Fake service stamps, RX8 failed within a week?
Discussion
Hello everyone,
I recently bought a 2003 RX8. 43,000 miles and was described as-new with a full service history.
I have found out that the service stamps have been forged. The seller had only owned the car for two months as well..
The car broke down within a week (limp mode) and my local Mazda garage have found a botched repair on the wiring loom. This means no heating, no A/C - even the petrol cap won't work anymore (although I believe that's not electrically related).
I have tried my hardest to come to a resolution with the seller (eBay, private) - but he will only accept the car back in the same condition as sold. As the wiring (and whatever else) was modified and not mentioned in the description, not to mention the fraud he has commited selling a car with fake service stamps - I said to him take it back then!
He will not though, and seems oblivious to the consequences of fraud in a court of law. Before I go to my local county court tomorrow - is there anything else I can do? He seems quite content with me taking it to court, even though I've been advised by a solicitor and consumer advice that I'm well within my rights. He says the opposite..
Advice is most welcome guys
I recently bought a 2003 RX8. 43,000 miles and was described as-new with a full service history.
I have found out that the service stamps have been forged. The seller had only owned the car for two months as well..
The car broke down within a week (limp mode) and my local Mazda garage have found a botched repair on the wiring loom. This means no heating, no A/C - even the petrol cap won't work anymore (although I believe that's not electrically related).
I have tried my hardest to come to a resolution with the seller (eBay, private) - but he will only accept the car back in the same condition as sold. As the wiring (and whatever else) was modified and not mentioned in the description, not to mention the fraud he has commited selling a car with fake service stamps - I said to him take it back then!
He will not though, and seems oblivious to the consequences of fraud in a court of law. Before I go to my local county court tomorrow - is there anything else I can do? He seems quite content with me taking it to court, even though I've been advised by a solicitor and consumer advice that I'm well within my rights. He says the opposite..
Advice is most welcome guys
Yes, I rang up the garage that stamped the book and they informed me that they were fake. They also notified trading standards by themselves.
There's the sales of goods act which means if the car fails within a month or so - I can reject it.
That's two problems for him right there. However, if he can prove that he knew nothing if the forgery - surely that was his responsibility to make sure they were genuine before re-selling?
There's the sales of goods act which means if the car fails within a month or so - I can reject it.
That's two problems for him right there. However, if he can prove that he knew nothing if the forgery - surely that was his responsibility to make sure they were genuine before re-selling?
tmg89 said:
Yes, I rang up the garage that stamped the book and they informed me that they were fake. They also notified trading standards by themselves.
There's the sales of goods act which means if the car fails within a month or so - I can reject it.
That's two problems for him right there. However, if he can prove that he knew nothing if the forgery - surely that was his responsibility to make sure they were genuine before re-selling?
You were buying the car, surely it is your problem to ensure they were genuine? There's the sales of goods act which means if the car fails within a month or so - I can reject it.
That's two problems for him right there. However, if he can prove that he knew nothing if the forgery - surely that was his responsibility to make sure they were genuine before re-selling?
As for "fails within month or so" - not on the threads that have been previous on this topic! Sales of goods act is for business sales not private sales.
Who is giving you this advice?
supertouring said:
tmg89 said:
Yes, I rang up the garage that stamped the book and they informed me that they were fake.
So they admitted that they stamped the book with fake stamps?R8Steve said:
I had a similar situation, ironically with a Mazda RX-8 purchased from a dealer.
Trading standards did nothing despite having plenty evidence so I wouldn't expect a good outcome here to be honest.
Sorry to hear that Steve.Trading standards did nothing despite having plenty evidence so I wouldn't expect a good outcome here to be honest.
To everyone else, all I'll say is that I spoke to consumer advice and followed their guidance to the T. I checked with a solicitor before considering court and he said my case was so strong that there's no need for representation.
Section 12 and 13 of the Sales of Goods Act should make him cough up, and the act does cover private sales, even through e-Bay - so that's hopefully some advice to anyone who ends up in a similar situation.
I'll keep this thread updated so future buyers will have a rough idea of the outcome.
Oh, and I googled the name on the stamp, asked them if they'd actually serviced the car in which they said no. I scanned the stamp, emailed it to them which is when that service centre said it was not their stamp at all. They seemed quite annoyed actually!
Edited by tmg89 on Tuesday 28th May 01:28
http://www.directline.com/motor/buyingprivate.htm
Directline said:
In contrast to a dealer, private sales are not protected by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended). This means the seller does not have to justify the satisfactory quality of the car he is selling. As a buyer it is up to you to make your own inspections and checks.
The only duties a private seller owes to a buyer are to ensure that:
The seller can prove his ownership of a car; and
The car is correctly described and roadworthy for the price paid.
Although buying a car privately should be cheaper than buying from a dealer, it can involve a lot of risk. For example, the car might not belong to the seller, the car may be stolen or belong to a finance company as security for a loan or hire purchase.
If you have a dispute, you will need to prove that the seller made a misrepresentation or that the car did not meet its description at the time of sale. As many such contracts are only verbally agreed, representations can be very difficult to independently confirm.
The only duties a private seller owes to a buyer are to ensure that:
The seller can prove his ownership of a car; and
The car is correctly described and roadworthy for the price paid.
Although buying a car privately should be cheaper than buying from a dealer, it can involve a lot of risk. For example, the car might not belong to the seller, the car may be stolen or belong to a finance company as security for a loan or hire purchase.
If you have a dispute, you will need to prove that the seller made a misrepresentation or that the car did not meet its description at the time of sale. As many such contracts are only verbally agreed, representations can be very difficult to independently confirm.
You have no comeback on a private sale, and you won't get anywhere with the fraud accusation unless you have proof that the seller was responsible for the fake history. Whoever told you that you had a strong case is wrong.
Check the mileage history via previous mot history online, there's a good chance its been clocked as well.
Check the mileage history via previous mot history online, there's a good chance its been clocked as well.
mjb1 said:
You have no comeback on a private sale, and you won't get anywhere with the fraud accusation unless you have proof that the seller was responsible for the fake history. Whoever told you that you had a strong case is wrong.
Check the mileage history via previous mot history online, there's a good chance its been clocked as well.
I'm with this guy. Check the mileage history via previous mot history online, there's a good chance its been clocked as well.
Even if the stamps turn out to be the work of the guy that sold it to you, is there an actual offence of falsifying service records (clocking mileage yes, but forging service stamps?), and if there is, will any of it result in you getting your money back? I very much doubt it.
If person sold it stating it actually has full service history knowing it does not is misrepresentation, regardless of private sale or not. The difficultly will be proving that the seller faked or knowingly advertised false information.
Ignore the "private sale no chance", it's a misrepresentation of a material fact that is the issue here.
Ignore the "private sale no chance", it's a misrepresentation of a material fact that is the issue here.
SOGA applies to private sales in that the car must be as described - clearly the car is not as described as it has false information with it - so there is a breach of contract there to start with. Its cut and shut in terms of your civil case.
Are you sure this guy is not a trader? Trading Standards can deal with clockers but they deal with businesses. In which case you are left with the Fraud Act 2006 and the Police. You would have to show (or the Police would) that he put the stamp in knowing it was fake - but that might not be too hard to do if they look on his PC. The question is whether they have the time/inclination.
Are you sure this guy is not a trader? Trading Standards can deal with clockers but they deal with businesses. In which case you are left with the Fraud Act 2006 and the Police. You would have to show (or the Police would) that he put the stamp in knowing it was fake - but that might not be too hard to do if they look on his PC. The question is whether they have the time/inclination.
tmg89 said:
I recently bought a 2003 RX8. 43,000 miles and was described as-new with a full service history.
I have found out that the service stamps have been forged. The seller had only owned the car for two months as well.
The car broke down within a week (limp mode) and my local Mazda garage have found a botched repair on the wiring loom. This means no heating, no A/C - even the petrol cap won't work anymore (although I believe that's not electrically related).
Firstly, you don't physically go to the court to issue proceedings - you can do it online.I have found out that the service stamps have been forged. The seller had only owned the car for two months as well.
The car broke down within a week (limp mode) and my local Mazda garage have found a botched repair on the wiring loom. This means no heating, no A/C - even the petrol cap won't work anymore (although I believe that's not electrically related).
Secondly, you need to be very clear as to what your case is.
S.12 SOGA does not appear to be relevant here; there is an implied term that the seller has title (i.e., that the goods are his to sell). I don't think you're alleging that the goods are anyone else's, so that's completely irrelevant to the claim. If you spout off about this in your claim to the Court, you'll achieve nothing except an (irrelevant) admission and resentment from the DJ.
S.13 is more helpful. "Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied that the goods will correspond with the description." This is a sale by description, and the goods are apparently not as described.
However, "except as provided by this section and section 15 below and subject to any other enactment, there is no implied term about the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale." (s.14).
So, your case is that the goods are not as described. Note that your case is not that the goods were not properly described; there is nothing that says that every fault must be declared in a private sale (there are regulations that apply to businesses). Accordingly, your claim is for breach of the descriptive term and not for the quality of the goods. You are entitled to be put in the position that you would have been, had the contract been fulfilled.
Your major loss however is not from the fact that the car is really a 90k miler with patchy history (or whatever), but from the fact that it is broken (assuming that the wording does not make promises as to the car's quality that go beyond 'mere puff'.) This makes the claim complicated: you are looking to recover a loss from a clear breach of contract, but the loss you really want to recover is from the breach of s.14 (which by default does not apply in a private sale).
The breach of s.13 is likely to attract less by way of damages than you would need to put you in the position you should have been in; had the car been genuine and still broken, on the face of it, the contract would have been fuliflled.
As such, you want to make sure that the sale is voidable at your instance; i.e., that there was a representation, that you relied on it, provided that the seller cannot show that he had reasonable ground to believe that the representation was true. Misrepresentation is better for the claimant than a simple breach of contract because it allows the contract to be voided, and once you have established that there was reliance on a representation, meaning you get a refund rather than a repair, unless the claimant can show that he had good reasons for making the representation.
Of course, everything you've described sounds like the seller is a trader with a lemon, who knows that if he admits he's a trader, he'll get sued. Your challenge is to prove it - what does the seller's eBay history look like?
Finally, I very much doubt that any solicitor has ever said in so many words that a case is so strong that it does not require a lawyer's services to win it. What you may have been told is that your maximum loss is the value of a clean 10-year-old RX8 (£2k?) and that, while you may have a strong case on its face, it would not be economic to be represented as you would not be able to claim for your costs.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff