Second-hand car, first-hand problems: Your rights under the Consumer Protection Act

You’ve found your dream car, taken it for a test drive and signed the paperwork, only for the engine to overheat a few weeks later. The dealership denies any liability, saying that you bought a used car and that its warranty has already expired. Are you stuck with the repair bill? Not necessarily.

Fortunately, buying a used car does not mean giving up the protections of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 ("CPA"). You may be entitled to a repair, replacement or refund, depending on the nature of the problem and the circumstances in which you bought the vehicle.

When does the CPA apply

The CPA only applies when the seller supplies vehicles in the ordinary course of business, like a dealership does. Buying your neighbour's car in a once-off private sale would therefore fall outside these protections, unless, of course, your neighbour is in the business of selling cars.

The CPA is further geared toward protecting individuals. Therefore, if you are buying a car through a company or another juristic person, such as a trust, both its annual turnover and asset value must be below R2 million at the time of the transaction. If either reaches that threshold, these CPA protections do not apply.

The type of sale also matters, as vehicles bought at auction are excluded from the section 55 quality protections discussed below.

What can you reasonably expect from a used vehicle

A twenty-year-old vehicle with substantial mileage will naturally show signs of use and the CPA does not require it to look or perform like a new one.

Section 55 of the CPA nevertheless requires the vehicle to be reasonably suitable for its intended purpose, of good quality, in good order, free of defects and usable and durable for a reasonable period, assessed in light of its age, mileage, price and its advertised condition.

A worn seat is therefore quite different from a serious engine defect. As the Supreme Court of Appeal explained in Motus Corporation v Wentzel [2021] ZASCA 40: not every small fault justifies returning a vehicle and the question is whether the problem makes it fall short of what a buyer could reasonably expect.

Choosing the remedy for a defective vehicle

Section 56 of the CPA gives effect to these standards through an implied warranty of quality. It essentially stipulates that if the vehicle fails to meet the section 55 standards, you may return it within six months after delivery, without penalty and at the supplier’s risk and expense. The supplier must then, at your sole direction, repair it, replace it or refund the purchase price.

Because the choice under section 56(2) of the CPA belongs to the consumer, a dealership cannot insist that it always gets the first opportunity to repair the vehicle.

It is important to note that the six-month period is not a general right to return a car because you have changed your mind. To qualify for these remedies, the vehicle must fail to meet to the standards set out in the CPA.

Furthermore, choosing a repair does not leave you having to accept repeated unsuccessful attempts to fix the problem. If, within three months after the repair, the defect remains or a further failure, defect or unsafe feature is discovered, section 56(3) of the CPA entitles you to a replacement or a refund. Keeping repair records and promptly reporting further problems is particularly important here.

What if you accepted the defect before buying

The position changes where the dealer expressly discloses a particular condition and you knowingly accept it.

If, for example, the dealer tells you that the air-conditioning does not work and you agree to buy the car in that condition, section 55(6) of the CPA limits certain quality protections and you generally cannot rely on that fault alone to demand a repair, replacement or refund.

However, that does not mean you also accepted an undisclosed gearbox problem or surrendered every statutory protection.

A blanket “as-is” or voetstoots clause is therefore not a substitute for properly disclosing the vehicle’s condition, and a dealer’s limited warranty cannot replace your rights under the CPA.

A costly lesson for one dealership

These protections had expensive consequences for the dealership in Avura Motors v National Consumer Commission [2025] ZAGPPHC 1129, after a used Mazda developed serious problems within 28 days of purchase. Although the dealership refused assistance and relied on its own warranty, an assessor’s report revealed extensive rust and corrosion in the cooling system.

The High Court found that this deterioration could not have occurred during the buyer’s short period of ownership and upheld the finding that the vehicle had been sold with a hidden defect, the order to reimburse repair costs and the R100 000 administrative fine.

This case also shows why a mechanical report can be decisive when a dealer blames a breakdown on the buyer’s conduct or ordinary wear and tear.

What should you do if things go wrong

If your car develops a problem, write to the dealership promptly to explain what has gone wrong and which remedy you want, keeping the advert, sale agreement, messages and repair records to support your complaint. Where the cause is disputed, obtain an independent mechanical assessment and give the dealer an opportunity to inspect the vehicle. If your complaint is not resolved, you can approach the Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa ("MIOSA").

For dealerships, clear written disclosures and a proper investigation of complaints can prevent an expensive dispute. Simply telling a buyer that the car is second-hand will not resolve a valid CPA claim.

Whether you need help with a defective vehicle or your dealership’s sale terms, Van Zyl Scheepers Attorneys can help you assess your rights and determine the appropriate next steps.