase price of the vehicle (yeah, not the best example, but an example none-the-less! )

 

[Zigner]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the timing belt issue alone could very well be enough to cause this to fall under the Lemonade law. Timing is an integral part of the emission of the vehicle. If the timing belt is busted, then there is no way that the timing will fall within the required specifications.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Yes, but just the fact that it's "non-running" doesn't mean it falls under the Lemonade law in MA. It has to ALSO require emissions or safety related repairs that need to be done that exceed 10% of the purchase price. Read the link. Let's say that you purchase a car that doesn't run because the battery is dead. You can't get your money back just because it's not running...even if the cost of the battery exceeds 10% of the purchase price of the vehicle (yeah, not the best example, but an example none-the-less! )

Not surprisingly, there appears to be a discrepancy between the actual statute and the interpretation by the Office of Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.

The statute plainly states:

Section 7N. Notwithstanding any disclaimer of warranty, a motor vehicle contract of sale may be voided by the buyer if the motor vehicle fails to pass, within seven days from the date of such sale, the periodic staggered inspection at an inspection station licensed pursuant to section seven W; provided, that the defects which are the reasons for the failure to issue a certificate of inspection were not caused by the abusive or negligent operation of the motor vehicle or by damage resulting from an accident or collision occurring after the date of the sale; and provided, further, that the cost of repairs necessary to permit the issuance of a certificate of inspection exceeds ten per cent of the purchase price of the motor vehicle.

In order to void a motor vehicle sale under this section the buyer shall, within fourteen days from the date of sale, notify the seller of his intention to do so, deliver the motor vehicle to the seller, provide the seller with a written statement signed by an authorized agent of such inspection station stating the reasons why the motor vehicle failed to pass the safety or combined safety and emissions inspection and an estimate of the cost of necessary repairs. The buyer shall be entitled to a refund of his purchase price unless the buyer and seller agree in writing that the seller may make the necessary repairs at his own cost and expense within a reasonable period of time thereafter. This section shall apply only to motor vehicles purchased for the immediate personal or family use of the buyer.

There's no requirement in the statute that the failure to issue a certificate be safety or emissions related. Only that it fails to pass the inspection.

The paragraph on non-running cars seems to be geared towards cars that are not running at the time they're sold, however the last sentence of the statute would appear to exclude those vehicles from this statute. A car that does not run cannot be for immediate use.

 

[Zigner]

Not surprisingly, there appears to be a discrepancy between the actual statute and the interpretation by the Office of Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.

The statute plainly states:



There's no requirement in the statute that the failure to issue a certificate be safety or emissions related. Only that it fails to pass the inspection.

The paragraph on non-running cars seems to be geared towards cars that are not running at the time they're sold, however the last sentence of the statute would appear to exclude those vehicles from this statute. A car that does not run cannot be for immediate use.

Thanks for the clarification Steve

 

[justalayman]

That's not what the law says.

really? Please provide that the statement that says otherwise.

 

[justalayman]

The timing belt would not be your fault...I just wanted to be sure you have it diagnosed as the timing belt breaking which caused the damage, a quote to repair (exceeding $200) (won't be a problem) and a note on the estimate stating that this was NOT due to any negligence on your part can't hurt!

The damage was the OP's fault. He drove the vehicle and that is what caused the timing belt to break/slip. If he had not driven it, it would be just fine. It would need a new timing belt (which in itself would not cause it to fail inspection) but it would be running.