Car owner wins case against used car dealer over false mileage 
Consumer Claims Tribunal awards RM6,940 to buyer for decreased valuation, cost of service

Updated 3 months ago · Published on 18 Aug 2023 3:32PM

A car owner has won a compensation claim against a used car dealer after discovering the pre-owned Honda Accord he bought three months ago had actually clocked more than twice the mileage shown on its odometer upon purchase. – Pixabay pic, August 18, 2023


BY Shahrim Tamrin
PUTRAJAYA – A civil servant won a compensation claim against a used car dealer after he discovered inaccurate odometer readings upon purchasing a car.


He took the dealer to the Consumer Claims Tribunal to seek compensation for the pre-owned Honda Accord he bought three months ago which had actually clocked more than twice the mileage shown on its odometer upon purchase. 

The civil servant sought relief of 50% reimbursement from the amount of service cost and purchase price to be reduced by RM5,000.

In view of the evidence presented, tribunal president Haliza Aini Datuk Othman handed down an award of RM6,940.33 to the applicant. 

On May 5, the owner purchased the 10-year-old Honda Accord 2.0l VTI-L with an odometer reading of 97,007km.

He bought the Accord at the price of RM34,600 after trading-in his 2008 Toyota Camry 2.4l for RM23,000.

Five days later, he brought the car to an authorised Honda service centre in Seremban for a thorough check and paid RM3,880.66 for parts replacement and service. 

He was then shocked to discover from the customer database that the car had apparently clocked 202,671km when it was last serviced by the former owner in January.

The claimant then contacted the previous owner and received confirmation that the Accord had allegedly reached over 200,000km at the time the car was sold to a broker.

In response, the representative of the car dealer located in Banting denied allegations of any malpractice.

“We sold the car on the basis of ‘as is where is’,” he said. “We have no knowledge of the rolling back odometer as claimed.” 

In the company’s defence, the manager argued that “customers should be aware of the risks when buying a used car in its current condition regardless of its known or unknown damages or defects.” 

In addition, the claimant also demanded RM20,000 compensation in lieu of a potential warranty void since the coverage requirements, among others, stated that it is only applicable for a vehicle with an odometer below 180,000km.

He explained that upon purchase of the car, the dealer had given a one-year warranty with a coverage value of RM40,000 for repairs to parts and systems such as the gearbox, engine control unit, engine control module and air-conditioning.

“Now that I own a used car with false mileage, I fear that I may face excessive cost of repairs and maintenance,” said the 49-year-old government officer, who was formerly attached to the Melaka Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs department. 

However, the tribunal president made a decision that the secondhand dealer must ensure that the 12-month warranty coverage was provided for the applicant.

The car dealer has 14-days to comply with the tribunal’s decision under Section 117 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act 1999 which provides for a fine of up to RM5,000 or jail up to two years, or both, if found guilty. 

The Consumer Claims Tribunal is an alternative dispute resolution avenue to civil courts for consumers to speedily file redress claims for purchases of goods and services up to RM50,000. – The Vibes, August 18, 2023

https://www.thevibes.com/articles/news/8494...7vYsERsgA2FLTFc

Claim 200k, won only rm50k lol. No wonder company all taici mode

Why is the dealership liable again ? Why isn't the manufacturer that is liable ? Manufacturer or dealer yang pasang vehicles ? Shouldn't the manufacturer be producing vehicles that are of certain standard & quality, so that their vehicles are operable  especially within it's warranty period ?

It's similiar to when buyers or their financier makes payment to the manufacturer via their dealership, don't the manufacturers & their dealers receive the full amount billed ? Ada ke tak terima full amount ? If ada, tak terima full amount atau tak dapat sebarang bayaran langsung or kena duit palsu ke, then tak payah be held liable for detective vehicles.

Ini kira vehicles yang defective aje tahu, belum lagi saya masuk "sengaja defective by design tanpa disedari ramai" tahu.

Buying parts to make a vehicle = Buying a vehicle.

How is it that the quality criteria is stated by the manufacturer and not according to international standard of operation ? If according to manufacturer standards, then the manufacturer can claim anything is valid and good. For example new modern vehicles now comes with GPS trackers etc from their distributor which suppose to help deter theft. How is it that vehicles equipped with such systems, the moment it's stolen, it cannot be traced at all within the minutes of it being stolen ? What manufacturer standard is that ? Manufacturer is helping the thieves or what ?

Limitation of 6 months ? Kind of ridiculous I would say for a GPS tracking system. Ridiculous is not the proper word in this context but it's outrageous. To add salt to injury, subscribers have to pay annual fees for such tracking system that is proven to be utterly useless the moment it is stolen. Ini macam mana kira ?

Whatever law they want to draw up, I am not bothered nor interested. In the most unfortunate event I ever become the plantiff, I pity the defendant who is going to face me in court. No out of court settlement nonsense.