Car Dealer Gave False Information - Sued Innocent Person

[calibrax]

NobleGuy said:

Foliage said:

Your being fobbed off because your thick. hth

Ha ha! Your thick.
The irony

Not only that, he did the same error twice in the same sentence. Or maybe the comment was intentionally ironic...?

[NobleGuy]

zedstar said:

So basically X and Y sold you a dodgy car and then pretendended to work for A when infact X and Y are trading as a partnership. Good news for you that as it means that they are liable personally.

Make a new MCOL against X and Y, take your evidence from case against Mr A to prove that he is nobody and then use 192.com or facebook to find the addresses of the 2 individuals.

If you don't actually know their names at all then do a bit of digging round facebook/192.com, or ask around here - i'm frequently amazed the amount of information the PH detectives can find out.

We know the name of one of them. He's listed as a builder on some random website with the mobile that he uses. We found him on Facebook and although there's little or no information of any use, we did get a big photo of him and it's deifnitely him.

We have the partner's reg number on a random photo the GF took of our car when we originally went to see it (assuming it's registered to him). Do you think DVLA would be willing to give out information in this case...?

[edc]

I would do anything I could above board to validate the identity details you have. Get somebody to go in and enquire about a car, get a business card, look at any post that is lying on the floor, desk etc, ask who the bankers draft should be written to if purchasing a car, check their online and Autotrader adverts etc etc

[anonymous-user]

NobleGuy said:

Durzel said:

BlackLabel said:

Did you buy the car from an individual or a trader/dealer?

If it was the latter then why didn't you sue them? And if it was the former then I can't see how the previous trader is still responsible for the car.

This.

Surely any subsequent claims are the business of the parties in the chain. What contract have you got with the company you didn't buy the car from?

Have you both had your brains removed...?
Maybe it's my explanantion that's tough to follow.

This is so simple:
Mr A used to trade at the premises (as sole trader 1).
He moved out.
Mr X & Mr Y moved in and started trading (as sole trader 2).
We bought the car from Mr X & Mr Y.
Car had problem.
We phoned Mr X & Mr Y to complain.
Mr X & Mr Y told us that the owner of the company was Mr A.
We sued Mr A, who was never involved.

We never believed we had a contract with anyone other than Mr X & Mr Y.
Mr X & Mr Y lied to us about who they were and where to direct our complaint.

Do you find that insulting people responding to a request for free advice gets you further on?

As for brain removal, you contracted with X and Y but sued A. Have a think about that for a minute.

[Boosted LS1]

NobleGuy said:

We know the name of one of them.

Then sue him as an individual, trading as 'so and so garage'.

[zedstar]

NobleGuy said:

We know the name of one of them. He's listed as a builder on some random website with the mobile that he uses. We found him on Facebook and although there's little or no information of any use, we did get a big photo of him and it's deifnitely him.

We have the partner's reg number on a random photo the GF took of our car when we originally went to see it (assuming it's registered to him). Do you think DVLA would be willing to give out information in this case...?

I doubt it - they only give the info out if you're registered for it.

Can you not start the claim on one of their names that you know and then add the other guy in later? If the guy writes a defence and blames the other person than you'll have his name and you can add him on.

[Bluebarge]

NobleGuy said:

Bluebarge said:

NobleGuy said:

It quite clearly says "sole trader" on my post.

It also quite clearly says "the owner of the company" when it appears there is no effing company, so stop referring to "company" when you mean "business name".

This is only complicated because you are making it so.

Some people appear to be able to understand...

But not you, it would seem

[Hol]

Are they VAT registered on the receipt?

It would be very hard not to reach the turnover limit unless they only sell one £1000 car a week.



Edited:

Actually, do used car traders pay VAT?

Edited by Hol on Friday 3rd October 08:48

[Boosted LS1]

zedstar said:

I doubt it - they only give the info out if you're registered for it.

In the past you would write to the dvla requesting registered keeper details but you had to assure them that the information would only be used for civil proceedings.

[Vaud]

Hol said:

Are they VAT registered on the receipt?

It would be very hard not to reach the turnover limit unless they only sell one £1000 car a week.



Edited:

Actually, do used car traders pay VAT?

Edited by Hol on Friday 3rd October 08:48

They pay VAT on the margin, not the full sale price as (generally) the VAT has already been paid on the original purchase.

[roddyp]

Hol said:

Actually, do used car traders pay VAT?

It's complicated.

AFAIK they pat VAT on the margin - the difference between the buying and selling price. So if they buy a car for £5K and sell it for £6K, they have to account for a proportion (1/6th) of that £1K as VAT.

But it depends if the car has always been owned by a VAT-registered company: Then I think, VAT is accounted for in the usual way : Seller adds 20%VAT, which buyer (if they're VAT registered) can reclaim.