UGZ3535 Rifter Cam chain fail.as of 01/06/26 with dealer 35 days, 42 days since fail.Dealer cannot advise of when fix completed. No Courtesy car.

I bought this vehicle from your Charles Hurst Boucher Road Belfast branch in November 2024, due to an ongoing fault with this model on 14th March 2026 I required assistance from the RAC and the car had to be picked up by transporter and taken to Boucher Road Belfast. It has now been at your premises since then and I have been driving a hire car provided by your Belfast Brance which is a much inferior quality than my Peugeot 3008.I am extremely unhappy at this situation as I am paying £448 per month on a PCP deal for a car that is not road worthy and has now been of the road for almost three months and wish now to return this vehicle to you and cancel this finance agreement.Can you please urgently attend to this matter.Please note my new address since purchasePeter McGimpsey8 Prince Regent ParkNewtownardsBT23 7FT07968092278

Meant to give 2 stars. Very one- sided discussion and outcome.

I visited the showroom on a Saturday afternoon & the guy I spoke to at the time was nice & helpful. We went through all the details, he took my car and did the valuation on it etc for exchange and discussed options with me. He said the systems were down & unfortunately could not produce the quote for me to take away but verbally stated an amount. He said he would email quotes though as soon as I could as he also wanted to speak to his manager that Monday about customer loyalty. I heard nothing back by the Wednesday so I called and got a different guy on the phone. I explained the situation to him & rather than passing me back to the previous guy he decided to take all details again I assume for him to try & get a sale and said there was no record of me calling to the showroom. He give differing info from the other guy such as car spec etc and no where near the verbal quote I was given. I did ask several times could you not just pass me back to the 1st person I was speaking to as I felt Inhad wasted my time that Saturday but that was not done. This would have been my 3rd 'new' peugeot car and I never heard from them again. I went with a completely different make of car as I was so disappointed with the service especially being a repeat customer to Peugeot.

the salesman was friendly helpful and professional

Agreement Number: 000040372609Vehicle: Peugeot 2008Registration: ESZ6088Dear Sir or Madam,I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding my finance agreement for the above vehicle and to formally notify you of my decision to reject the vehicle under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I am including below a chronological summary of events, as I am conscious that earlier correspondence to customer service to redline finance was not reviewed from 28th April 2026.I purchased the Peugeot 2008 on 11 November 2025, at which point it had a recorded mileage of 25,049 miles. Since purchase, the vehicle has covered approximately 2,500 miles. The transaction involved a part exchange of my previous vehicle, together with a cash deposit, with the remaining balance funded through the above finance agreement. I have continued to make monthly payments of £288 throughout this period. The vehicle was also supplied with an extended warranty, which I understood would provide reassurance and protection should any issues arise.On 2 April 2026, less than six months after purchase, the vehicle suffered a breakdown and required recovery from the RAC.Following recovery, the vehicle was diagnosed with multiple faults, including, complete battery failure and heating system failure.There were initial delays in securing a service booking due to lack of availability, where I was quoted early June (11/06/2026) as the first chance they could fix the vehicle. Following several lengthy discussions and emails, and a complaint to Peugeot Customer Services, the car was left at Peugeot Belfast on the 3rd April to be fixed at the earliest opportunity. The appointment was then booked for 17/04/2026 at 8am which I was told was the earliest they could do. At this point I had asked for a courtesy car, Peugeot said this was not an option to me and they had no cars to give me.Once finally inspected, the battery issue became a point of dispute, with the warranty provider initially declining to cover the battery replacement on the basis of “wear and tear,” despite the fact I had owned the vehicle for only five months and it was covered by an extended warranty. I understand this is a wear and tear item, but my argument was there was very little wear and tear on the car given the mileage and time owned. This dispute caused further delay while responsibility for the cost was discussed between the warranty provider, UsedDirect, and Peugeot. Following further challenge, the battery replacement was eventually agreed as a “good will gesture”.It then took more time to fit and replace the battery, where the heating system had still to be diagnosed. Following complaint emails to Peugeot and management on the 28th April 2026, the heating fault was subsequently addressed and parts were fitted. However, during this process, additional faults were identified. Following even further delays, I have now been advised that the vehicle requires a new control unit. As of yesterday, the required part has only just been ordered by Peugeot Belfast, with an estimated delivery timeframe of 7–10 days, followed by a further period required to complete the repairs. At this moment, there remains no confirmed completion date.Throughout this process, communication has been limited by Charles Hurst and Peugeot unless I have actively chased updates by phonecall. For advice and to try seek some form of compensation, I contacted your customer experience team on 27 April 2026 and again on 28 April 2026, neither of which received a response (I have also emailed again yesterday). Throughout this period, I have also raised a complaint directly with Charles Hurst regarding these ongoing delays; however, despite this escalation, the situation and the car remains off the road.As matters stand, I have now been without use of the vehicle for almost six weeks. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, faults arising within six months of purchase are presumed to have been present at the time of sale unless proven otherwise. The Act also requires that repairs be carried out within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer. In my view, the extended period without the vehicle, the discovery of additional faults during repair, the delays despite the existence of an extended warranty, the lack of a courtesy vehicle, and the continued requirement to pay £288 per month demonstrate that this standard has not been met.I have therefore lost confidence in the vehicle, as well as in Peugeot and Charles Hurst’s ability to provide an effective remedy. I consider that the seller has been given their opportunity to repair the vehicle and that this opportunity has failed.Accordingly, I am formally exercising my final right to reject the vehicle and wish to exit the finance agreement. I am seeking a return of all monies paid to date, including the part exchange allowance, the deposit, and all monthly payments made, in line with my statutory rights.I would appreciate prompt written confirmation acknowledging this rejection and advising on the next steps to resolve this matter.Yours faithfully,Eamonn

The Peugeot representative at Boucher branch (Jonathan) was very formative/professional when dealing with my questions.

I had my car repaired on 22/05/25. However, less than a year later the same esp warning is activating ever time I drive.y MOT is die on 15/05/26 and I am fearful that due to this fault it will not passed. This is not acceptable especially as specifically took the car to Peugeot for a quality fix. Equally I was promised that my navigation would be updated but this never happened. Does this qualify as acceptable customer care and reach Peugeots exacting standards?

Hi,I’m getting in touch regarding my Peugeot 3008, which I purchased from Charles Hurst in April 2024.Before buying the vehicle, I specifically raised concerns about the known wet belt issues with the Peugeot 1.2 PureTech engine (DSZ 4827). I emailed to ask whether this had been addressed and was told it would be checked with the workshop. I was later advised over the phone that the issue had been sorted. I was also reassured in writing before purchase that “this vehicle should have received a full technical check by our trained technicians.”At the time of purchase, the car had around 62,000 miles. It has now done approximately 71,000 miles.Unfortunately, since then I’ve had to pay for significant repairs totalling over £2,000, including:• Wet belt replacement (along with dephaser replacements)• Battery management replacementMy main concern is the wet belt failure and related engine issues. As you’ll know, these engines are known for premature wet belt deterioration, which can contaminate the oil system and lead to further problems.Since owning the car, I’ve made sure it has been properly maintained using the correct specification oil. Given the servicing, mileage, and the scale of the repairs needed, I don’t believe the wet belt issue had actually been fully resolved before I bought the vehicle.I relied on the assurances given at the point of sale that this had been checked and sorted. If I had known it hadn’t been properly dealt with, I may not have gone ahead with the purchase.With that in mind, I’d like to ask if Charles Hurst would consider offering any goodwill support towards the repair costs I’ve had to cover.I can provide invoices, receipts, photos, videos, and previous correspondence if needed.Kind regards,Curtis

Bought car car 2012 and 2022