Being sued over a car I sold :(

Being sued over a car I sold :(

Author
Discussion

Jasandjules

69,825 posts

228 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Exactly what and how are they claiming misrepresentation?

What breach of contract are they claiming? If you say "Sale of Goods" it will be amusing.

BertBert

18,954 posts

210 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Yes I certainly didn't mean try to refute the details of the items, but refute the basis of the claims (misrep and breach of contract). Ie get stuffed and see you in Court.

heebeegeetee said:
BertBert said:
I'm not sure what I'd actually do if that happened to me. But what I think I'd do is write back a simple letter refuting it and only employ solicitors if actual court action appeared.

Bert
I'd be careful about refuting, or about what is refuted. Other than the boot problem which you say you explained, you have no knowledge of any other issue (thus cannot refute or otherwise).

I wouldn't offer a single thing. I do hope your earlier offer doesn't amount to some sort of admission, but otherwise I can't see this going anywhere.

It may be the old boy has a relly who's a solicitor or somesuch and has had this letter produced for nowt.

johnfm

13,668 posts

249 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
This is poor advice.

First, there was undoubtedly a contract here. A contract for the sale of a car does not have to be made in writing. Secondly, the OP should not ignore the letter, but should send a polite but firm response, denying liability. Even when the claim is dodgy, as it probably is here, it may weaken a party's position if he does not respond to pre claim correspondence.




Edited by Breadvan72 on Thursday 12th November 16:05
Bredders, I already took the trouble to draft Dave a Pre-action protocol compliant response...

Adamski69

175 posts

109 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
spats said:
Just when you think you've seen the worst these two bit "lawyers" will try and get involved with, they go throw this kind of BS into the ring.

What the actual flip are these spunktrumpets drinking these days to think this is anything but a waste of everyone's time?
'SPUNKTRUMPETS' !!!!!! roflroflrofl

Totally brilliant!! You sir are a wordsmith of the highest order!! rofl I am actually crying I am laughing so hard!!

polite letter from your barrister friend stating the obvious, retract the offer and get on with your life dear fellow.

longblackcoat

5,047 posts

182 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Just one piece of advice – don’t ignore it. I concur with the view here that your purchaser is either an idiot or a chancer, and that he’s got zero chance of winning in law.

The reality, however, is that when a legal letter lands on your doormat it’s always a worry. Well, for people like me, the sort who don’t have much to do with the law on a personal basis. You know, the kind of guy who can remember why they were summonsed………

Anyway, all I’d say is don’t bury your head in the sand and ignore it. The old guy’s gone this far in sending a letter, so he might very well carry on throwing good after bad. So I’d make very clear notes of what you said/didn’t say to him, and never deviate from this in any response you might give. Answer the solicitor’s letter promptly, but don’t go into any unnecessary detail. A lawyer may say differently, but absent their advice I’d say nothing about “the law says you’ve got no leg to stand on”. I’d simply answer their questions saying that you told him about 1 & 2, and you have no knowledge of 3 & 4. Be clear that you’ve declared all known faults, and that as far as you’re aware you’ve got no liability.

As for your offer to buy back at £3500, I’d be very clear that it was an offer at the time and is no longer open

Who Me

89 posts

121 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
OP, A few other have touched on the "weekend trader" thing without saying it direct.

Reading your post you sold the BMW on 30th August, bought and replaced it with an RS6, which by the time the original buyer had complained (25th Sept), you had just then sold, 26 days later, and offered to buy the original back.

How long had you owned the BMW ?.
How many cars do you buy and move on a year ?.

Im sure its just a pain in the ass buyer, but be careful if you "dont keep cars very long"



QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Thanks all. I'm on phone so short replies til in home. I owned the BMW for eight months as my daily. Only cars sold this year are the BMW, ur quattro I owned for six years the RS6 I just didn't feel affinity with (thread on here) and the alfa I bought of my dad to replace my wifes older alfa but she didn't like it. Before that it was three years since I last sold a car.

Absolutely not a trader of any sort and after this I'm never likely to be either!

clarkey

1,365 posts

283 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
What is the name of the lawyers? Have you checked if they really exist??

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
clarkey said:
What is the name of the lawyers? Have you checked if they really exist??
I have and they do. However they seem to be a multinational firm which suggests more corporate setup which itself would suggest friend or relative

Centurion07

10,381 posts

246 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Just for everyone saying "caveat emptor" and "it's a private sale so tough titties"; http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php...

There's no guarantee it'll go your way even though you're clearly in the right.

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
I skimmed just a few pages of that thread and it has more ill informed nonsense from idiots confidently giving out legal advice when they have no clue what they are talking about than a whole year's worth of S,P&L threads!

Durzel

12,232 posts

167 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Cmon OP - scan the letter and redact the personally identifying info.

Zod

35,295 posts

257 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
QuattroDave said:
clarkey said:
What is the name of the lawyers? Have you checked if they really exist??
I have and they do. However they seem to be a multinational firm which suggests more corporate setup which itself would suggest friend or relative
It's not one that advertises a lot, is it?

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Zod said:
It's not one that advertises a lot, is it?
It is the pure definition of sparse!

SB solicitors. So good we don't need to have a website with more than our Nunber and stock pics!

Centurion07

10,381 posts

246 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
I skimmed just a few pages of that thread and it has more ill informed nonsense from idiots confidently giving out legal advice when they have no clue what they are talking about than a whole year's worth of S,P&L threads!
It was more for the outcome than any "advice" contained within. wink

catman

2,490 posts

174 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
As previously mentioned, even if you were a Dealer, they couldn't just take the car elsewhere to get it repaired and then present you with the bill.

Even if the Solicitor is genuine, they may not be that well up on this part of the law.

Tim

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Breadvan72 said:
I skimmed just a few pages of that thread and it has more ill informed nonsense from idiots confidently giving out legal advice when they have no clue what they are talking about than a whole year's worth of S,P&L threads!
Nevertheless that is a very troubling outcome imo?

Am I allowed to quote that site, mods?

This was as the outcome was posted, on page 15 of that thread. http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php...

>>Hi guys

Bad news I'm afraid. Well technically anyway.

A judge finally went through the case and we each presented our arguments.

I had to inform the judge that the claimant hadn't met deadlines and had sold the car on.

They also brought with them no evidence of the repair being done (£700) or being sold for a loss of £200 on their original purchase price, claiming that is was a cash job.

I thought things were going really well at this time because the judge was asking lots of questions they couldn't answer including what they were claiming for now (because things had changed) and I really couldn't believe my ears (nor could my partner) - at this stage I kind of expected to win despite the water works being turned on by the claimant.

When the judge delivered her verdict it was that the fault was with car before sale even though that I was honest and probably wasn't aware of it. She went on to say that I said the car drives well and even though I could engage reverse that the fault was probably there. As I clearly volunteered the information I don't see how this was my fault but hey she's the judge.

As she couldn't use the claimants evidence for repairs, she used the information I had given based on the labour quote from her mechanic and availability of second hand parts on ebay (which she didn't know were used or not) which was circa £500.

As a footnote, at mediation I did offer a without prejudice offer of half (£250) toward repair when she asked for £1500. I am aware I was not obliged to do this but in the interest of not going to court and the fact when I advertised the car at £2500 I was really expecting £2000/£2100 so was effectively £250 up.

The judge also awarded the court fee of £115 but did not award the hearing fee because I was reasonable and clearly followed instructions and I guess made an offer beforehand.

Therefore I have to pay £615 within 14 days which I will do so today because even though I disagree (and I did tell the judge politely) I need to move on with my life.

My partner is livid tbh but it just goes to show how the law "Caveat emptor" is not always applied.

Thank you very much for your kind input and help over the past 5-6 months and it's defintely made me thing about selling a used car in future.

WJUK<<

It seems like a green light for idiots who expect others to take responsibility for their actions. It's rather shocking, if true.

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
Either the DJ went nuts (can happen), or the seller wasn't telling his audience there the full version of events (can happen too).

QuattroDave

Original Poster:

1,461 posts

127 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
heebeegeetee said:
Nevertheless that is a very troubling outcome imo?

Am I allowed to quote that site, mods?

This was as the outcome was posted, on page 15 of that thread. http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php...

>>Hi guys

Bad news I'm afraid. Well technically anyway.

A judge finally went through the case and we each presented our arguments.

I had to inform the judge that the claimant hadn't met deadlines and had sold the car on.

They also brought with them no evidence of the repair being done (£700) or being sold for a loss of £200 on their original purchase price, claiming that is was a cash job.

I thought things were going really well at this time because the judge was asking lots of questions they couldn't answer including what they were claiming for now (because things had changed) and I really couldn't believe my ears (nor could my partner) - at this stage I kind of expected to win despite the water works being turned on by the claimant.

When the judge delivered her verdict it was that the fault was with car before sale even though that I was honest and probably wasn't aware of it. She went on to say that I said the car drives well and even though I could engage reverse that the fault was probably there. As I clearly volunteered the information I don't see how this was my fault but hey she's the judge.

As she couldn't use the claimants evidence for repairs, she used the information I had given based on the labour quote from her mechanic and availability of second hand parts on ebay (which she didn't know were used or not) which was circa £500.

As a footnote, at mediation I did offer a without prejudice offer of half (£250) toward repair when she asked for £1500. I am aware I was not obliged to do this but in the interest of not going to court and the fact when I advertised the car at £2500 I was really expecting £2000/£2100 so was effectively £250 up.

The judge also awarded the court fee of £115 but did not award the hearing fee because I was reasonable and clearly followed instructions and I guess made an offer beforehand.

Therefore I have to pay £615 within 14 days which I will do so today because even though I disagree (and I did tell the judge politely) I need to move on with my life.

My partner is livid tbh but it just goes to show how the law "Caveat emptor" is not always applied.

Thank you very much for your kind input and help over the past 5-6 months and it's defintely made me thing about selling a used car in future.

WJUK<<

It seems like a green light for idiots who expect others to take responsibility for their actions. It's rather shocking, if true.
I was just starting to feel slightly less st about the situation too.?

anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 12th November 2015
quotequote all
One wonky swallow does not make a summer. If the facts are as you have stated, and you are not a trader, you are very unlikely to lose if the buyer sues. What did you say in the sale advert?