Private Car Sale - Legal advice please???
Discussion
Hi, I started a thread in general gassing and have been advised to start one in here.
I recently sold a car privately. The car was working perfectly well and I'd recently been on a family holiday in it with no problems.
Anyway, the buyers are asking for a refund because they say the car is faulty.
I was contacted by the buyer a few days after the sale. She said that she had the vehicle inspected by a mechanic friend and it has a number of faults! One being the DPF and Engine had been removed recently and it is unsafe to drive????!!!!! Another being that the car cuts out when it hits 3000revs. (this never happened whilst I drove it)
I know nothing about cars and I told her that none of this was done whilst I owned the vehicle, and I didn't know of any faults with the car. Like i said, I went on holiday with my wife & kids in the car and experienced no problems.
She also said that there are bolts missing and loose pipes under the bonnet which can be clearly seen????, I politely pointed out to her that when she and her husband came to look at the car, they looked under the bonnet at the engine, under the car and took it for a test drive and were more than happy with it at the time.
I received a letter from her with some photos of the engine and a list of faults.
I've never been in a situation like this before and its giving me sleepless nights with worry.
Since then I have received a letter from the Small Claims Court.
The claim is as follows:
I purchased a car off the defendant after being told it had been looked at by a mechanic and was sound but within 2 hours of driving away an engine fault presented itself.
After investigation by a professional mechanic, we found the vehicle to have several faults and the DPF filter had been removed making the car an mot failure.
None of which had been declared before the sale. We notified the defendant by phone on the same day about the fault & have since written to him for a resolution but have had no response. We feel the car is not fit for purpose.
That's it.
For all I know they could've damaged the engine if they changed their minds about the car????
Do they have a case against me as it was a private sale??
Any help and advice much appreciated.
Thanks
I recently sold a car privately. The car was working perfectly well and I'd recently been on a family holiday in it with no problems.
Anyway, the buyers are asking for a refund because they say the car is faulty.
I was contacted by the buyer a few days after the sale. She said that she had the vehicle inspected by a mechanic friend and it has a number of faults! One being the DPF and Engine had been removed recently and it is unsafe to drive????!!!!! Another being that the car cuts out when it hits 3000revs. (this never happened whilst I drove it)
I know nothing about cars and I told her that none of this was done whilst I owned the vehicle, and I didn't know of any faults with the car. Like i said, I went on holiday with my wife & kids in the car and experienced no problems.
She also said that there are bolts missing and loose pipes under the bonnet which can be clearly seen????, I politely pointed out to her that when she and her husband came to look at the car, they looked under the bonnet at the engine, under the car and took it for a test drive and were more than happy with it at the time.
I received a letter from her with some photos of the engine and a list of faults.
I've never been in a situation like this before and its giving me sleepless nights with worry.
Since then I have received a letter from the Small Claims Court.
The claim is as follows:
I purchased a car off the defendant after being told it had been looked at by a mechanic and was sound but within 2 hours of driving away an engine fault presented itself.
After investigation by a professional mechanic, we found the vehicle to have several faults and the DPF filter had been removed making the car an mot failure.
None of which had been declared before the sale. We notified the defendant by phone on the same day about the fault & have since written to him for a resolution but have had no response. We feel the car is not fit for purpose.
That's it.
For all I know they could've damaged the engine if they changed their minds about the car????
Do they have a case against me as it was a private sale??
Any help and advice much appreciated.
Thanks
TooMany2cvs said:
Short answer: Nope.
Long answer: So long as you didn't misrepresent it, and you're a genuine private seller not a trader pretending not to be, then... Nope.
The claim in the letter from the courts is this:Long answer: So long as you didn't misrepresent it, and you're a genuine private seller not a trader pretending not to be, then... Nope.
I purchased a car off the defendant after being told it had been looked at by a mechanic and was sound but within 2 hours of driving away an engine fault presented itself.
After investigation by a professional mechanic, we found the vehicle to have several faults and the DPF filter had been removed making the car an mot failure.
None of which had been declared before the sale. We notified the defendant by phone on the same day about the fault & have since written to him for a resolution but have had no response. We feel the car is not fit for purpose.
My original post has now been moved into this section by the moderator.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Not sure whether that link will work.
Thanks in advance for all your help.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Not sure whether that link will work.
Thanks in advance for all your help.
marshalla said:
No - that's the claim. What does the letterhead on the accompanying letter look like ? How is the accompanying letter worded ?
Which court is given as the address to respond to ? Which person/dept. in that court ?
(and if that's really the wording of the claim it's a bad one and probably won't go anywhere since it doesn't mention the amount being claimed)
Oh I see, very sorry, this is all new to me.Which court is given as the address to respond to ? Which person/dept. in that court ?
(and if that's really the wording of the claim it's a bad one and probably won't go anywhere since it doesn't mention the amount being claimed)
I will have a look when I get home (at work until 9) and I'll let you know.
Thanks
JustinP1 said:
So they've fired off a claim via Money Claim Online it looks like.
They've wasted £185 which is sad for them.
How this plays out is when you file a Defence, the case is moved to your home court. Then, they'll be asked to pay a hearing fee otherwise it'll be thrown out.
They'll probably realise that it's a waste of time at that point. This point will be in about 3 months time.
Money Claim Online it is yes.They've wasted £185 which is sad for them.
How this plays out is when you file a Defence, the case is moved to your home court. Then, they'll be asked to pay a hearing fee otherwise it'll be thrown out.
They'll probably realise that it's a waste of time at that point. This point will be in about 3 months time.
I've just got to respond with a defense now then, and the ball is back in their court (excuse the pun)
JustinP1 said:
Yep.
Don't fire one off just yet. It needs to be worded properly.
Out of interest, you say 'private sale' - was this your own personal car with your name on the V5? How long did you own it for?
The thing about your mechanic looking at it, exactly what was said? That's their sole angle on this.
Yes it was my own car, my name on the V5 etc.Don't fire one off just yet. It needs to be worded properly.
Out of interest, you say 'private sale' - was this your own personal car with your name on the V5? How long did you own it for?
The thing about your mechanic looking at it, exactly what was said? That's their sole angle on this.
I owned it for about 2 months.
I bought the car purely because it was more beneficial than hiring one for a family holiday.
We have a 5 seater renault scenic, but wanted a 7 seater for holiday as we have 3 kids. (more space for luggage & pushchair etc)
I looked into hiring one, but decided to buy one with the intention of selling it after the holiday as we have no need for 2 cars. It made more sense financially to do it this way.
I explained all of this to people who viewed the car too.
Regarding 'my mechanic' looking at it as they claim, I never said this because I do not have a mechanic and I dont know any mechanics. All I told them was that I had topped the oil up a bit before we used the car for the holiday.
They inspected the vehicle thoroughly inside & out, under bonnet & under car etc.
Jasandjules said:
When did you receive this claim? Have you filed your acknowledgement of service?
From what you say you made no such assertion about any mechanic inspection. Do you have the wording of the sale advert as well?
It may be prudent to write to them now and advise them if they don't withdraw the claim you will make an application to strike it out before allocation and will seek your costs.
Yes I still have the advert.From what you say you made no such assertion about any mechanic inspection. Do you have the wording of the sale advert as well?
It may be prudent to write to them now and advise them if they don't withdraw the claim you will make an application to strike it out before allocation and will seek your costs.
I received the claim last week and have 14 days to respond.
I sold my car I used for work a few months back, I'd had it for over a year though, sold it to free up some cash for the 7 seater. I wouldn't have time to even think about being a trader, I have a full time job where I normally do about 50 hrs a week & I've got 3 boys aged 5, 2, & 8 months who run me ragged the rest of the time lol
I sold my car I used for work a few months back, I'd had it for over a year though, sold it to free up some cash for the 7 seater. I wouldn't have time to even think about being a trader, I have a full time job where I normally do about 50 hrs a week & I've got 3 boys aged 5, 2, & 8 months who run me ragged the rest of the time lol
walm said:
Post your suggested response up here and I am sure someone will advise on how suitable it is.
My suggested responseThe claimant thoroughly inspected the car inside
and out, including under the bonnet whilst revving the engine,
underneath the car and the exhaust pipe. She also took it for a
test drive and seemed very pleased. Later that day she phoned me
to make an offer, which I accepted, and she paid a deposit for me
to take the advert down.
Approximately 2 hours after collecting the car the following week,
the claimant phoned me stating the car had seemed to lose power
but didn't cut out. Therefore they were going to take the car to a
mechanic friend of theirs. I had never experienced anything like
this whilst i drove the car.
I then received contact 4 days later saying their mechanic friend
has looked at the car and found a number of faults - some of which
were 'clearly visible' when looking under the bonnet, yet these
'clearly visible' faults were not seen or picked up on during the
initial inspection.
I was also told that the car wouldn't go over 3000rpm, again a
problem I had never experienced, and didn't happen during their
inspection when the engine was revved or on the test drive.
None of the faults that were listed were apparent to me, if there
at all, whilst I owned the car.
Regarding the 'DPF filter' removal, this most certainly was not
removed whilst I owned the car.
The reason for not responding to the initial written contact
(apart from being under no obligation to) is that I was not given
a postal address, just an email address, and I didn't think it was
very formal to respond to the email address given regarding this
matter.
If I felt the car was not 'fit for purpose' there is no way
whatsoever I would've taken my wife and 3 children on a family
holiday in it just a few weeks prior.
essayer said:
How was your advert worded?
Original AdvertVery low genuine milage Mazda 5. Excellent condition throughout.
Full Mazda Service History. MOT until April 2015 with no advisories, Tax until end Jan 2015. Insurance group 6.
Lovely to drive, very comfortable and very spacious.
Very well looked after car. Ideal for families with 2+ children, lots of room to put all the things that come with kids
Only selling because we have another MPV and we have no need for 2.
Cheapest of this model with low milage online.
Any further questions or to arrange a viewing please contact me.
Breadvan72]1. By an agreement made orally on [date said:
, the Defendant sold and the Claimant bought [describe car] "the Car".
2. The Defendant did not sell the Car in the course of a business.
3. The Defendant sold the Car as a private seller and without any express or implied warranty or condition as to its quality.
4. The Defendant makes no admissions as to the alleged defects in the Car, but such defects are in any event irrelevant for the reason indicated in paragraph 3 above.
5. The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant, as alleged or at all.
6. The claim has no reasonable prospect of success. The Defendant will seek the costs of defending the claim.
If asked, the "excellent condition" was what is known as a "mere puff", and in any event an expression of inexpert opinion.
So this is along the lines of how I should respond with my defense??2. The Defendant did not sell the Car in the course of a business.
3. The Defendant sold the Car as a private seller and without any express or implied warranty or condition as to its quality.
4. The Defendant makes no admissions as to the alleged defects in the Car, but such defects are in any event irrelevant for the reason indicated in paragraph 3 above.
5. The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant, as alleged or at all.
6. The claim has no reasonable prospect of success. The Defendant will seek the costs of defending the claim.
If asked, the "excellent condition" was what is known as a "mere puff", and in any event an expression of inexpert opinion.
Thanks
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff