Oh FFS! Buyer of my car issued court summons!
Discussion
Can you please state what the claim form says?
As 10ps said, you can make an application to have the claim struck out (unless he is claiming Misrepresentation which is why I would like to know what he is actually claiming, if he simply states private sale etc then it should be fairly easy). You would not get costs in a small claim BUT there is a way around that. If you make the application before the claim has been transferred to the small claim track, that means that you can indeed recover your costs - which at the moment if you are self employed you can prove your hourly rate, if not, litigants in person get £18ph......
So you send in your acknowledgement of service, noting that you will defend the claim. Then your defence is that the claim should be struck out etc... and ask for costs....
As 10ps said, you can make an application to have the claim struck out (unless he is claiming Misrepresentation which is why I would like to know what he is actually claiming, if he simply states private sale etc then it should be fairly easy). You would not get costs in a small claim BUT there is a way around that. If you make the application before the claim has been transferred to the small claim track, that means that you can indeed recover your costs - which at the moment if you are self employed you can prove your hourly rate, if not, litigants in person get £18ph......
So you send in your acknowledgement of service, noting that you will defend the claim. Then your defence is that the claim should be struck out etc... and ask for costs....
.The AA defines private sale-
''The only legal terms that cover a private sale contract are:
•the seller must have the right to sell the car
•the vehicle should not be misrepresented
•it should match its description:
for example, if the ad states that there is a valid MOT, there should be a valid MOT.''
You have no rights to expect that goods be of satisfactory quality or fit for their purpose, but there is a requirement that they should be 'as described
Have you got your description you used to sell?
link to similar case. http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14654...
The end result.
sam1176uk
''Well it went to a day in small claims court and his case got thrown out, he had to pay me travel expenses as well as compensation for the day off work for myself and the wife.
The only potential sticking point (lol) was the fact i had put "refurbed calipers blue" in the advert and then they were supposedly found to be sticking (after the car had been sitting for over a month). But since i hadnt stated when they were refurbed or that they were in full working order then it was ok.
His claims regarding the exhaust etc were all dismissed out of hand.
Closing comments were that "this is a case of an irresposible buyer making a reckless purchase" or something along the lines of it is up to him to have the car checked first. ''
''The only legal terms that cover a private sale contract are:
•the seller must have the right to sell the car
•the vehicle should not be misrepresented
•it should match its description:
for example, if the ad states that there is a valid MOT, there should be a valid MOT.''
You have no rights to expect that goods be of satisfactory quality or fit for their purpose, but there is a requirement that they should be 'as described
Have you got your description you used to sell?
link to similar case. http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14654...
The end result.
sam1176uk
''Well it went to a day in small claims court and his case got thrown out, he had to pay me travel expenses as well as compensation for the day off work for myself and the wife.
The only potential sticking point (lol) was the fact i had put "refurbed calipers blue" in the advert and then they were supposedly found to be sticking (after the car had been sitting for over a month). But since i hadnt stated when they were refurbed or that they were in full working order then it was ok.
His claims regarding the exhaust etc were all dismissed out of hand.
Closing comments were that "this is a case of an irresposible buyer making a reckless purchase" or something along the lines of it is up to him to have the car checked first. ''
Edited by The Spruce goose on Wednesday 19th September 20:23
Jasandjules said:
Can you please state what the claim form says?
As 10ps said, you can make an application to have the claim struck out (unless he is claiming Misrepresentation which is why I would like to know what he is actually claiming, if he simply states private sale etc then it should be fairly easy). You would not get costs in a small claim BUT there is a way around that. If you make the application before the claim has been transferred to the small claim track, that means that you can indeed recover your costs - which at the moment if you are self employed you can prove your hourly rate, if not, litigants in person get £18ph......
So you send in your acknowledgement of service, noting that you will defend the claim. Then your defence is that the claim should be struck out etc... and ask for costs....
The defendant sold and Audi XX to the claimant under representations that it was in excellent condition for age and mileage and with full service history, everything described was in full working order with good tyres.lt was on the basis of this representation that I agreed to purchase theAs 10ps said, you can make an application to have the claim struck out (unless he is claiming Misrepresentation which is why I would like to know what he is actually claiming, if he simply states private sale etc then it should be fairly easy). You would not get costs in a small claim BUT there is a way around that. If you make the application before the claim has been transferred to the small claim track, that means that you can indeed recover your costs - which at the moment if you are self employed you can prove your hourly rate, if not, litigants in person get £18ph......
So you send in your acknowledgement of service, noting that you will defend the claim. Then your defence is that the claim should be struck out etc... and ask for costs....
vehicle. Upon delivery, the vehicle was not as represented and the following defects were found.
Engine fault caused by broken air inlet manifold that had been present for some time.
Defective brakes ? front discs warped and pads (front and rear) in need of immediate replacement.
Rear tyres worn down to 2mm tread and spare unserviceable.
Failure of front parking sensor. Accordingly the claimant was induced into the purchase by the defendant?s misrepresentations and seeks recovery of the cost of rectifying the defects in the sum of #2391
That's cut and pasted, along with the random ? and #'s, with only the reg and model deleted.
[quote]Upon delivery, the vehicle was not as represented and the following defects were found.
[/quote]
What a load of tosh. Why would he have paid if that were the case?? And why did it take him a week to find the faults.
He should have had the Audi 'specialist' look at it before he bought it.
[/quote]
What a load of tosh. Why would he have paid if that were the case?? And why did it take him a week to find the faults.
He should have had the Audi 'specialist' look at it before he bought it.
You won't be paying a penny of that. The buyer has been bent over by the specialist! You have no idea how he drove the car for that week when he had the car anyway. You would have know if the discs were warped on the test drive.
This guy has made me want to punch him for being part of the blame culture we live in.
This guy has made me want to punch him for being part of the blame culture we live in.
ks, particularly the tosh about 'delivery'. Tyres are something he should blatantly have seen and the rest... Well, if he wants to pay a specialist for unnecessary work...You've already got some good advice in this thread.
All I would add is,
1. The less you say the better. He has to make his case.
2. Might be worth adding in your filed defence "My description of the car in the advertisement was completely accurate and was still accurate at the time of sale. I am not responsible for anything that happened afterwards."
3. The less you say the better. He has to make his case. (Did I mention that before?)
All I would add is,
1. The less you say the better. He has to make his case.
2. Might be worth adding in your filed defence "My description of the car in the advertisement was completely accurate and was still accurate at the time of sale. I am not responsible for anything that happened afterwards."
3. The less you say the better. He has to make his case. (Did I mention that before?)
Well, notwithstanding the fact it was a private sale, and he had chance to inspect the car before agreeing to purchase, the tyres were good for a 100k+ car. 2mm is legal, if not ideal. As for the spare, I thought I read earlier that he said it was 3mm, therefore needed replacing. 3mm is serviceable, even if Kwik Fit et al suggest you should replace at 3mm. The legal limit as we well know is 1.6mm.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff