Interesting Thread on a Private Used Car Sale
Discussion
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php...
Interesting bit was he sold a car described all the faults then the buyer sued and won for the cost of fixing one of the faults.
Interesting bit was he sold a car described all the faults then the buyer sued and won for the cost of fixing one of the faults.
Vaud said:
PAULJ5555 said:
There was another on that Judge Rinder program where the buyer got his money back from a private sale.
Seriously - a reality TV show as a reference? I thought it was a mock up of a county court.
JustinP1 said:
From what I see, it was advertised as 'drives well' but was shagged.
.
As are most sheds. If you dont know what you're doing or can't take the risk, stump up for a car with a warranty at a dealership. .
The worrying thing is that these cases will become common knowledge and genuine people will be frightened away from selling privately. It's happening anyway.
SuperHangOn said:
JustinP1 said:
From what I see, it was advertised as 'drives well' but was shagged.
.
As are most sheds. If you dont know what you're doing or can't take the risk, stump up for a car with a warranty at a dealership. .
The worrying thing is that these cases will become common knowledge and genuine people will be frightened away from selling privately. It's happening anyway.
Presumably if the seller had not put "drives well" in the description then the buyer would not have been successful in the claim. I don't see an issue here. If the car was not as described - and obviously this would have to be tested legally - then why shouldn't the seller bear some risk?
fido said:
Presumably if the seller had not put "drives well" in the description then the buyer would not have been successful in the claim. I don't see an issue here. If the car was not as described - and obviously this would have to be tested legally - then why shouldn't the seller bear some risk?
Because private sales / cheap cars cannot work if there is a comeback. It would become a farce and nobody would dare bother."drives well" is entirely subjective in the context of a 12 year old car anyway.
SuperHangOn said:
"drives well" is entirely subjective in the context of a 12 year old car anyway.
Better not to put it in the advert then. Stick to objective facts which you know are true. If you start putting in subjective things like "excellent condition" or "very reliable" there is a risk (not a big risk, but a risk) that they could come back to bite you if they turn out not to be true, or if someone else's interpretation of what they mean is not the same as yours. fido said:
Presumably if the seller had not put "drives well" in the description then the buyer would not have been successful in the claim. I don't see an issue here. If the car was not as described - and obviously this would have to be tested legally - then why shouldn't the seller bear some risk?
If you read the whole thread you'd have seen numerous problems with it all, but not from the sellers side.Buyer was aware of the issues putting it into reverse as they were dicussed on the test drive.
Buyer bought the car aware of this issue
Buyer then changed mind after got home with car.
Put in small claims. Missed the deadline to pay for the claim, but claim went ahead anyway
Before judgement the judge said to get an independent report done on the vehicle condition - not possible as the buyer had sold the car and claimed made a loss.
Judges ruling was to reflect that loss they incurred despite no evidence.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff