Ekona

Get the technical details right and close racing will follow. Gimmicks do nothing but turn off fans who have been there from the beginning, and the new fans will quickly get bored and depart. Then who's left?

Don't get me wrong, I vastly prefer WEC to F1, but that doesn't mean I want F1 to start running grids full of GP2 cars and diesels. It's a unique formula that has stood alone as the pinnacle of motorsport with a very simple set of rules (ignoring the tech side, which is now just legal jargon). Monaco. What's the point having mixed grids there? Impossible to overtake unless it's in the pits or the undercut, so if you stick the Mercs at the back then that's where they'll finish. Why bother trying to be great if you get punished? Gives the middle teams a better shot at winning the championship, but is that fair? The best car & driver should win, not the one that had the most luck with flukey grids. I'd rather Kimi won every race in a Ferrari at a canter, than Lewis win by luck. And I HATE Kimi and I HATE Ferrari!

Ah yeah, you can just see the script on the flank in that first pic now, if you zoom in and squint. Lovely motor

Chavtastic. No way I'd ever reduce the light output on a car voluntarily.

Thought more of you Dan 3.8rs lucky bloke. Thought the wing supports looked like the 4.0 ones. Also, a 4.0 is worthy of a thread, a 3.8L less so

F1 does not need fake grids. It's never had them, it's never needed them. If you want that crap go watch BTCC and their shopping boxes. What's the point being the fastest when you've got to start further back? It's just creating fake drama.

I would suspect they'd know more than me, but I don't think they're correct at all. You've already proven the oil usage, so what more are you supposed to do? No, I'd be dropping it off n their doorstep and asking for my refund ASAP else you'll see them in court.

4.0 RS

They don't have to agree to take it back: That's your right as a consumer.

No you don't. It's a crap idea, dreamt up by people who know the sport is going down the toilet and are desperate for ANYTHING that gets them column inches. It's a really, really shockingly bad idea and I can't believe the teams agreed to it. It doesn't help any of them, and all it means it that there will be so many complaints about blocking and referrals that the grid won't be determined until Sunday morning, once Charlie & co have had a good look and made their decisions.

Arguably, no. According to your first post, you notified them twice within the 30-day period that the product was faulty and they did not help out. As such, I believe you fulfilled your end of the CRA and can return the car now.

you cant just return it with out proving it has a fault annoyingly. getting them to accept it has a fault then i can get my money back and my PX if its still there. it does have an mot now this was what i saw with them trying to get it through one But it does have a provable fault: It used over 4 litres of oil in under 1000mi, which isn't even close to being within the Nissan spec. Doc's right, I would get it back to them with a final letter and request a refund or else go to court. And I would follow through with that threat as well: It's easy enough to do, and they're not going to challenge it I promise.

Please, next time you buy a car make sure it's actually correct before you drive it away. Whilst I don't condone their actions, you have made it incredibly easy for them to take advantage.

Oh yeah Given you've already said you need more storage, you've answered your own question.

Utter, utter bobbins. That's exactly what a fuel filter prevents! That's an outright lie, plain and simple.

If the 6 and 6S are the exact same price, then get the S. No brainer. Unless you mean the 6 and 6+, which is another matter altogether.

I just figure that if/when it goes to court that if you've done over and above what's reasonable, then the court is highly likely to look more in your favour. It's a pain, and it's wrong, but it's also easier long term. Send them a letter by SPECIAL delivery (not recorded, you want proof they signed for it) that you are rejecting the vehicle under the CRA 2015, and give them 14 days to give you a refund. In the mean time, send the car back to them. They have precisely nothing to stop them issuing the refund then.

Bloody Polish, coming over here and levelling out our peaks.

I disagree. There's no proof it's broken from their POV (although it clearly is), and if it's not who is going to pay for that transport? Put it this way, the longer it's at yours the more chance there is that they can say you broke it. If it's on their drive way, it's their problem. If you have it IN WRITING that they say they'll collect then grand, but if not I'd just get it trailered up there.

Whilst I see what you mean, sadly those bits of the headlights are the indicators. Now I know they're usually optional on a BMW anyway, but I figure the MOT guys would prefer I kept them.

I nearly had a bout of narcolepsy editing the photos

Christ on a bike, that's massively over! I still don't see that it's down to them to collect though. If you bought a toaster from Tesco in store you wouldn't expect them to come and collect it. Chuck enough fuel & oil in to make the trip, then leave it with them.

Sad pokemon

F*** you. ;)

First off, hi and sorry to hear about your issues. Some practical notes: It's not the dealer's fault you live so far away. Any costs to get the car back to them is your burden, customer service notwithstanding. How many miles have you done, and how much oil has been used? Up to 1L/1000mi is acceptable according to the tech documents. You either need proof the car is faulty (so pay Abbey to strip down, not something I'd do) or you need to give the car back to them and reject it. Proof of oil usage would be acceptable to use in court, so receipts & videoing works. You do need to give the car back to them one way or another, so take the easy approach first.