Being sued over a car I sold :(

Being sued over a car I sold :(

Author
Discussion

Barkychoc

7,848 posts

203 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
paintman said:
I wonder if there's any mileage in sending a copy of his letter to his solicitors with a note that your position is as outlined in your barrister's letter & stating that you consider their client's letter to be harassment & you would be obliged if they would advise him about that.


Edited by paintman on Saturday 21st November 19:32
I have dropped in and out of this thread - but if he does have legal representation in tow - even if it's a relation or whatever - couldn't you just send a reply to every letter you receive from whatever source to his so called solicitor. Even if they are family if they are real presumably they are duty bound to reply, they will possibly soon get cheesed off with it, and if they are a 'proper' solicitor it will presumably cost him dosh everytime the solicitor relays on the correspondence. Two can play at being a pedantic arse.

btcc123

1,243 posts

146 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
As always seams to happen on PistonHeads the experts,in this case Breadvan72 and JustinP1 give sound correct advice and most of the other posters think they know it all but in reality know Fcensoredk all.

JustinP1

13,330 posts

229 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
btcc123 said:
As always seams to happen on PistonHeads the experts,in this case Breadvan72 and JustinP1 give sound correct advice and most of the other posters think they know it all but in reality know Fcensoredk all.
For what it's worth, BV's a barrister. I'm not a lawyer. I've studied a niche of law to a decent standard, and kept that knowledge up to date as it is part of my job to use that niche of law now. So, whilst I have some knowledge and whilst I'm happy to offer my experience in handling disputes or considering the options available, for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not a lawyer.


Tony 1234

3,465 posts

226 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
Fer said:
MW-M5 said:
Breadvan you are a true star! Well done you for assisting the OP.
Too true.
+1 smile

Swanny87

1,265 posts

118 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
rofl Some people make me laugh. If you want a trouble free car, Go. And. Buy. A. New. fking. Car. Even if the OP didn't mention anything it's up to him to make sure the car is up to scratch. OP, tell him and his div solicitors to do one.

johnwilliams77

8,308 posts

102 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
Swanny87 said:
rofl Some people make me laugh. If you want a trouble free car, Go. And. Buy. A. New. fking. Car. Even if the OP didn't mention anything it's up to him to make sure the car is up to scratch. OP, tell him and his div solicitors to do one.
Really? I know lots of people who have had new audits and bmws with lots of issues. New does not equal trouble free unfortunately!

Burwood

18,709 posts

245 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
johnwilliams77 said:
Swanny87 said:
rofl Some people make me laugh. If you want a trouble free car, Go. And. Buy. A. New. fking. Car. Even if the OP didn't mention anything it's up to him to make sure the car is up to scratch. OP, tell him and his div solicitors to do one.
Really? I know lots of people who have had new audits and bmws with lots of issues. New does not equal trouble free unfortunately!
sure, but you have a warranty and it will be fixed (in nearly all situations)

Gallen

2,162 posts

254 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
what a mission... Glad you're getting some good advice - hats off to BV72.

Watching the thread with interest.

G.


Brave Fart

5,680 posts

110 months

Monday 23rd November 2015
quotequote all
johnwilliams77 said:
Really? I know lots of people who have had new audits and bmws with lots of issues. New does not equal trouble free unfortunately!
Agreed, the standard of auditing these days does the profession no credit at all..........sorry couldn't resist! Auto correct; bah!

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Well, letters gone off so just waiting to see if I get served or whether he finally realises there's little hope of a positive outcome for him and he stops contacting me and lets it go. Logic suggests it should be the latter, but gut feeling is it'll be the former :S

pinchmeimdreamin

9,837 posts

217 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
Well, letters gone off so just waiting to see if I get served or whether he finally realises there's little hope of a positive outcome for him and he stops contacting me and lets it go. Logic suggests it should be the latter, but gut feeling is it'll be the former :S
Best start saving up for BV to represent you laugh

Usget

5,426 posts

210 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
Well, letters gone off so just waiting to see if I get served or whether he finally realises there's little hope of a positive outcome for him and he stops contacting me and lets it go. Logic suggests it should be the latter, but gut feeling is it'll be the former :S
Never was the phrase "more in hope than in expectation" more apt.

spikeyhead

17,223 posts

196 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
pinchmeimdreamin said:
QuattroDave said:
Well, letters gone off so just waiting to see if I get served or whether he finally realises there's little hope of a positive outcome for him and he stops contacting me and lets it go. Logic suggests it should be the latter, but gut feeling is it'll be the former :S
Best start saving up for BV to represent you laugh
I suspect it would be cheaper to refund the buyer than to pay BV for a day to sit around waiting for the case to start.

xjay1337

15,966 posts

117 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
Well, letters gone off so just waiting to see if I get served or whether he finally realises there's little hope of a positive outcome for him and he stops contacting me and lets it go. Logic suggests it should be the latter, but gut feeling is it'll be the former :S
Can you possibly post up your response?



B.O.L

paulrockliffe

15,639 posts

226 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Quick question re responding to letters; the latest letter was sent without prejudice. I was under the impression that this meant that it couldn't go before the court. If that's the case (?) how would a reply or a non-reply demonstrate reasonableness as the court wouldn't know the correspondence existed?

Ta.

Cudd Wudd

1,084 posts

124 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
The letters / actions of the parties / refusal to communicate etc. can be highlighted to the judge once the decision in the case has been made. Often headed "without prejudice save as to costs ".

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
This sort of wildcard claimant might seek to rely on the letter in any event. There's also the more general discussion about replying to open letters.

PorkInsider

5,877 posts

140 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Would OP's initial offer to refund the purchase price and take the car back be considered 'without prejudice' automatically as it pertained to trying to negotiate settlement of the matter?

Just wondering as someone mentioned earlier in the thread that they thought the offer and subsequent withdrawal might backfire on OP.

Only asking as I know nothing useful about legal matters but do find them interesting.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I'm no lawyer, so my advice is :-

1. Listen to BV, and no one else

2. Stay squeaky clean regarding procedure(s), even if it is annoying.

3. Just in case it goes further, spend some time now disecting his case. Lots of errors in it have been highlighted in this forum

Good luck

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
As some have asked for it please see below pretty much the response that was sent today.


"
I have received you letter of 20th November. I do not accept your account of our discussion as accurate and I maintain the position that I set out in my letter to your solicitors. I add that I had no previous knowledge that you were disabled, and in any event your disability makes no difference to the legal obligations of the parties to a private sale of a car. I am unable to take seriously your suggestion (if made) that you could not unfold the MoT certificate, and am confident in my recall that I pointed out to you the MoT advisory as to an oil leak.

I have received legal advice that your claim has no merit. I do not see any point in further correspondence. If you intend to make a claim, then please arrange for the claim form to be served on me at this address. I suggest, however, that you take legal advice and reconsider your position. My adviser takes the view that a claim by you would likely be regarded by the court as sufficiently unreasonable to justify an order for costs against you. I hope that this can be an end to the matter."