I picked up my car 19th May(I came from Newtownabbey)as I was driving home I noticed that the things I pointed out to Gary on the day I looked at it wernt fixed/sorted, I emailed Ed Carson,he tried to say the car had been cleaned it obviously wasn't, I took photos and sent them to him .I got a call a day or 2 after asking me to leave the car up at Newtownabbey and it would be picked up and taken to Portadown to rectify the things that wernt done,I left it up to Newtownabbey branch on Thurs the 21st at 2.30 pm as said.It was still there on the Friday.I still havnt got my car back,it's been such an inconvenience and hassle and relying on people for lifts,to say I'm disgusted is an understatement.

Subject: Formal Complaint – Mercedes PL67 HSA Purchased 11 March 2026 – Second Written Correspondence / Written Repair Confirmation RequiredDear Charles Hurst,I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the Mercedes vehicle, registration PL67 HSA, purchased from your dealership on 11 March 2026 for £17,000. The vehicle is still within the first six months of purchase and is also covered by warranty.This correspondence should now be treated as our second written complaint/correspondence regarding this matter.Since purchasing the vehicle, we have experienced ongoing issues. Most recently, the AdBlue warning indicator appeared. We topped up the AdBlue as required, however the indicator continued to show a fault. The engine warning light also came on, and the vehicle began displaying an error message stating that the car would not start within 500 miles. This mileage warning continued to reduce mile by mile as the vehicle was driven.The vehicle was taken in by Charles Hurst for investigation and repair. However, I wish to make it explicitly clear that taking physical possession of the vehicle should not be treated as acceptance that the repair has been completed satisfactorily, that the vehicle is now free from fault, or that we are satisfied with how this matter has been handled.For the avoidance of doubt, while the vehicle has now been returned to us, we do not accept the return of the vehicle as full or final resolution of this complaint. Our acceptance of the vehicle back into our possession is strictly without prejudice to our rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the vehicle warranty, and any further remedies available to us.This matter remains unresolved until our concerns have been formally recorded and addressed in writing, and until we receive full written confirmation of the diagnosis, the work carried out, the parts replaced, the cause of the fault, and confirmation that the vehicle is now safe, reliable, roadworthy, and free from any related faults.We also require written confirmation regarding the reported damage to the exhaust while the NOx sensor was being replaced, including how this occurred, what work was carried out to rectify it, and confirmation that this additional repair was completed at no cost to us.This entire experience has caused me considerable distress and inconvenience. I am a busy mother of three young children and I am the sole driver in our household. Having a reliable vehicle is not a luxury for us — it is essential for school runs, appointments, family commitments, and everyday life. I am genuinely at a loss as to how this situation has unfolded so soon after purchasing the vehicle.We bought this car in good faith, expecting it to be reliable, roadworthy, fit for purpose, and as described. Instead, within a short period of ownership, we have had to deal with warning lights, a countdown stating that the vehicle would not start, repeated phone calls, unclear communication, delays, uncertainty around the repair process, and further damage reportedly caused while the vehicle was being repaired.As a result, my trust and confidence in this vehicle has significantly diminished. Although the vehicle has now been returned, I still wish to fully understand my options should the same or a related fault reappear. Given the short period of ownership, the nature of the fault, and the way this matter has unfolded, I also require full transparency regarding the vehicle’s condition at the point of sale and any pre-sale checks carried out.For clarity, I have set out the timeline of events below.On 6 May 2026 at 1:01pm, I made an initial call to Charles Hurst. This call lasted approximately 18 minutes. During this call, I flagged that the AdBlue light was not turning off, the engine warning light was on, and the vehicle was showing a warning that it would not start within 500 miles, with the mileage reducing mile by mile. I was advised that Charles Hurst could not look at the vehicle until 28 May 2026. I was then told to leave the vehicle in on Friday 8 May 2026 so it could be plugged into diagnostics.On Friday 8 May 2026 at 8:15am, I left the vehicle into Charles Hurst.At 11:50am, I called Brian at Charles Hurst for an update. This call lasted approximately 4 minutes. I was told the car had not yet been looked at. I explained that it was essential I had a working vehicle, as I had to bring my mother-in-law to an appointment in Dublin on Monday. Brian stated several times during the call that there were no courtesy vehicles available and that I could hire a car myself if I wished.At 12:59pm, Brian called me back. This call lasted approximately 5 minutes. He confirmed that NOx sensor 2 required replacement and advised that the vehicle would not be looked at until Monday. He also stated that there was nothing else he could do, that no courtesy vehicle would be supplied, and that there were only approximately 260 miles left on the vehicle’s countdown warning, which was nowhere near enough to travel to Dublin and back for the appointment.At approximately 2:00pm, I collected my vehicle from Charles Hurst. I have photographs showing the condition in which the vehicle was left after AdBlue had been added. This was despite me advising Brian during the first call that I had already applied the correct AdBlue when the warning light appeared. My boss was present when I collected the vehicle. Following discussion with Brian, we asked to speak with the manager. When it became apparent that she was not coming out to speak with us, we knocked on her door. After a brief discussion of approximately five minutes, she assured me that if the vehicle was brought in for repair on Monday 11 May 2026, she would ensure that I had a courtesy vehicle of some description.On Monday 11 May 2026 at 8:15am, I left the vehicle into Charles Hurst again. I was advised that it was being sent to the Nissan garage on Boucher Road for repair and that it would most likely be back before Wednesday 13 May 2026.At 12:45pm, I called Brian for an update. This call lasted approximately 2 minutes. He advised that Enterprise would be in touch regarding a courtesy vehicle until mine was returned, and that the vehicle was still likely to be back by Wednesday.At approximately 5:15pm, the Enterprise courtesy car arrived at my home.On 13 May 2026 at 1:57pm, Brian called to advise that the vehicle would more than likely be back on Thursday 14 May or Friday 15 May.On 15 May 2026, I received a missed call from Brian at 11:25am and a voicemail stating that the vehicle was not ready.On 18 May 2026 at 1:29pm, I received a further call from Brian advising that the vehicle was still not ready.On 20 May 2026 at 11:22am, I called Brian for an update. He did not have one. I was told he had emailed asking for an update but had received nothing.On 21 May 2026 at 4:02pm, Brian called and advised that the exhaust had been damaged while the NOx sensor was being replaced. I was then told that the “exhaust man” would not be available until Monday 25 May 2026 to look at it.On 27 May 2026, an employee from Charles Hurst attempted to return the vehicle to us. At that time, we did not accept the return of the vehicle as full or final resolution of the complaint, as no written response had been provided to our concerns. Our initial written complaint letter was handed directly to the employee.The vehicle has since been returned to us. However, our position remains that taking physical possession of the vehicle does not amount to acceptance that the repair has been completed satisfactorily, that the vehicle is now free from fault, or that this matter has been resolved.This correspondence should now be treated as our second written complaint/correspondence regarding this matter.We have still not received written confirmation of the diagnosis, the parts replaced, the repair work completed, the warranty position, or confirmation that the reported exhaust damage has been fully rectified. Until these matters are addressed in writing, this complaint remains open and unresolved.We paid £17,000 for this vehicle less than three months ago. In fact, the vehicle was not in our possession for more than eight weeks before issues started to arise. It is not reasonable that, so soon after purchase, we have had to deal with a serious warning system fault, a countdown indicating that the vehicle would not start, repeated chasing for updates, lack of clear written communication, uncertainty around the repair, and additional damage reportedly caused during repair.It is also deeply concerning that, while the vehicle was in the care of Charles Hurst/the repairer, the exhaust was reportedly damaged during the replacement of the NOx sensor. This was not an issue caused by us, and we require written confirmation of how this happened, what was done to rectify it, and confirmation that the exhaust system is now fully repaired and free from related faults.As the original fault arose within the first six months of purchase, we are relying on our rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. We understand that, after the first 30 days, the dealership is generally entitled to one opportunity to repair or replace the vehicle. However, that repair must be completed within a reasonable timeframe and without causing significant inconvenience to the customer.In addition to our statutory rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the vehicle is also covered by warranty. We therefore expect Charles Hurst to deal with this matter promptly and professionally under both our consumer rights and the warranty cover provided at the point of sale. The existence of the warranty does not replace or reduce our statutory rights.The Motor Ombudsman’s guidance confirms that, where a fault arises within the first six months of purchase, it is generally presumed the fault was present or developing at the point of sale unless the seller can prove otherwise. It also confirms that, after the first 30 days, the seller normally has one opportunity to repair or replace the vehicle, but if the repair is unsuccessful, cannot be completed, or is not carried out within a reasonable timeframe, the customer may be entitled to further remedies, including rejection of the vehicle or a refund.In this case, the fault appears to have related initially to an AdBlue/NOx sensor issue. We require clear written confirmation of the diagnosis, the parts replaced, any additional work carried out, and confirmation that the issue has been fully resolved.To be clear, our confidence in this vehicle has been seriously undermined. We purchased this car in good faith, yet within a short period of ownership it developed faults serious enough to leave it effectively unusable. Although the vehicle has now been returned, I do not feel reassured until we receive full written confirmation that the vehicle is safe, reliable, roadworthy, and free from any related AdBlue, NOx sensor, emissions system, engine warning light, or exhaust faults.We now require the following in writing as a matter of urgency:A full written update on the diagnosis and repair completed.Confirmation of the original fault identified.Confirmation that NOx sensor 2 was the part requiring replacement.Confirmation of when this part was ordered.Confirmation of when the part arrived.Confirmation of when the repair was started and completed.Confirmation of all parts replaced or repaired.A copy of the diagnostic report, job sheet, parts order, invoice, or any documentation relating to the NOx sensor and any other part repaired or replaced, for our own records.Confirmation of how and why the exhaust was damaged during the repair.Confirmation of who repaired the exhaust damage.Confirmation that the exhaust damage was repaired at no cost to us.Confirmation that the exhaust system is now fully repaired and free from related faults.Written confirmation that the repair was handled under warranty and at no cost to us.Written confirmation that the AdBlue/NOx sensor/emissions warning fault has been fully resolved.Written confirmation that the vehicle is safe, reliable, roadworthy, and fit for purpose.A copy of any pre-sale inspection report, health check, service history, diagnostic report, or preparation checklist completed before the vehicle was sold to us.Written confirmation of whether Charles Hurst was aware of any previous AdBlue, NOx sensor, emissions system, engine warning light, or exhaust-related issues before the vehicle was sold.Written confirmation of our options should the same or a related fault reappear.Written confirmation of our options regarding rejection and return of the vehicle, given that our confidence in the vehicle has now significantly diminished.Written confirmation that this complaint, and all concerns raised within it, have been formally recorded on your system and attached to the vehicle/customer file.Written confirmation that our taking physical possession of the vehicle will not be treated by Charles Hurst as acceptance that the repair has been completed satisfactorily, or as acceptance that this complaint has been resolved.We also ask that you confirm this complaint has now been logged through your formal complaints process.Given the value of the vehicle, the short period of ownership, the fact the vehicle is under warranty, the nature of the fault, the additional damage reportedly caused during repair, and the inconvenience and distress caused, we expect this matter to be treated seriously.We require a satisfactory written response and all requested documentation prior to return of the vehicle, if in fact that is determined to be the best way forward.If the same or a related fault reappears, or if we do not receive satisfactory written reassurance and documentation confirming that the issue has been properly resolved, we will seek to exercise our rights under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, including our final right to reject the vehicle and request a refund, subject only to any lawful deduction for use.Given the timeline of events, the nature of the fault, the reported additional damage caused during repair, and the significant loss of trust in the vehicle, we are asking Charles Hurst to confirm our options for rejecting and returning the vehicle should this matter not be fully and satisfactorily resolved.Please note that if this matter is not resolved satisfactorily, we will escalate the complaint to The Motor Ombudsman and any other relevant consumer advice or dispute resolution body.We would prefer to resolve this matter directly with Charles Hurst. However, the lack of clear written communication, the inconvenience and distress caused to us so soon after purchasing the vehicle, and the uncertainty around the repair are not acceptable.Please also note that photographs showing the condition of the vehicle when collected on 8 May 2026 can be provided and/or are attached for your records.Please respond in writing as soon as possible.

Had a few minor issues and a fuel gauge concern. The car was booked in again a month later so I could monitor the gauge. The appointment was not needed as I informed them that the gauge that appeared stuck on full had dropped and I would update them if it registered a full. However I had to tell them that the reversing buzzer had stopped working . I almost had a reversing collision twice before I caught it on. They confirmed that the sound was missing and booked in in today 20 /05/26 . I was able to inform them that the gauge seemed to go working ok. As there is no bus service to Portadown I needed home. They brought me home in my car and then drive it back to Portadown. I told the driver to phone me when he was bringing my car back. He arrived and as I was not in he drove away again in my car. I was close by . I checked my phone but no missed call. I have been left without my car and a lot of wasted fuel.

It went in before April for the reverse camera repair and was told I would be contacted within the fortnight once the part came in for exhaust. Have not received any contact. Any time i call calls aren't returned. Exhaust still needs repairing and have not received duplicate key. Have phone multiple times with a large percentage of calls ringing off the hook. I want the issues that were flagged up during sale and was assured as part of that sale would be rectified fixed asap ...

I can see that I was sent an email 5 days after I purchased the car on the 18th May showing documentation that I needed to login to view for GardX protection applied on the 13th May 2023. I did not agree to this at all, and I did not sign this document, why was the email sent 5 days after the event for something that didn’t happen?It is also impossible that this GardX product was applied to my car as I visited your dealership on Saturday 13th April 2023 with my wife and child, took the car for a test drive, parked it outside, signed the finance documents, and left the dealership straight after with the new car. At no point was the car taken into the garage to apply GardX protection or carry out any other remedial works. I have been charged for a service that wasn’t carried out on the car which is a breach of contract.

I purchased this car from you on 22 January 2026, including a 6-month warranty.My first contact regarding issues with the sensors was on the night of 20 February. The car was then booked in with you on 24 February. Please note that I had to pay for my own courtesy car (£72.88), as none were available that day.I collected the vehicle again on 24 February, as a fault was identified that you were unable to deal with and which required referral to Lexus Belfast, Boucher Road. I was advised at that stage that this would involve an additional charge not covered by warranty. An appointment was then scheduled for 11 March, which I chose not to attend as the sensor issues had become less frequent.I also enquired about the cooling-off period and was advised that this was six weeks, and that Charles Hurst must be given the opportunity to fix the issue within that timeframe. I was further advised that the appointment on 24 February did not “classify as a repair”, as no repair was attempted and only a history code was found with no other faults detected.To be candid, I became exhausted with the repeated back-and-forth emails and the lack of meaningful assistance, so I decided to leave the matter as I was not getting anywhere.On 7 April, I then made contact again to advise that I had discovered the rear passenger footwell was saturated with water. I was advised that “weeping” was not covered by warranty and that I would need to pay for this myself.This morning, I have left the car with my local mechanic, who advised that there is a TSB bulletin from Audi for this exact fault

I am writing to express my disappointment my dad received at Charles hurst motors portadown. My dad is 80 years oldHe bought a car on 1st April Vauxhall Mokka black OIG 2246 - Edward Carson sales repOn his journey home the engine light and oil light came on then went off. It was quite obvious straight away that this was an issue- the engine light comes on and off and the red oil light is relentlessly flashing on/off beeping and the issue escalates in traffic- this has been constant since we got carA phonecall was made regarding issues within a few days and we were just told to come on 23rd April to look at it. No urgency /apology/acknowledgement that this shouldn’t really happen on way home from purchaseAfter that on Saturday 18th when the handbrake was lifted the metal part on it popped off along with 2 springs. I was driving at the time and phoned your office and spoke to Amanda who referred me to RAC who had to come out and do a temporary fix. This could have been more serious if my dad had been driving at the time as it took a lot of strength for me to put handbrake back on without the correct mechanisms and I am sure an 80 year old would have struggled. RAC mechanic remarked that this should not happen on a recent purchase.The heating in the car does not and has never worked- when temp is showing as 28 for example ice cold air pumps out. All settings have been tried. No hot air has ever come outThe car shakes oddly in gear 5 above 55mph and does not feel safe.I phoned up and spoke to staff who to be fair were very pleasant and said bring car down on 23rd April and they said they would sort it out and that they had a driver to take my dad home if they needed to keep car for any reason.My dad arrived at 1.30 on 23rd April as agreed. Due to my dads age i asked them to communicate with me via mobile if anything needed talked about. The next update was when I got a call at 3.30 from I think was a mechanic. He said the car had failed a compression test and they would need to keep it for a month!I asked could they drop my dad home as agreed- I was told no as the driver was in Belfast and finished at 4.30. I was told I could get a courtesy car but had to get to portadown with driving licences by 5.30!Left with no choice as I have no car myself at the minute I had to leave work early get a taxi to Hillsborough to pick up driving licences and taxi on to portadown then wait another 10 mins (which by that point was a long time) to be given a courtesy car. This taxi cost me £47.00At this stage my 80 year old dad had been waiting 3+hours.My complaint isn’t against any individual member of staff as such but honestly this just should not have happened. He should not have been sold the car- the car should have been taken in straight away to look at the issues- I think these actions were potentially dangerous.I also think that if you offer someone a lift especially in these circumstances the offer should be stood over. Someone in a senior role in Charles hurst should have been made aware of these set of circumstances- taken responsibility for the entire shambles of it, apologised and looked to set it right. I am still hopeful this will happenI would request that one person take on board all of the above information and I can deal with them solely moving forward to resolve issue without any further stress

purchased this car from you on 22 January 2026, including a 6-month warranty.My first contact regarding issues with the sensors was on the night of 20 February. The car was then booked in with you on 24 February. Please note that I had to pay for my own courtesy car (£72.88), as none were available that day.I collected the vehicle again on 24 February, as a fault was identified that you were unable to deal with and which required referral to Lexus Belfast, Boucher Road. I was advised at that stage that this would involve an additional charge not covered by warranty. An appointment was then scheduled for 11 March, which I chose not to attend as the sensor issues had become less frequent.I also enquired about the cooling-off period and was advised that this was six weeks, and that Charles Hurst must be given the opportunity to fix the issue within that timeframe. I was further advised that the appointment on 24 February did not “classify as a repair”, as no repair was attempted and only a history code was found with no other faults detected.To be candid, I became exhausted with the repeated back-and-forth emails and the lack of meaningful assistance, so I decided to leave the matter as I was not getting anywhere.On 7 April, I then made contact again to advise that I had discovered the rear passenger footwell was saturated with water. I was advised that “weeping” was not covered by warranty and that I would need to pay for this myself.This morning, I have left the car with my local mechanic, who advised that there is a TSB bulletin from Audi for this exact faultn light of the above, could you please confirm:Can this issue be repaired by yourselves?Is this repair covered under the 6-month warranty?

Went to the branch in portadown on the 13th around 10:13 am my partners car was due for service and it was only scheduled for a engine oil and filter serviceMy partner did not mention any faulty gear shifts at allAfter the car was serviced they told my partner that it had a gear shift problem and we need to go to Nissan and get it sortedBecause they might have been and liquid spill damage or probably a short circuit in the gear boxI and my partner did not understand , then he then advised me and my husband to properly clean the shift gear handle before going to Nissan ., and we didn’t understand why he said that sounded very sketchy to us . I then stated to the sales person that I did notice that once when we fully got the car when it came and I thought it was maybe I used the spare key ,we didn’t understand why they had ripped open the shift gear handle and told us now we are manually now shifting gearsUpon arriving at my house around 5 pm I tried to switch off the car as I was instructed but it didn’t fully shut off the car it kept beeping and showing on the dashboard switch to parking gear . I then called Brian twice and told him that the car isn’t fully switching off and what should I do he replied to me saying that the engineers have already gone home and I should ring back tomorrow morningRight now as I write this utter disappointment

I am writing to formally notify you that I am rejecting Vehicle Reg. IMZ4325 FORD FOCUS 2025, which I purchased from your dealership on 30/3/2026 for the sum of £19290.This is my legal right as per the Consumer rights act 2015.My reasons are as follows1. The car does not meet the description detailed in the advertisement for sale or in the description provided orally by the seller when I bought it.The vehicle had previous un-recorded damage that was not disclosed to me, on close inspection visual evidence includes a wing replacement on the passenger side and a creaseon the bonnet. The replacement wing has labels on the inside indicating that its a Ford parts plus part (i.e not fitted in factory) with a date code indicating that the wing was manufactured in August 2025 - the car was first registered in July 2025.2: The car is not of satisfactory quality taking account of its age and mileage i.e. its 8 months old and has covered only 3000 miles approximately, it has multiple dents and scratches on the door sills on both sides plus cigarette burns on the passenger seat, front passenger door card, passenger carpet mat, rear passenger carpet mat.3: The car developed a serious issue approximately 15 minutes into my journey home whereby the digital dash went black giving no indication of my speed etc, i had to pull the car in and attempt to re-start it multiple times before it started again. When i got it started i immediately returned to the dealership to reject and return the car.Upon my return to the dealership i was met by the manager (Colin) who agreed to a refund there and then.As of today 2/4/2026 i still have not received my money.Can you please action this refund as a matter of urgencyBest regardsPatrick Mc Elhinney