Originally Posted by
Longblackcoat
Actually, you're the one assuming that. And you might well be correct, there's a good chance that it was a pre-existing condition.
With secondhand cars, the courts take the view that the higher the mileage, the older the car, and the further it is away from the point of sale, the more likely it is that a purchaser will need to be aware of possible failure, especially on consumable items like clutches.
In this case, if the owner had said within 4 days that the clutch was going, yep, you have a point - back to the dealer. 4 weeks? Again yes, but slightly less so - it doesn't take much to destroy a clutch. 4 months? At that point you'd really need to have good evidence that you didn't cause it and short of getting an engineer to strip it, then trying to prove that the clutch was damaged through misuse AND that it was misuse from the previous owner, not the current one. All for a percentage of £800? All the while, of course, the OP doesn't have their car to drive, they're generally pissed off with the world, have incurred costs for an engineer's strip down and assessment, and now they're taking time to argue with the dealer or warranty company (who will be in no hurry to address the issue).
You have to look at the average clutch life - more than 65k, certainly, but no-one's going to say that the average is over 100k. So now you're at the point where, if you're lucky, you have a car with a clutch that should be 2/3 worn, maybe more and the OP is expected to know this. Even if the court were to say that yes, it's a pre-existing condition, they'd be very unlikely to get awarded the cost of an entire whole new clutch.
This isn't just me spouting, by the way - Mrs LBC's a barrister. Her view - speak to the dealer, try to get a contribution. Then get the car fixed, learn a valuable lesson about car warranties and put it behind you. Don't bother trying to take it to court, you're just throwing good money after bad.