Being sued over a car I sold :(

Being sued over a car I sold :(

Author
Discussion

williamp

19,276 posts

274 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Have you given him him an answerer yet? His spelling is worse then mine....

As for advice, get proper legal help

Sushifiend

5,297 posts

138 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Tell him there's a chap on the internet who likes to munch on Japanese food and will offer him £1k to take it off his hands.

Edited by Sushifiend on Sunday 22 November 00:41

btcc123

1,243 posts

148 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
williamp said:
Have you given him him an answerer yet? His spelling is worse then mine....

As for advice, get proper legal help
Why not read the whole thread as you will see the OP has had advice from Breadvan72 who is a Barrister.

IanA2

2,763 posts

163 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Priceless, his unspecified disability apparently prevents him from unfolding the MoT.




ClaphamGT3

11,324 posts

244 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Dear mythering old tool,

I have received your letter dated xx November 2015.

Having taken legal advice I am satisfied that your case does not have merit and I now consider the matter closed. Any further correspondence from you will be referred to my solicitors.

Yours sincerely

Quattro Dave

Brave Fart

5,763 posts

112 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
btcc123 said:
the buyer sent you his letter because his solicitors told him that we will not win
If you give him the £4,000 back that may be seen as you admitting misrepresenting the car and shown weakness so sure as eggs are eggs you will be getting a letter from probably his solicitors asking for an extra £1,000 he spent on the car.
Agreed. Look, the bloke is a total fruit loop and you have only two sensible options here:
1)Ignore him, reply to any solicitor's letter, perhaps prepare for a court hearing (nah, he'll give up)
2)Find a friend who needs a £4k BMW 530D and put them in touch with Mr Loony (you risk losing a friend though!)

Option 1 would be my choice.
Mike.

slk 32

1,491 posts

194 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
What a grade A tool

First he uses the nuclear option of a solicitors letter and once he realises the bluff hasn't worked then seeks to play the disabled card.

I wouldn't even feel the need to dignify that with a response unless his solicitor gets involved again (highly unlikely)

davepoth

29,395 posts

200 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
If you reply, reply to his solicitor rather than to him. Chances are they'll charge him a fee for forwarding the letter on.

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,471 posts

129 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
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!!

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....

jeff666

2,323 posts

192 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Maybe you could just send his letter back to him with a short note saying all further communication on this matter to go thru his solicitor.

This would cost him more money and hopefully with advice from his solicitor he will finally let it go.

Just my opinion , hope it gets resolved for you.

TbirdX

115 posts

114 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Judge Rinder all day long :-)

spikey78

701 posts

182 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
So it was parked at Gatwick for 2 weeks. I wonder if the parking company used it for taxi work whilst it was supposed to be in their 'secure' car park! Got any mileage records?

DuraAce

4,240 posts

161 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
Ignore it (unless you get official solicitor /court correspondence of course)

You're adding fuel to his fire by replying. He thinks you are soft and will give in to his demands. Don't you bloody dare! Don't offer a single penny.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

231 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
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!!

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....
In my opinion, almost without exception all correspondence should be replied to even if it is a single sentence to state that the letter has been received and your position remains unchanged.

Whilst you don't reply, it simply elongates the time the other party thinks you are actually considering the position.

The other response I would personally consider in this situation would be a two sentence without prejudice response, the first being that his offer is rejected, the second the advice that if he has genuinely been advised that county court action would result in a positive outcome for him, that he gets a second opinion before spending any more money.

That demonstrates that you have been well advised of the position and are confident enough to make that statement. Thus, it demonstrates to him that the ruse he planned of a 'nasty solicitor's letter' has been called out as the bluff it is, along with the fact that you are not frightened of his threats.

Nezquick

1,462 posts

127 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
paintman said:
I wonder if he's been told by his solicitors that he hasn't a hope & is now having a go himself?
That's exactly what's happened in my view.

Just write back to him saying you're sorry to hear about his turn of ill health, the offer you made has already been withdrawn but you consider the matter closed. End of!

Good luck.

0a

23,903 posts

195 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
He's a chancer who has clearly been told to get lost by his own lawyer.

Write back, message received, this matter is closed - see my previous letter.

chr15b

3,467 posts

191 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
IanA2 said:
Priceless, his unspecified disability apparently prevents him from unfolding the MoT.

I read this as admission of a lack of simple due diligidence on his part.

johnwilliams77

8,308 posts

104 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
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.
Answerer rofl

Vixpy1

42,625 posts

265 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
TbirdX said:
Judge Rinder all day long :-)
If ever there was a name that needed a G

bad company

18,704 posts

267 months

Saturday 21st November 2015
quotequote all
btcc123 said:
As the letter that you received today was from the buyer and not his solicitor I personally would not reply to it.If you give him the £4,000 back that may be seen as you admitting misrepresenting the car and shown weakness so sure as eggs are eggs you will be getting a letter from probably his solicitors asking for an extra £1,000 he spent on the car.
Good advice. Do not respond.