Warranty Solutions Group says dealers need clearer guidance on the time to diagnose faults under the Consumer Rights Act, to prevent premature rejections.

Warranty Solutions Group (WSG) has warned that car dealers lack clear guidance on how long they may investigate vehicle faults under the Consumer Rights Act before a customer can reject a vehicle, a lack that risks premature rejections as vehicles become increasingly technical.

WSG executive discussing repair rights under the Consumer Rights Act

Key takeaways

Dealers report customers demanding immediate rejection after fault reports.
40% of surveyed dealers cite intermittent faults as a major challenge.
85% say modern vehicle technology exceeds current Consumer Rights Act framework.
WSG calls for defined timeframes to investigate and repair faults.
Industry bodies urge legislation to reflect complex diagnostics.

Dealer experiences with the Consumer Rights Act

More than half of the 100+ dealers surveyed said customers often request outright rejection as soon as a fault is reported, rather than allowing a repair attempt. This trend places pressure on retailers to act quickly, sometimes without sufficient diagnostic information.

Intermittent faults, which appear sporadically, were highlighted by 40% of respondents as particularly troublesome. Without clear guidance, dealers risk breaching the Act if they take longer than consumers expect to resolve the issue.

Why modern vehicle faults are hard to diagnose

Technology such as software updates, electronic control units, sensors and advanced driver assistance systems makes fault identification more complex than in older models. Faults may only surface after specific driving conditions or after a series of software interactions.

85% of those polled said the sophistication of today’s vehicles exceeds the framework of the current legislation, leaving dealers uncertain about what constitutes a reasonable investigation period.

WSG's request for clearer repair guidance

WSG chief executive John Colinswood argues that a single‑visit repair is unrealistic for many modern faults. He stresses the need for an explicit definition of a “reasonable opportunity” to diagnose and repair before a customer can reject the vehicle.

The provider also notes that some problems require multiple software updates, data analysis over time or direct manufacturer support, all of which extend the time needed to resolve the issue.

Industry voices on the need for reform

Professor Jim Saker of the Institute of the Motor Industry echoed the call for a framework that acknowledges the staged nature of modern diagnostics. He warned that limiting dealers to one chance to fix a fault creates a hostile environment.

Amy‑Jane Marsden of ProTech Academy added that analysing live vehicle data over extended periods is essential for intermittent faults, highlighting the mismatch between current legal expectations and technical realities.

What this means for dealers

Until guidance is clarified, dealers should document all diagnostic steps, including software checks and communication with manufacturers. Detailed records can demonstrate that a reasonable investigation period was provided.

Dealers may also consider informing customers early about the potential complexity of a fault and setting realistic expectations for repair timelines, helping to avoid disputes under the Consumer Rights Act.

Frequently asked questions

How long can a dealer legally investigate a fault under the Consumer Rights Act?

The Act does not specify a fixed period; it requires a “reasonable time” to diagnose and repair. What is reasonable depends on the complexity of the fault, the need for software updates, and whether manufacturer assistance is required. Dealers are advised to keep thorough records to justify the time taken.

What types of vehicle faults are most likely to cause disputes?

Intermittent faults, sensor failures, software glitches and issues with advanced driver assistance systems are the most common sources of disagreement. These problems often cannot be reproduced in a single service visit, making it harder for dealers to provide an immediate fix.

What steps can dealers take now to protect themselves before legislation changes?

Dealers should adopt a systematic diagnostic process, capture all data, and communicate clearly with customers about expected repair times. Engaging with manufacturers for support and maintaining transparent logs will help demonstrate compliance with the “reasonable opportunity” requirement if a dispute arises.