Being sued over a car I sold :(
Discussion
QuattroDave said:
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.
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!
Surely you wouldn't be out of pocket, well certainly not by £4k, if he returns the car though? It's just the hassle of then having to re-sell it, but if he paid you £4k, then you are just returning his payment and he is returning the car - or is he suggesting that he keeps the car AND gets the money?? Haha. Happy birthday in any case. 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
daveinhampshire said:
There is no requirement to respond to every offer or communication, once the OP has made his position clear and is unwilling to enter settlement terms it is in the claimants hands to file the claim. The civil procedure rules are clear and simple to read.
There is a difference between advice based on reading the rules and advice based on practical experience of how Courts determine disputes. Pre action correspondence (which is the subject of a Practice Direction that you may perhaps have overlooked) can influence the Court's perception of which party is behaving reasonably, and can sometimes have an impact on awards of costs, even in small claims. In addition, an opportunistic claimant can be deterred from making a claim by credibly expressed correspondence opposing the claim. For all of these reasons, the OP should send a brief response to the latest letter. I'll send him a draft.zygalski said:
I'm no legal expert, but in cases such as these where you have started to correspond with a complainant's solicitors, surely it would be better to then only correspond with the solicitors, even if it's referencing correspondence directly sent to you by the alleged aggrieved party?
I should imagine one fully legitimate point of contact in circumstances like these would be by far the best way to proceed, avoiding unnecessary complications & potential issues of who said what, when & to whom & also playing out in a far more level headed & professional way in court.
There is no magic to this. If the solicitors write to you, reply to them. If the claimant writes to you, reply to him. I should imagine one fully legitimate point of contact in circumstances like these would be by far the best way to proceed, avoiding unnecessary complications & potential issues of who said what, when & to whom & also playing out in a far more level headed & professional way in court.
I am not a legal expert, so I would speak to a solicitor.
Having said that, this sounds like a shake down.
Even if you were a curb side dealer (I am not saying you are), your bases are covered and the clainants communications can be easily picked apart by an apprentice sol.
You have little to worry about.
Having said that, this sounds like a shake down.
Even if you were a curb side dealer (I am not saying you are), your bases are covered and the clainants communications can be easily picked apart by an apprentice sol.
You have little to worry about.
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.
Dave, you have mail.
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.
Breadvan you are a true star! Well done you for assisting the OP. Dave, you have mail.
SirBlade said:
I am not a legal expert, so I would speak to a solicitor.
Having said that, this sounds like a shake down.
Even if you were a curb side dealer (I am not saying you are), your bases are covered and the clainants communications can be easily picked apart by an apprentice sol.
You have little to worry about.
Check the occupation of the poster above you who is helping the OP out of his own good.Having said that, this sounds like a shake down.
Even if you were a curb side dealer (I am not saying you are), your bases are covered and the clainants communications can be easily picked apart by an apprentice sol.
You have little to worry about.
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.
What. A. Dobber.
It does indeed look to me (might've misread his correspondence?) that the buyer is asking for £4k with no mention of returning the car
Perhaps any response letter from the OP should include a hyperbolic sob story in an attempt to "outsob" the buyer? I'm thinking of the Monty Python Yorkshiremen...!
Best of luck OP - glad you're getting assistance from people you trust and so can filter out the nonsense
It does indeed look to me (might've misread his correspondence?) that the buyer is asking for £4k with no mention of returning the car
Perhaps any response letter from the OP should include a hyperbolic sob story in an attempt to "outsob" the buyer? I'm thinking of the Monty Python Yorkshiremen...!
Best of luck OP - glad you're getting assistance from people you trust and so can filter out the nonsense
Should OP not be replying now rescinding his original offer?
I'd be wary of taking the car back now, who knows what this plank has done to it? How do we know he hasn't misfueled and the light's come on because of that? How do we know he wont be vindictive and stick a load of sharves of metal down the oil cap?
He is a plum. He is playing the disabled card now, and it's a load of front. If he is incapable of buying a car from a private seller, who is not an expert in law, then he should have bought from a dealer, with the associated warranties and expertise involved, and pay for that accordingly.
As for the supposed £1000 he has spent, well that's his look out. He never gave you an opportunity to fix the faults, not that you'd have to as a private seller. But he WOULD have too give that opportunity to a dealer or trade seller.
He just wants his cake and to eat it too.
I'd be wary of taking the car back now, who knows what this plank has done to it? How do we know he hasn't misfueled and the light's come on because of that? How do we know he wont be vindictive and stick a load of sharves of metal down the oil cap?
He is a plum. He is playing the disabled card now, and it's a load of front. If he is incapable of buying a car from a private seller, who is not an expert in law, then he should have bought from a dealer, with the associated warranties and expertise involved, and pay for that accordingly.
As for the supposed £1000 he has spent, well that's his look out. He never gave you an opportunity to fix the faults, not that you'd have to as a private seller. But he WOULD have too give that opportunity to a dealer or trade seller.
He just wants his cake and to eat it too.
Nar, comment is free. Also, if people suggest things that are bad ideas they may find it helpful to have some boring bloke like me or one of the other Judge-botherers explain why it's a bad idea. I wouldn't mind, however, if more people read the thread before commenting, but that applies to all of PH.
Fer said:
MW-M5 said:
Breadvan you are a true star! Well done you for assisting the OP.
Too true. Some people will probably think, "so what, it's only a letter he's writing", but when someone is providing services for free, when those services are how they make a living, it's no different to a builder popping round and building a wall FOC for a stranger.
Will be very interested to see how this ends. Sounds like everyone would enjoy seeing the utter trumpet of a buyer knocked down a few pegs.
catman said:
simoid said:
What. A. Dobber.
It does indeed look to me (might've misread his correspondence?) that the buyer is asking for £4k with no mention of returning the car
His letter makes it clear that he wants to return the car for a refund.It does indeed look to me (might've misread his correspondence?) that the buyer is asking for £4k with no mention of returning the car
Tim
The buyer has purported to rescind the contract, but he can't do that. His case on misrepresentation is weak but, in any event, he drove the car around for almost a month before seeking rescission, and so cannot return the car in exactly the same state as it was when he bought it. The fact that he says that the car was parked at an airport for part of that time while he was on his holibobs is neither here nor there.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff