Dealer now wants higher price after taking deposit!
Discussion
Paid a deposit on a high end car at a allegedly reputable independent in February, after being fobbed off for the last three months getting the car ready (was supposed to be 4-6 weeks) Got a call from the dealer today, now saying as they don't own the car, the owner now has decided he want more money for the car (rag top summer). And now want significantly more money from me!
I have a receipt for the deposit, that states I'm entering into a legally binding contract.....
Where do I stand legally?
A call to my solicitor Monday I think.
Cheers,
Chris.
I have a receipt for the deposit, that states I'm entering into a legally binding contract.....
Where do I stand legally?
A call to my solicitor Monday I think.
Cheers,
Chris.
hornetrider said:
What are the sums involved, and is it a rare car?
Paid deposit based on 40K, dealer now wants 45K.Prices of this car have gone silly since paying deposit, three cars same spec and price when I paid the deposit, now two other cars available with same spec 58-60K!
Not happy.
Do you like hassle?
If you do, you could warn them that unless they are willing to supply the car as agreed in a set period, that you will sue them for breach of contract.
The damages amount would be the difference between the agreed price and the next available car to the same spec.
The devil is in the detail of your contract though. Who is the contract with?
If you do, you could warn them that unless they are willing to supply the car as agreed in a set period, that you will sue them for breach of contract.
The damages amount would be the difference between the agreed price and the next available car to the same spec.
The devil is in the detail of your contract though. Who is the contract with?
Justin is correct. We need to know exactly what the contract says. Is the extra cost to you of buying a similar car worth the hassle and risk of suing?
You could only obtain an order for sale of the car you contracted to buy if it is a rare and special car. Otherwise your claim will be limited to price difference and return of your deposit.
You could only obtain an order for sale of the car you contracted to buy if it is a rare and special car. Otherwise your claim will be limited to price difference and return of your deposit.
I think the garage was doing a commission sale and the owner is backing out. In a perfect world I imagine they should have back to back agreements as it sounds like they've sold you (or at least taken a deposit against) something they don't own.
The type of garage matters in whether you want to pursue, if it's a large main dealer type place then it's worth digging in as they'll be more worried about reputation. Forget that particular car though, can't see that deal happening easily.
The type of garage matters in whether you want to pursue, if it's a large main dealer type place then it's worth digging in as they'll be more worried about reputation. Forget that particular car though, can't see that deal happening easily.
Butter Face said:
Unless the dealer has a written SOR agreement with the owner that they are willing to go through the hassle of enforcing, you trying to force them to complete on a contract will mean nothing.
The car still belongs to the owner, not the dealer.
Incorrect. The car still belongs to the owner, not the dealer.
If the OP made a contract with the dealer in which the price was set at 40K, then the OP could sue on it for damages (but not for specific performance unless the car is very special). It matters not what agreement the dealer had with the car's owner. If a dealer makes a deal that he cannot deliver on, that's done at his risk.
OP, you are if course free to take whatever advice you wish, but on this thread you will get lots of well meant but completely wrong blether from people who know nothing about the law, so read with your scepticism filter turned on.
Please tell us what exactly was agreed, and with whom. Did you know that the dealer was selling as agent for someone else?
SonicShadow said:
Get the deposit back, find another car.
OP, there have been threads like this before where I've been shouted down by the PH masses who decided that contract law does not really exist but I'd be siding with BV here.The devil is in the detail but if this stands up to scrutiny -
taz turbo said:
I have a receipt for the deposit, that states I'm entering into a legally binding contract.....
then I would expect the dealer to have some legal obligation to you.Enforcing it may be a hassle but that's a different conversation……..
The shouty IANAL but I am going to give you some completely rubbish made up legal advice anyway types that abound hereabouts often appear to believe that a contract has to be written in Goat Blood on Pink Papyrus and have the word KONTRAKT on it in order to be enforceable. They do not appear to realise that contracts can in most contexts be made through speech, actions, writing, email, etc.
There is much else besides. The other day we had "if it's a private sale contract it can be breached with impunity" (not word for word, but that was the idea expressed). The Internet pub book of the law of contract would be a very strange read indeed.
What makes me curious is that many people here appear to have a commendable interest in the law (commendable because a free society ruled by law is all the better if all of its citizens understand the basics of the laws that they live by), but do not then take the trouble to read up on it from reliable sources.
There is much else besides. The other day we had "if it's a private sale contract it can be breached with impunity" (not word for word, but that was the idea expressed). The Internet pub book of the law of contract would be a very strange read indeed.
What makes me curious is that many people here appear to have a commendable interest in the law (commendable because a free society ruled by law is all the better if all of its citizens understand the basics of the laws that they live by), but do not then take the trouble to read up on it from reliable sources.
taz turbo said:
Paid deposit based on 40K, dealer now wants 45K.
Prices of this car have gone silly since paying deposit, three cars same spec and price when I paid the deposit, now two other cars available with same spec 58-60K!
Not happy.
What exactly were the terms of the deposit? Without more to give more accurate advice, then I would write to the dealer stating:Prices of this car have gone silly since paying deposit, three cars same spec and price when I paid the deposit, now two other cars available with same spec 58-60K!
Not happy.
1. You have a contract for them to supply the car at 40k.
2. If they breach that contract you will find a similar car elsewhere and pursue them for the additional costs you incur (which you estimate to be in the region of 15k). Advise that if they breach the contract you expect your deposit back within forty eight hours.
3. Give them seven days to get back to you.
I am I reading this right ?.
OP agreed to pay 40k Garage/agent/owner/whoever want 45k but it's worth 58-60k, I think a decision needs to be made on what you wanted out of the car in the first place, if you can't get another one for less than 58k then you still got a bargain by spending the 45k.
OP agreed to pay 40k Garage/agent/owner/whoever want 45k but it's worth 58-60k, I think a decision needs to be made on what you wanted out of the car in the first place, if you can't get another one for less than 58k then you still got a bargain by spending the 45k.
Assume contract to buy at 40K. Deaker repudiates contract. OP accepts repudiation but, in reasonable mitigation of loss, buys car at 45K, reserving rights as he does so. Then OP sues dealer for 5K. I am not joking! This could be done, if the contract is a good one. Details of contract needed, please.
Breadvan72 said:
The shouty IANAL but I am going to give you some completely rubbish made up legal advice anyway types that abound hereabouts often appear to believe that a contract has to be written in Goat Blood on Pink Papyrus and have the word KONTRAKT on it in order to be enforceable. They do not appear to realise that contracts can in most contexts be made through speech, actions, writing, email, etc.
There is much else besides. The other day we had "if it's a private sale contract it can be breached with impunity" (not word for word, but that was the idea expressed). The Internet pub book of the law of contract would be a very strange read indeed.
What makes me curious is that many people here appear to have a commendable interest in the law (commendable because a free society ruled by law is all the better if all of its citizens understand the basics of the laws that they live by), but do not then take the trouble to read up on it from reliable sources.
Perhaps you need to write the Internet pub book of the law, then we would have a reliable sourceThere is much else besides. The other day we had "if it's a private sale contract it can be breached with impunity" (not word for word, but that was the idea expressed). The Internet pub book of the law of contract would be a very strange read indeed.
What makes me curious is that many people here appear to have a commendable interest in the law (commendable because a free society ruled by law is all the better if all of its citizens understand the basics of the laws that they live by), but do not then take the trouble to read up on it from reliable sources.
ging84 said:
Perhaps you need to write the Internet pub book of the law, then we would have a reliable source
Now THAT would be an interesting read 
How on earth do people think that contracts cannot be verbal? How would you even buy a paper in the morning without a lawyer in attendance otherwise?
Of course with verbal contracts determining the terms is the fun part...it can descend into "he says A,I say B" etc.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff