Need advice re: course of action after buying a bent car
Discussion
Vaud said:
C70R said:
I almost see where you're coming from, but I'm curious.
Which of "competitions of any kind, racing, pacemaking, rallies, road use including track days, for any form of hire or reward and usage for or by driving schools" does someone using their car to receive driving instruction at a hillclimb venue come under?
Do you think that the CRA has the same terms as a new Audi warranty? If so, I'd be keen to see where you found that.
You can't define every scenario. County court judges are human beings. Which of "competitions of any kind, racing, pacemaking, rallies, road use including track days, for any form of hire or reward and usage for or by driving schools" does someone using their car to receive driving instruction at a hillclimb venue come under?
Do you think that the CRA has the same terms as a new Audi warranty? If so, I'd be keen to see where you found that.
No idea on CRA. It doesn't cover every single nuance. The above terms are seem well tested in court and look to be common across many manufacturers and would seem too be fair.
So, in effect, you've produced the most unrealistically stringent terms possible, and even then you can't accurately say how the OP has operated outside of them.
C70R said:
You not going to bother with the bit in bold? The bit where your (ill-thought-out) argument comes unstuck? No matter what happens, the OP isn't testing a manufacturer's warranty or claiming against a manufacturer.
So, in effect, you've produced the most unrealistically stringent terms possible, and even then you can't accurately say how the OP has operated outside of them.
So, in effect, you've produced the most unrealistically stringent terms possible, and even then you can't accurately say how the OP has operated outside of them.
C70R said:
POORCARDEALER said:
Ive thought about this, the fact youve used it for a motorsport event is going to stuff you in the event that you go legal.
I've thought about this too, and you're completely wrong. Showing yourself up to indeed be a very "poor" car dealer.What about "an instruction day at the local hillclimb school" implies that the car was used for a "motorsport event"?
In your infinite experience/wisdom, which law is the dealer going to use to try and weasel out of his responsibility on that basis?
C70R said:
POORCARDEALER said:
Ive thought about this, the fact youve used it for a motorsport event is going to stuff you in the event that you go legal.
I've thought about this too, and you're completely wrong. Showing yourself up to indeed be a very "poor" car dealer.What about "an instruction day at the local hillclimb school" implies that the car was used for a "motorsport event"?
In your infinite experience/wisdom, which law is the dealer going to use to try and weasel out of his responsibility on that basis?
hole?C70R said:
You not going to bother with the bit in bold? The bit where your (ill-thought-out) argument comes unstuck? No matter what happens, the OP isn't testing a manufacturer's warranty or claiming against a manufacturer.
So, in effect, you've produced the most unrealistically stringent terms possible, and even then you can't accurately say how the OP has operated outside of them.
Calm down you'll live longer So, in effect, you've produced the most unrealistically stringent terms possible, and even then you can't accurately say how the OP has operated outside of them.
I pulled generic terms. I'm a pragmatist in life. I'm pretty sure that a county court judge would not think hill climb testing falls as any part of the CRA - or a reasonable warranty claim (depending on how the OP wanted to play it).
The CRA covers normal usage. Section 10 is pretty clear.
Hill climb training is not the usual scope of a road car sold as a road car, though it will be down to what the dealer said.
If it was a hill climb car sold as a hill climb car, then maybe - it would depend on what the trader said?
But from what the OP has said, it wasn't, it was sold as a road car, for use on the road?
cmaguire said:
andymc said:
well we are both long time motor trade and hill climbing is a motor sport, was the last forum mums net?
Perhaps you and Poorcardealer should include a free trackday ticket with all your sales. You could sell no end of sh@theaps on that basis.Is the dealer yet aware of your troubles? I think you will struggle with a gearbox claim, you test drove the car prior to purchase and it must have been ok then? All the dealer would need to do is check on pistonheads and see the car has been up a hill climb (this will be seen as Motorsport) and deem that the gearbox could have been damaged here. And with all the work you have done with the car you must have been keen on keeping it. If you had a gearbox snag then surely you would have taken it up with the seller before investing time and money in the car and putting it up the hill? Also people referring to the seller as an 'expert', he may not be, he breaks cars and sells parts, don't need to be a master tech to do that.
gordyshreds said:
Also people referring to the seller as an 'expert', he may not be, he breaks cars and sells parts, don't need to be a master tech to do that.
Trade sellers are generally deemed to be the experts, it's a risk you take on when you start trading, it's not an option to plead naivety.
TroubledSoul said:
I bought some coilovers for the car (it has been bought with the intention of tracking it mainly) and when I collected it I was told the chassis was bent. One of the front shocks had to have the camber on it set differently to the other to achieve the correct alignment both sides.
The second sentence is all you need to tell you that you have a serious problem. A friend of mine bought a car which appeared to be in very good condition. It was only when it was over a pit that it became apparent on close inspection that it had had a impact and just how badly the front suspension repair had been bodged. Unlike some he wasn't willing to simply offload it onto some unsuspecting punter and sold it for spares. His piggy bank took a serious hit.TroubledSoul said:
One of the guys in my local owners' club thinks I should have it jigged but I'm not sure about that really.
Listen to this man. He is spot on: it's the only way to be sure of the extent of the damage to the body shell and whether it can be satisfactorily repaired.Every Japanese performance car has an owners club: many have more than one. Are you a member of the same club as this guy? If not, I recommend you join as it could save you a fortune. If you are, maybe you should consider in future asking for advice/active help from other members before you make any more mistakes. Most are only to happy to do so.
Re your current problem, if the sale document has the words spares or repair on it I suspect the CRA won't be of much help to you. Btw, whatever possessed you to buy a car from a breaker expecting it to be a satisfactory runner? It will have been in his yard for a reason. The 'too good to break' is either puff or outright b/s and you ought to have known it tbh.
Either he is a car trader or he isn't.
If he is then the fact that the majority of the vehicles he sells on are for spares or repair does not in any way permit him to punt out a complete vehicle as fit for road use without recourse when it is subsequently found to be unsuitable.
Being a trader brings with it a responsibility for your actions (even if unintentional) that ignorant (in both senses of the word) private sellers usually manage to avoid. Hence why there are so many sellers pretending they aren't traders but just like changing their vehicles regularly.
The suggestion that the buyer has invalidated his case by allowing the car to be used by his wife for a training day at a hillclimb (or whatever it was) is a cop out. The buyer has already said the gearbox seal was shot and the gearbox low on oil at point of sale. The hill-climb might have been sticking the boot in, but that gearbox was shot anyway.
That aside, the gearbox is academic. It looks like the car is bent. Can that be blamed on the buyer too.
He does appear to be somewhat of a Jonah where car buying is concerned though.
If he is then the fact that the majority of the vehicles he sells on are for spares or repair does not in any way permit him to punt out a complete vehicle as fit for road use without recourse when it is subsequently found to be unsuitable.
Being a trader brings with it a responsibility for your actions (even if unintentional) that ignorant (in both senses of the word) private sellers usually manage to avoid. Hence why there are so many sellers pretending they aren't traders but just like changing their vehicles regularly.
The suggestion that the buyer has invalidated his case by allowing the car to be used by his wife for a training day at a hillclimb (or whatever it was) is a cop out. The buyer has already said the gearbox seal was shot and the gearbox low on oil at point of sale. The hill-climb might have been sticking the boot in, but that gearbox was shot anyway.
That aside, the gearbox is academic. It looks like the car is bent. Can that be blamed on the buyer too.
He does appear to be somewhat of a Jonah where car buying is concerned though.
The OP couldn't tell it was bent when he bought it. Why should the dealer? (This is a question out of ignorance on my part)
Does a trader have to check a car for damage before selling? Obviously they cannot misrepresent and need to answer truthfully to the best of their knowledge anything asked; but in this case, would be dealer have to put the car on a lift/jig and check for the bent chassis? The car was clear of any insurance claim for accident damage.
It would be interesting to see a copy of the advert, or at least know exactly what was said.
Does a trader have to check a car for damage before selling? Obviously they cannot misrepresent and need to answer truthfully to the best of their knowledge anything asked; but in this case, would be dealer have to put the car on a lift/jig and check for the bent chassis? The car was clear of any insurance claim for accident damage.
It would be interesting to see a copy of the advert, or at least know exactly what was said.
V8LM said:
The OP couldn't tell it was bent when he bought it. Why should the dealer? (This is a question out of ignorance on my part)
Does a trader have to check a car for damage before selling? Obviously they cannot misrepresent and need to answer truthfully to the best of their knowledge anything asked; but in this case, would be dealer have to put the car on a lift/jig and check for the bent chassis? The car was clear of any insurance claim for accident damage.
It would be interesting to see a copy of the advert, or at least know exactly what was said.
Buck stops with the dealer as he is the expert in normal circumstances.Does a trader have to check a car for damage before selling? Obviously they cannot misrepresent and need to answer truthfully to the best of their knowledge anything asked; but in this case, would be dealer have to put the car on a lift/jig and check for the bent chassis? The car was clear of any insurance claim for accident damage.
It would be interesting to see a copy of the advert, or at least know exactly what was said.
Buying from a car breaker, and what it says on the paperwork may seem this a different case
You guys are generally right. I make a lot of fk ups buying cars. It's mostly because I'm happy to fix things myself unless it's something really complex like in this case. Combine that with the fact I'm a bit OCD and a bit impulsive. I tend to fixate and that often sees me convince myself things will be OK as I have to have that car. It is st being like that. It does result in bad buys. Unfortunately it's a difficult thing to get past and I don't often ask people to come with me as I don't like putting people out.
I've already admitted that I've had unrealistic expectations of what a dealer should or shouldn't do and believe me, I have learnt from that. That's why I had stopped making silly posts like some of my previous ones. It's also why I went approved used on my main car. To avoid any crap.
Unfortunately in this case I've had an experience which makes the others pale into insignificance. Should I just have to accept that because I've been a bit neurotic in the past?
To address some points:
The gearbox; I don't rag other people's cars. The fault never showed up on the test drive. It was only apparent once the car was driven at the top of the rev range. I don't usually go over 5k when I drive on the road anyway. It's just the way I drive. Mrs is quite similar in that.
The price and what can be realistically expected; Sold cheaper purely because of a lack of history. Nothing else. It's not unreasonable for that to happen with these cars. I accepted things would need doing as a given, but that was NOT the basis of the price according to the seller. Unfortunately for me, someone else on Scoobynet has just bought one for the same money that looks bloody great
Things said to me when looking into the car; It's a great car. Too good to break. Perfectly working gearbox. Sorry, but some of you think I shouldn't be aggrieved after that? Wind it in. If he'd said "look pal, it's got a forged engine but the chassis is bent and the gearbox crunches" I'd have said no thanks, it's not for me.
I do want to keep the car. I don't want to return it. But I would have valued it around £1500 less as is. I'm now either going to have to jig it and get a repair panel welded in on the sill or reshell it and I am going to have to have the gearbox sorted.
And for the record, I have never ever pursued a dealer for any money. I have asked for things sorting but I've never really pushed beyond that, just to dispel a myth.
Many, many thanks to those trying to help. The rest of you should have a think about the best use of your time. Putting posters that need assistance on trial in your kangaroo court just makes you look like a bunch ofs. Good day to you.
k ups buying cars. It's mostly because I'm happy to fix things myself unless it's something really complex like in this case. Combine that with the fact I'm a bit OCD and a bit impulsive. I tend to fixate and that often sees me convince myself things will be OK as I have to have that car. It is st being like that. It does result in bad buys. Unfortunately it's a difficult thing to get past and I don't often ask people to come with me as I don't like putting people out. I've already admitted that I've had unrealistic expectations of what a dealer should or shouldn't do and believe me, I have learnt from that. That's why I had stopped making silly posts like some of my previous ones. It's also why I went approved used on my main car. To avoid any crap.
Unfortunately in this case I've had an experience which makes the others pale into insignificance. Should I just have to accept that because I've been a bit neurotic in the past?
To address some points:
The gearbox; I don't rag other people's cars. The fault never showed up on the test drive. It was only apparent once the car was driven at the top of the rev range. I don't usually go over 5k when I drive on the road anyway. It's just the way I drive. Mrs is quite similar in that.
The price and what can be realistically expected; Sold cheaper purely because of a lack of history. Nothing else. It's not unreasonable for that to happen with these cars. I accepted things would need doing as a given, but that was NOT the basis of the price according to the seller. Unfortunately for me, someone else on Scoobynet has just bought one for the same money that looks bloody great
Things said to me when looking into the car; It's a great car. Too good to break. Perfectly working gearbox. Sorry, but some of you think I shouldn't be aggrieved after that? Wind it in. If he'd said "look pal, it's got a forged engine but the chassis is bent and the gearbox crunches" I'd have said no thanks, it's not for me.
I do want to keep the car. I don't want to return it. But I would have valued it around £1500 less as is. I'm now either going to have to jig it and get a repair panel welded in on the sill or reshell it and I am going to have to have the gearbox sorted.
And for the record, I have never ever pursued a dealer for any money. I have asked for things sorting but I've never really pushed beyond that, just to dispel a myth.
Many, many thanks to those trying to help. The rest of you should have a think about the best use of your time. Putting posters that need assistance on trial in your kangaroo court just makes you look like a bunch of
s. Good day to you. TroubledSoul said:
Many, many thanks to those trying to help. The rest of you should have a think about the best use of your time. Putting posters that need assistance on trial in your kangaroo court just makes you look like a bunch of s. Good day to you.
That reads as if you only want to see replies that agree with you...s. Good day to you. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff