I am planning to go to a small claims court about a Consumer Rights Act issue on a second-hand vehicle. The trader that sold the second-hand vehicle claims that it's the result of wear and tear. His mechanic had already a look allegedly. They are confident that is a timing chain issue. They say that when they had the car was fine. They request the consumer to pay for the repair.
The first indication of the error was only after two weeks of purchase. No damage was done to the car from the consumer or any other third party. It was driven solely for leisure purposes.
A couple of other independent mechanics (paid by the consumer) had a look at the car and each one of them has a different opinion on how to fix the car. One said to change the engine oil the other to change the solenoid.
The only thing sure is that it's P0014 error code which indeed it may be caused by a series of things (all the above claims from the various mechanics are not wrong). Allegedly the root cause of it which I found online is bad vehicle maintenance (not changing with good quality engine oil at the supposed time periods, this practice is reinforced by the fact that every wheel has a different brand tyre to save cost).
In the eyes of the judge does the wear and tear argument have any basis? Will more evidence be needed from either parties?