Private Car Sale

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
datum77 said:
Have been in the motor trade for over 45 years.
You sold the car privately. There is NOTHING they can do. If you buy a car from a dealer, the law is wholly on the consumers side. If you buy a car privately, there is NO law covering the buyer.
DO NOT answer any communication, however guilty you may feel. They will attempt to grind you down until you concede something or all. The law of 'buyer beware' covers them, not you.
Even if you receive something from a solicitor, (my wife is a solicitor), do not reply to it.
Take your money and spend it.
Every part of this is wrong*. Datum, I'll make you a deal. You don't give legal advice and I won't deal in cars!



*Except presumably the bit about being in the motor trade for over 45 years.


Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 21st October 13:50

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
rigga said:
Have you not read anybody the above? I presume you sold it with a valid mot? Then it was roadworthy you have nothing to worry about.
An MoT certificate simply shows that the car was roadworthy when tested. A piece of paper cannot make a car roadworthy if one day or one month later it is in fact unroadworthy.

CYMR0

3,940 posts

199 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Every part of this is wrong.
Maybe his wife is a solicitor.

SonicShadow

2,452 posts

153 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
An MoT certificate simply shows that the car was roadworthy when tested. A piece of paper cannot make a car roadworthy if one day or one month later it is in fact unroadworthy.
So, you're saying that the sticker saying 'Taxed, Tested and insured - go catch real criminals officer!' on the back of Barry's stroen Saxo doesn't give him the immunity he think it gives him?

CYMR0

3,940 posts

199 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
SonicShadow said:
So, you're saying that the sticker saying 'Taxed, Tested and insured - go catch real criminals officer!' on the back of Barry's stroen Saxo doesn't give him the immunity he think it gives him?
If it's accurate, he's not committing driving without a valid MoT certificate; however, he may still be committing a construction and use offence.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 20th October 2014
quotequote all
CYMR0 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Every part of this is wrong.
Maybe his wife is a solicitor.
That explains everything.

grayme

936 posts

235 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Every part of this is wrong. Datum, I'll make you a deal. You don't give legal advice and I won't deal in cars!
Every part?

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
OK, I believe him when he says he's been in the motor trade for 45 years. The rest is all hooey.

B'stard Child

28,320 posts

245 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
Every part of this is wrong. Datum, I'll make you a deal. You don't give legal advice and I won't deal in cars!
There was me thinking it would be nice to see a Lancia Dealer in the UK again...... biggrin

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Buy my VX and make your dream a reality!






(Terms and conditions may apply)

Adrian E

3,248 posts

175 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
philario said:
It's a diesel yes, I don't know about it being part of mot??
There was nothing showing up on the dash or anything though!
A check for the presence of a DPF became part of the MOT in February this year - that's why I queried it back on pg3 as it was one of the things mentioned was that it had been found to be removed. It is possible for a DPF to be removed and for it to pass an MOT, but only in theory if the DPF has been 'gutted' and put back. The person doing so will usually 'remap' to remove the parts of the software that manage DPF regeneration and fault code logging. No warning lights doesn't mean a DPF is there, although warning lights present might equally mean a DPF has been removed without doing the ECU remapping. It won't fail an emissions test at MOT as that measures smoke opacity and not particulate emissions.

If the DPF has been removed and an empty canister is all that's on the vehicle then it would be an offence to use the vehicle on the road since it is in breach of Regulation 61A of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, but as far as I'm aware there's never been a prosecution for the offence. If you were now the owner of the car and it had been bought from a dealer I'd be saying take it back as it's not roadworthy and the garage would have to foot the bill to reinstate the DPF, but as a private seller I'm not sure where you would stand irrespective of whether you knew if had been removed or not? I suspect if you hadn't personally had it removed and were unaware then you couldn't reasonably be considered liable. I'll leave to the lawyers to confirm or otherwise!

threadlock

3,196 posts

253 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Adrian E said:
I'll leave to the lawyers to confirm or otherwise!
They have. Several times.
Welcome to the thread.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
To sell a car that is unroadworthy is a criminal offence*, but not a breach of contract absent a contractual obigation, express or implied, as to roadworthiness.

OP, this may be significant, as if the claimant is well advised she may claim that it was an implied term (to be inferred from all the circumstances - price, general description etc) that the car was roadworthy. You should take your stance on the standard principle that you did not warrant the car to be so and cannot be liable for faults unknown to you.



BTW I have less than utterly no clue what a DPF is**, but if it is a roadworthiness thing, see above.



* This is why the solicitor slagged off a few pages ago was not completely wrong.

** Modern car thing? Ordure of Beelzebub!

Adrian E

3,248 posts

175 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
threadlock said:
They have. Several times.
Welcome to the thread.
Indeed on the original query of the OP - mine was a more generic statement about DPF removal itself. I know about DPFs, but not applicable law wink

Adrian E

3,248 posts

175 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
To sell a car that is unroadworthy is a criminal offence*, but not a breach of contract absent a contractual obigation, express or implied, as to roadworthiness.

OP, this may be significant, as if the claimant is well advised she may claim that it was an implied term (to be inferred from all the circumstances - price, general description etc) that the car was roadworthy. You should take your stance on the standard principle that you did not warrant the car to be so and cannot be liable for faults unknown to you.



BTW I have less than utterly no clue what a DPF is**, but if it is a roadworthiness thing, see above.



* This is why the solicitor slagged off a few pages ago was not completely wrong.

** Modern car thing? Ordure of Beelzebub!
BV - a Diesel Particulate Filter is required for a diesel motor vehicle to pass modern emissions tests for Type Approval - some were fitted before they were required, but basically anything much less than 10 years old will most likely have/had one. Reg61a requires the vehicle to be maintained such that it still complies with its Type Approval limits that applied when the car was built.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Modren AND diesel. Double Devil Do-do!

rigga

8,727 posts

200 months

Tuesday 21st October 2014
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
An MoT certificate simply shows that the car was roadworthy when tested. A piece of paper cannot make a car roadworthy if one day or one month later it is in fact unroadworthy.
You're right, a mot test only state's a car is roadworthy at that particular time, might well be unroadworthy a few hour's later if something breaks or falls off, though you'd hope if something was in imminent danger of doing so it might be spotted at test time, but anyway, point being as a private seller if the car has a valid mot at point of sale, there's not much else he can do to prove its fit for the road.