Being sued over a car I sold :(
Discussion
Hi all,
As the title suggests I've just received a letter from a solicitor stating that the person I sold my 530d for intends on suing me. Oh the joy.
So I'm a private seller and I sold the car on 30th August this year. I received a letter dated 25th September stating that he's identified issues with the car and wants me to buy it back at full sales price. The items were:
1. Faulty electric tailgate - This I ran through with him how to operate it so it works (basically a £3 retaining pin is missing - but he took an 11 year old car to a BMW main dealer and they charged him nearly £750 for a whole new unit - which he paid!)
2. Oil leak - Again during the sale I showed him the MOT certificate (which was done just three days prior!) which stated that there is a small oil leak.
3. Gearbox fault - Never noticed any ill running of the gearbox but he's stating that I should have known!!! that something was wrong with the box and that I wilfully withheld this information;
4. At some point after the sale a warning came up stating excessive pollution, again he is claiming that I knew about this (how would it get through MOT with excessive pollution warning??)
So being the nice guy I am (and as it happens having just sold on the RS6 I bought to replace it) I offered to buy it back but at a lower amount (£3,500 not the £4,000 paid) citing these issues that were previously not known to me.
He refused that offer and also refuted all my claims.
Today I receive a three page letter from a solicitors demanding a payment of nearly £5,000 for the cost of the vehicle and the 'repairs' he's had done to it.
I've had a quote for initial meeting and first letter from a solicitor and it's coming out just shy of £500.
I'm absolutely sure that this guy is determined to take this to court. He's an old retired guy with a rar rar accent and seemingly bugger all else to do save this.
Anyone got thoughts/advice or an idea as to whether it'll get to court and the chances that he'll win (understand you're only seeing my side of things).
As the title suggests I've just received a letter from a solicitor stating that the person I sold my 530d for intends on suing me. Oh the joy.
So I'm a private seller and I sold the car on 30th August this year. I received a letter dated 25th September stating that he's identified issues with the car and wants me to buy it back at full sales price. The items were:
1. Faulty electric tailgate - This I ran through with him how to operate it so it works (basically a £3 retaining pin is missing - but he took an 11 year old car to a BMW main dealer and they charged him nearly £750 for a whole new unit - which he paid!)
2. Oil leak - Again during the sale I showed him the MOT certificate (which was done just three days prior!) which stated that there is a small oil leak.
3. Gearbox fault - Never noticed any ill running of the gearbox but he's stating that I should have known!!! that something was wrong with the box and that I wilfully withheld this information;
4. At some point after the sale a warning came up stating excessive pollution, again he is claiming that I knew about this (how would it get through MOT with excessive pollution warning??)
So being the nice guy I am (and as it happens having just sold on the RS6 I bought to replace it) I offered to buy it back but at a lower amount (£3,500 not the £4,000 paid) citing these issues that were previously not known to me.
He refused that offer and also refuted all my claims.
Today I receive a three page letter from a solicitors demanding a payment of nearly £5,000 for the cost of the vehicle and the 'repairs' he's had done to it.
I've had a quote for initial meeting and first letter from a solicitor and it's coming out just shy of £500.
I'm absolutely sure that this guy is determined to take this to court. He's an old retired guy with a rar rar accent and seemingly bugger all else to do save this.
Anyone got thoughts/advice or an idea as to whether it'll get to court and the chances that he'll win (understand you're only seeing my side of things).
Thanks guys, I agree it's total madness, especially clawing back costs that he's paid after buying the car which in my opinion are non essential and certainly nothing impacting the roadworthyness (tailgate!)
I've passed the details onto my cousin who's a barrister so hopefully she'll craft a suitably legal 'go F yourself' letter.
It truly beggers belief that he would go to the lengths of legal action over this.
As it happened I bought another car shortly after I sold this one and the RS6 from my dad of all people. Two weeks later the clutch goes pop and I'm £1,400 out of pocket. but did I sue my dad, course I bloody didn't. I didn't even ask for a single penny from him, I treated it just like any other private sale, paid out and got on with life.
The solicitors are indeed real but they're based 100+ miles away from where the guy lives so I'm suspecting either family/friend is solicitor.
The only wording I thought was slightly unusual was the twice mentioned phrase 'we suggest you take legal advice' moreso that it was mentioned twice than at all.
I've passed the details onto my cousin who's a barrister so hopefully she'll craft a suitably legal 'go F yourself' letter.
It truly beggers belief that he would go to the lengths of legal action over this.
As it happened I bought another car shortly after I sold this one and the RS6 from my dad of all people. Two weeks later the clutch goes pop and I'm £1,400 out of pocket. but did I sue my dad, course I bloody didn't. I didn't even ask for a single penny from him, I treated it just like any other private sale, paid out and got on with life.
The solicitors are indeed real but they're based 100+ miles away from where the guy lives so I'm suspecting either family/friend is solicitor.
The only wording I thought was slightly unusual was the twice mentioned phrase 'we suggest you take legal advice' moreso that it was mentioned twice than at all.
Wacky Racer said:
Is this thread a wind up?
I would bin all correspondence from this so called "solicitor" the guy does not have a leg to stand on, providing you have not misrepresented the car.
You may be in a slightly weak position now though, because you offered to buy the car back, just say you have withdrawn your offer.
The claim is on the grounds of misrepresentation and breach of contract. I would bin all correspondence from this so called "solicitor" the guy does not have a leg to stand on, providing you have not misrepresented the car.
You may be in a slightly weak position now though, because you offered to buy the car back, just say you have withdrawn your offer.
I offered to buy the car back out of goodwill but in the basis that the factory this remain on the car (which he stated he would remove).
The ad didn't mention the boot missing a pin but I did run him though how to work it verbally.
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!
Absolutely not a trader of any sort and after this I'm never likely to be either!
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 sAm 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.
t about the situation too.?Thanks to all for the feedback, it seems the general concensus is that he is somewhat of a fool to take it further, but given he's taken it this far I can't discount the fact that he'll go "full retard" so I shall leave it for my barrister cousin to draft a response which I will send this week. In her words she'll word it in such a way that it'll come from me but will let the other party know that there's someone on my side who knows exactly what they're on about!
Hopefully that'll then be that, but I thought that last time too...!
Hopefully that'll then be that, but I thought that last time too...!
Once again thanks all.
I've heard from my cousin who will be drafting the response over the weekend.
I may in the mean time respond wihtin the seven days stated that I acknowledge the letter and will respond by 20th. If for nothing else it means I wont get more st letters from them right before my birthday (and my only other days off this year!).
I can only honestly think it's one of two things:
It's family/friend/relative sending the letter for nowt OR
He really is quite deluded (& bored) and a solicitor has seen it as a quick £3/500 to consult and send one letter.
I'm hoping with a decent enough response it'll put it to bed once and for all.
As to his motives and expectations well I'm not sure I want a window into the mind of a mad man. I mean insisting I pay for his costs to date when he's taken an 11 year old BMW to a MAIN DEALER and spend £700+ on 'fixing' an electric tailgate that was already working but required the lightest of nudges to pop the strut back into the socket is beyond insane surely? I had it for eight months and I can honestly say it's such a minor inconvenience that any repair more than about £50 I would have just left it be.
The other crazy point (amongst many admittedly) is the fact they're charging 8% interest daily on the claimed amount. Considering the world we live in at the moment there's absolutely no justification for 8% interest, 3 maybe. But what that does mean is within 45 days the total they're claiming for will go above £5,000 which I believe is the limit for small claims court?
Even though I've done nothing wrong & it was a good car it's played on my mind all night and I had a rotten nights sleep meaning I've had a crappy day off, joy!
I've heard from my cousin who will be drafting the response over the weekend.
I may in the mean time respond wihtin the seven days stated that I acknowledge the letter and will respond by 20th. If for nothing else it means I wont get more s
t letters from them right before my birthday (and my only other days off this year!).I can only honestly think it's one of two things:
It's family/friend/relative sending the letter for nowt OR
He really is quite deluded (& bored) and a solicitor has seen it as a quick £3/500 to consult and send one letter.
I'm hoping with a decent enough response it'll put it to bed once and for all.
As to his motives and expectations well I'm not sure I want a window into the mind of a mad man. I mean insisting I pay for his costs to date when he's taken an 11 year old BMW to a MAIN DEALER and spend £700+ on 'fixing' an electric tailgate that was already working but required the lightest of nudges to pop the strut back into the socket is beyond insane surely? I had it for eight months and I can honestly say it's such a minor inconvenience that any repair more than about £50 I would have just left it be.
The other crazy point (amongst many admittedly) is the fact they're charging 8% interest daily on the claimed amount. Considering the world we live in at the moment there's absolutely no justification for 8% interest, 3 maybe. But what that does mean is within 45 days the total they're claiming for will go above £5,000 which I believe is the limit for small claims court?
Even though I've done nothing wrong & it was a good car it's played on my mind all night and I had a rotten nights sleep meaning I've had a crappy day off, joy!
JustinP1 said:
All very nice, lots of pages. However, they've overlooked to state what those alleged misrepresentations actually were. Did they state these in previous correspondence?
"Interest at a daily rate of 8%"...
Nor does it state that he's returning the vehicle shouid I be mad and pay"Interest at a daily rate of 8%"...
PurpleMoonlight said:
I can't see anything in the ebay advert that would constitute misrepresentation.
You had it serviced and MOTed shortly before sale.
You told the buyer about the boot issue, although he could of course deny that.
It's an 11 year old car with 150,000 odd miles on the clock.
I seriously doubt you have anything to worry about if he is crazy enough to take you to court.
In previous correspondence he has acknowledged that I explained the boot operation to him but cited that it only needed a pin to stop the ball popping out the socket. Surely enough on both the quote and invoive it states £3.42 for a pin, the bulk of the cost is for the hydraulic strut which was working fine!You had it serviced and MOTed shortly before sale.
You told the buyer about the boot issue, although he could of course deny that.
It's an 11 year old car with 150,000 odd miles on the clock.
I seriously doubt you have anything to worry about if he is crazy enough to take you to court.
Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Saturday 14th November 11:14
ANother thing that strikes me is the £717 quoted for the strut is exactly that, a quote. Not anywhere does it state that he's actually had the work done and paid for it!
hashtag said:
I am not a solicitor.
Has that letter really been written by a solicitor, or someone pretending to be one?
Would be be worth contacting the firm to confirm the legitimacy of the letter.
8% interest per day on a debt claim of £5500, would increase the the claim to over £15,000 during the reply period. (i think)
HEaded paper checks back to a website and the law society lists them at the address per the headed paper.Has that letter really been written by a solicitor, or someone pretending to be one?
Would be be worth contacting the firm to confirm the legitimacy of the letter.
8% interest per day on a debt claim of £5500, would increase the the claim to over £15,000 during the reply period. (i think)
As for the drawing they're suggesting all that needs changing to 'cure' emissions problems when all it likely needs is a damn good thrashing and/or a long run.
hashtag said:
Yes I checked that too, my comment is based in the English and how the letter is worded. I assume you have deleted their reference from the letter, or was there not one?
Is there a chance that the letterhead has been obtained to scare?
And the very obvious error with regard to the 8% per day, should be per annum!
Yes I've removed the reference and their banking details (the solicitors)Is there a chance that the letterhead has been obtained to scare?
And the very obvious error with regard to the 8% per day, should be per annum!
Actually just looking at the client reference it has his name followed by 0042 - now if it's anything like the accounting world that would mean he's used the solicitors 41 times previously!
As for the interest I assume it should have been 8% per annum accrued on a daily basis until settled - but you're correct it's wrongly worde and misleading
So a quick internet seach using his name and legal as search terms reveals that he's taken loads of people to court.
In just the last three years he's taken his local parish counciller to court for slander, Portsmouth council for a parking fine
It also looks like he might be a parish counciller and we all know what kind of person likes to take those roles..
In just the last three years he's taken his local parish counciller to court for slander, Portsmouth council for a parking fine
It also looks like he might be a parish counciller and we all know what kind of person likes to take those roles..
Granfondo said:
OP, if the tailgate only required a £3 pin to fix the electric tailgate why did you not fix it before sale?
Genuinely because it never bothered me enough to warrant going to my main dealer to order a pin from them.Press boot release button, boot opens electronically as it should at the speed it should, whilst doing so the strut socket comes out slightly from the ball. Closing it works as it should. However if you don't give the boot strut a slight nudge before you close the boot the next time you open it the strut pops out.
It really is that minor an ailment!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff