Being sued over a car I sold :(
Discussion
SirBlade said:
You sold a 530D, bought an RS6, which you then sold 2 months later?
Do you have a problem with that? Do I have to graduate in small increments until I reach a car such as an RS6? Am I not worthy in your eyes of such a car?I'll tell you exactly why I went from one to the other then.
Three family members have developed cancer in the last year, two of them have died, both within 2 months of being diagnosed, all of them are under 52. It's been an f'ing horrible year and my wife and I decided that you never know when your times up so I got a big loan out and bought the car I thought I always wanted. As it turned out it wasn't quite the car I had dreamed of and I didn't feel it was worth the loan I had to take to get it so I sold it on.
As 'luck' would have it just as I decided to sell the RS6 so the letter arrived insisting I bought the 530d back. As I genuinely enjoyed the 530d I thought what the hell, I'll make him an offer back but as he's claiming issues that genuinely weren't present when I sold it I offered a lower amount back and now here I am being sued for trying to be helpful.
Red Devil said:
Loads? Maybe I'm using the wrong search criteria. 
I think a bit of balance might be in order here. He won the slander case. Would you fancy being accused, at an open public meeting, by the Chairman of the Parish Council of a campaign of sexual harassment against the Council's Clerk?
The councillor subsequently accepted that such allegations were untrue and apologised. He gave an undertaking not to repeat the allegations and paid substantial damages and costs. The claimant made a statement through Counsel in open court (QBD) and the case never went to trial,
The upshot was that the entire Parish Council resigned and the complainant (who was the Chairman of the Parish Hall Management Committee at the time) became one of the elected replacements. This was all happened several years ago and he is no longer on the PC.
I can't find any Portsmouth parking fine story. He was involved in a verbal altercation with the Chairman of East Hampshire District Council over the use of a disabled bay. That was even longer ago and he had/(has) a Blue Badge.
As for your comment about the 'sort' of person who takes on the role of a Parish Councillor, I find that generic labelling somewhat insulting. My father was one for 10 years after he retired from world of commerce.
Back to the original topic of the thread, on the basis of what has been posted so far, I reckon you have little to be concerned about. However I do think you may face some (or even a lot) of inconvenience in the meantime. It will be interesting to see how this pans out and whether your barrister friend can help to trump his solicitor (the same firm that acted for him and instructed Counsel in the slander case) before it gets any further.
Granted 'loads' was perhaps the wrong term to use, however given what was found on the web search coupled with the client reference of 42 on the correspondence that suggests that this is the 42nd letter to be issued by those solicitors on his behalf and I would be surprised if those two cases we've both found generated 41 letters of correspondence. Regardless I don't know ANYONE personally who has taken anyone to court so to find that this guy has at least threatened it twice before mine makes him exceptional in my book.I think a bit of balance might be in order here. He won the slander case. Would you fancy being accused, at an open public meeting, by the Chairman of the Parish Council of a campaign of sexual harassment against the Council's Clerk?
The councillor subsequently accepted that such allegations were untrue and apologised. He gave an undertaking not to repeat the allegations and paid substantial damages and costs. The claimant made a statement through Counsel in open court (QBD) and the case never went to trial,
The upshot was that the entire Parish Council resigned and the complainant (who was the Chairman of the Parish Hall Management Committee at the time) became one of the elected replacements. This was all happened several years ago and he is no longer on the PC.
I can't find any Portsmouth parking fine story. He was involved in a verbal altercation with the Chairman of East Hampshire District Council over the use of a disabled bay. That was even longer ago and he had/(has) a Blue Badge.
As for your comment about the 'sort' of person who takes on the role of a Parish Councillor, I find that generic labelling somewhat insulting. My father was one for 10 years after he retired from world of commerce.
Back to the original topic of the thread, on the basis of what has been posted so far, I reckon you have little to be concerned about. However I do think you may face some (or even a lot) of inconvenience in the meantime. It will be interesting to see how this pans out and whether your barrister friend can help to trump his solicitor (the same firm that acted for him and instructed Counsel in the slander case) before it gets any further.
I can only go on my experience of parish Councillors which involves this guy and two that live in my road who are continually getting in silly arguments with neighbours over trivial matters. No offence was meant to yourself or your father so apologies.
Back to the case, thanks for your support and I too hope that my cousin can pull together enough of a response to kick this to the curb. But I fear the same as you insomuch that I reckon this'll go on for some time.
JustinP1 said:
A storm in a teacup, perhaps. Either way, it does demonstrate that the claimant is willing to spend good money on legal fees fighting his corner.
This.That's what I'm so concerned about. Especially as he won the last two cases that I can find he might well be thinking that he's going to win this one too. I do hope that the letter being written will show him that he's unlikely to win this one as I've genuinely done nothing wrong.
In the original letter from himself he states the following:
That I had explained the tailgate issue to him stating that it only required a pin to be replaced and that if he knew it was more he would have rejected the car.
That he acknowledges that the MOT certificate states slight oil leak but denys seeing it before buying (which is a lie as he reviewed the documentation before he bought the car and brought up the oil consumption)
That he has now covered several hundred miles upon which faults have developed with the emissions & gearbox. He also implies that the car has been left at an airport carpark unused for a period of time.
He also states that the test drive was short and he's "prepared" to take the view that the gearbox issue would be apparant when up to operating temperature!!
Edited by QuattroDave on Monday 16th November 10:11
Car sold on morning of 31st August. Drove from my house to his approximately 15 miles away which would have brought the car up to temperature and shown these 'problems' the same day if they were there??
His letter was dated 25th September so all in all 26 days had elapsed and several hundred miles. His letter states that he was on holiday for a while until 24th but surely that's not really relevant?
His letter was dated 25th September so all in all 26 days had elapsed and several hundred miles. His letter states that he was on holiday for a while until 24th but surely that's not really relevant?
Just spoke with a solicitor from my companys firm, a specialist in the area, who has read all the correspondence and in his opinion doesnt' feel that he has much (if anything) to go on.
He's given me some pointers as to what to lay out in my response and has stated to me that he wouldn't get involved professionally as morally he would have a problem being instructed on a case like this that didn't warrant legal represenation.... some faith in solicitors restored
He believes that the solicitors (which he'd never heard of) would have just used a pro forma to bang off without really looking at the evidence or case and that a well worded response would invoke the solictors to explain to the claimant that persuing the case would have a small chance of success but would end up costing him a significant amount of money should he insist on legal representation througout.
So it seems like I've got a stoking letter to be written then batten down the hatches and prepare for a day in court which the solicitor explained wouldn't be until mid next year at the earliest given the backlog and the (non) severity of the case. All the while he will continue to own the car.
I'm still gobsmacked that this has happened selling an 11 year old car :S
He's given me some pointers as to what to lay out in my response and has stated to me that he wouldn't get involved professionally as morally he would have a problem being instructed on a case like this that didn't warrant legal represenation.... some faith in solicitors restored
He believes that the solicitors (which he'd never heard of) would have just used a pro forma to bang off without really looking at the evidence or case and that a well worded response would invoke the solictors to explain to the claimant that persuing the case would have a small chance of success but would end up costing him a significant amount of money should he insist on legal representation througout.
So it seems like I've got a stoking letter to be written then batten down the hatches and prepare for a day in court which the solicitor explained wouldn't be until mid next year at the earliest given the backlog and the (non) severity of the case. All the while he will continue to own the car.
I'm still gobsmacked that this has happened selling an 11 year old car :S
JustinP1 said:
Quite.
Although Vaud it right, that that step is usually first, it is difficult to make middle ground where there is a meritless claim for five grand and someone misguided as a claimant.
Is your barrister cousin (IIRC) still going to write you a response?
Personally, playing out the options, this is best put to bed with a robust response in the first instance, as when he's chucked another £120 or whatever on court fees, and another few hundred quid on his solicitors filing the claim, he would have already got himself into an entrenched position where he would be losing money retracting from. In short, if he gets that far, he may as well chance his arm on the hearing.
Yes hopefully I'll get a response in the next day or so. Agree completely with your sentiment that if he throws that much money into the pot then he's likely to go all the way hence wanting to put this to bed as early as possible Although Vaud it right, that that step is usually first, it is difficult to make middle ground where there is a meritless claim for five grand and someone misguided as a claimant.
Is your barrister cousin (IIRC) still going to write you a response?
Personally, playing out the options, this is best put to bed with a robust response in the first instance, as when he's chucked another £120 or whatever on court fees, and another few hundred quid on his solicitors filing the claim, he would have already got himself into an entrenched position where he would be losing money retracting from. In short, if he gets that far, he may as well chance his arm on the hearing.
btcc123 said:
These are my thoughts about the thread,it seamed to me that the OP was telling the truth and the buyer has virtually no chance of winning the case in court.
The OP said he has a barrister cousin who will draft a response over the weekend so it seamed a positive step to stop the case in its tracks.Yet the OP says he spoke to his companies solicitor and says the has some pointers to write a reply,why is he doing that as he said his Barrister cousin was replying.Sounds like the bit about his cousin is not true and was a lie and if so what else in his story is not true and is the buyer justified in his actions.
I do not know what to make of it but think there are things that we may not know about.
The letter from the solicitors looks suspect as the last page only has the solicitors signature but on the previous page has plenty of room for the signature to be added at the bottom of the page if a parograph are moved up so something is not quite right.
Oh FFS you really got that from what I said? My cousin is real, she is a barrister, she has promised me she will draft a response. Before I got through to my cousin on Thursday however I sent an email to the solicitor I meet ever Tuesday for work for advice as I'm sure you can imagine I was quite distressed at receiving the letter so was chasing down every person I knew with a legal background. My work solicitor was on holiday until this morning. When she read it she called me with some advice.The OP said he has a barrister cousin who will draft a response over the weekend so it seamed a positive step to stop the case in its tracks.Yet the OP says he spoke to his companies solicitor and says the has some pointers to write a reply,why is he doing that as he said his Barrister cousin was replying.Sounds like the bit about his cousin is not true and was a lie and if so what else in his story is not true and is the buyer justified in his actions.
I do not know what to make of it but think there are things that we may not know about.
The letter from the solicitors looks suspect as the last page only has the solicitors signature but on the previous page has plenty of room for the signature to be added at the bottom of the page if a parograph are moved up so something is not quite right.
Edited by btcc123 on Monday 16th November 19:00
My cousin hasn't as yet sorted the response for me so seeing as I spoke with a solicitor today I thought I'd have a go at it myself whilst I'm waiting just in case my cousin doesn't come through. Obviously it's going to be better coming from a legal boffin but it'll make me feel comfortable knowing I'm doing something myself about it, even if it's then not used.
You don't happen to work for SB solicitors do you...
Breadvan72 said:
That raises an issue of professional conduct for the solicitors. A lawyer is not supposed to allege fraud without having cogent reasons for doing so. Attacking the solicitors now is not a good idea, but if and when you see the claim off, the SRA might be interested in a firm that sends out scattergun allegations of this kind without a proper foundation for them.
Chivvy your cousin along, if you can. You should respond asap. If she is too busy, let me know and I will draft you a short, polite but firm letter.
Thanks for the kind offer sir, I've sent you a pm.Chivvy your cousin along, if you can. You should respond asap. If she is too busy, let me know and I will draft you a short, polite but firm letter.
btcc123 said:
What I got from what you said was that you mentioned your Barrister Cousin a few days ago but only mentioned that you spoke to your company solicitor today.You have ONLY NOW mentioned that you E-mailed him prior to that.I do not have a crystal ball but see that I was wrong so apologise.
I am surprised that when you spoke to your company solicitor,who is a specialist in this ares,who had read all the correspondence does not feel there was much,if anything to go on.Where as on here there are posts from very qualified people that can pick holes in the buyers tactics left,right and centre.
I do hope everything goes well for you and my personal opinion is that you have nothing to worry about.The best piece of advice anyone will give you on this thread is to contact Breadvan72 and take him up on his offer.
Apology accepted. Not mentioned before as I knew I wouldn't get a response from work solicitor until today.I am surprised that when you spoke to your company solicitor,who is a specialist in this ares,who had read all the correspondence does not feel there was much,if anything to go on.Where as on here there are posts from very qualified people that can pick holes in the buyers tactics left,right and centre.
I do hope everything goes well for you and my personal opinion is that you have nothing to worry about.The best piece of advice anyone will give you on this thread is to contact Breadvan72 and take him up on his offer.
To clarify when I said the solicitor I spoke to today didn't feel there was much to go on I meant the buyer doesn't have much if any of a case against me.
I have emailed breadvan on here to accept his offer as I'd like something back sooner rather than later.
Once again thanks to all for your support (save for the swine who didn't like me going from a 530 to an rs6!!)
hashtag said:
Any news?
Yes I have news today.Firstly many many thanks to breadvan for his assistance.
Today I got a saturday delivery recorded for letter direct from the individual who bought my car at a cost of £11 for postage!!
Attached is said letter. Note it's not come from his solicitors!
Also note that he's now mentioning his disability as part of the argument something that he didn't mention at the time of buying, I only found out from looking at his legal history!
Also one of his lies in this correspondence I can actually prove as we never signed for the letter he sent on that date (unless the postie did it on our 'behalf'!) as the letter was just lying on our doormat when we got home!
dxg said:
I suspect your offer to buy the car back will be your undoing. But I'm no lawyer...
My undoing in what way?I suspect my offer to buy the car back has started all this because I was seen as a pushover or pliable as others have stated but I sincerely hope that my trying to be amicable at a time when I needed a replacement car doesn't end up coming to bite me.
N Dentressangle said:
I know you're probably in the right, but I think I'd just give the guy his £4k back and get on with your life. Not read the whole thread recently, so that's assuming you haven't already blown the lot on C&H
Life's too short for unnecessary stress, IMO.
At one point I would have bought the car back but the fact that he's implied fraud and got solicitors involved has put paid to any question of me giving him a penny. I did nothing wrong, the car was fine when I sold it so why should I be £4k out of pocket because some ejit seemingly enjoys taking people to court.Life's too short for unnecessary stress, IMO.
To reiterate I am a private seller. I work f'ing hard for my money so why should I just fold because he's being an arse.
Oh and as for stress well he's already caused that, happy birthday me!
Edited by QuattroDave on Saturday 21st November 10:38
Another point he made was "no expertise in motorcars" however a web search reveals he "enjoyed a career as a motor racer in the FIA Sport Prototype Championship."
To his earlier points about issues being apparent when the car is up to temperature. He drove 23 miles home on the day of purchase - no issues identified. He drove TO gatwick, no issues identified. He left it for two weeks in a car park and when returning home it came up with a warning!!
To his earlier points about issues being apparent when the car is up to temperature. He drove 23 miles home on the day of purchase - no issues identified. He drove TO gatwick, no issues identified. He left it for two weeks in a car park and when returning home it came up with a warning!!
JustinP1 said:
IMHO, a polite, but firm 'no' is called for, reiterating what I am sure was the content of BV's letter.
ETA: Would the car sat around for two weeks contribute to a temporary emissions warning? I presume that a minute of spirited driving would dust off the cobwebs?
That was exactly the gist of what I mentioned in the very first letter to him!!ETA: Would the car sat around for two weeks contribute to a temporary emissions warning? I presume that a minute of spirited driving would dust off the cobwebs?
I'm stuck between replying to reiterate the same points to his solicitor so he's charged that fee for correspondence or just ignore it altogether.
It does have a whiff of harassment about it now....
DanL said:
ou're certain it's the same chap? If so, and you can prove it, he may end up looking rather foolish should this go to court...
I wouldn't ignore it - respond, but refer to your previous letter. You want to appear reasonable if it goes to court.
Yup same guy. Name address and current occupation all agree I wouldn't ignore it - respond, but refer to your previous letter. You want to appear reasonable if it goes to court.
Ken Figenus said:
Superb!
Meantime its an interesting dilemma whether to respond or not and especially within 'his terms'.
Your goal should be to make this nonsense go away - it seems utterly without merit as any of us that have bought and sold used cars would know. In fact I did my own appraisal of my latest car even though it had passed the full main dealer 140 point check (the stuff they missed and the stuff they don't really do as its may not be in their best interests...). D i l i g e n c e...
Personally I would respond - winding him up with ignorance may not be in your best interest and may get his back up further (it would mine). Just keep it really short (especially as what he has written is quite ignorant in places and is against his interest) and say you will not respond further. You could call him if you have the patience and record the call - generally better to talk as less keyboard warrioring, but will take a cool head! Whatever you do wish him well with his health and be the bigger man.
This is what I'm intending on being as I (hope I) have been throughout. He's got to me but he won't get to my manners!Meantime its an interesting dilemma whether to respond or not and especially within 'his terms'.
Your goal should be to make this nonsense go away - it seems utterly without merit as any of us that have bought and sold used cars would know. In fact I did my own appraisal of my latest car even though it had passed the full main dealer 140 point check (the stuff they missed and the stuff they don't really do as its may not be in their best interests...). D i l i g e n c e...
Personally I would respond - winding him up with ignorance may not be in your best interest and may get his back up further (it would mine). Just keep it really short (especially as what he has written is quite ignorant in places and is against his interest) and say you will not respond further. You could call him if you have the patience and record the call - generally better to talk as less keyboard warrioring, but will take a cool head! Whatever you do wish him well with his health and be the bigger man.
Breadvan72 said:
The main point of a response would be to show the Court, if the buyer sues, that the OP has acted reasonably in seeking to avoid litigation. This could have a bearing on the award of costs, if the claim is dismissed and is regarded by the court as having been made unreasonably. Sensible pre claim correspondence from the OP may help in this regard.
Dave, you have mail.
Thank you sir you are a true gent.Dave, you have mail.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff