Porsche Classic Fraud Case
Author
Discussion

sutoka

Original Poster:

4,716 posts

131 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
Porsche dealer sells man car he claims is 'refurbished' and 'reliable' buyer then discovers it has not been totally refurbished and not as reliable as claimed when sold to him. He gets trading standards involved and now said dealer is up for fraud by misrepresentation. Now what kind of refurbished vintage Porsche are you going to buy for £40,000? Surely not one old enough to need a total nut and bolt rebuild.

As for the reliable claim, if you buy a classic Porsche who deems what is reliable, nobody has a crystal ball. Any car could break down at any time.

Interesting to see how this plays out in court. I suspect they'll want a few experts in the field discussing the reliability of a classic Porsche.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/courts/ni-...



Edited by sutoka on Saturday 4th February 02:39

Plus8

252 posts

113 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
It’s taken 6 years to get to a court hearing! You must wonder what negotiations, offers, etc have gone on in the meantime and what effect the last 6 years has had on the parties involved. There must be a quicker and simpler method of getting disputes like this resolved.

fridaypassion

11,178 posts

251 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
In the trade this is what we call a refund and move on.

It would be really interesting to know what the cars actually like you have to be so so careful with descriptions and that's not just traders either it's anyone.

I would guess the owner is a retired company director with too much time on his hands and had been mithering the dealer for 6 years. Probably got a really good car as well.

Canon_Fodder

1,775 posts

86 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
That report makes it sound like a criminal trial - surely not?

BertBert

20,886 posts

234 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
From reading, yes it's a criminal trial from the charges. Looks like the buyer paid 40k for the refurb rather than the price of the car. The dealer didn't do the refurb and falsified that he had and had a "tough st" clause in the contract.

anonymous-user

77 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
NOT a Porsche dealer. Just a used car dealer who sells Porsche.

Canon_Fodder

1,775 posts

86 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
Thanks Bert - makes sense

anonymous-user

77 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
So sounds like he paid for a full resto and got a blow over. Plenty of them about.

I paid for a full resto of the underneath on a car I had a few years back, but he obviously just sprayed it over. Ended up selling it cheap.

Now I always look underneath of a car im buying.

CRA1G

7,166 posts

218 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
Looking at the dealers company accounts if the plaintiff wins in court i would have thought more than likely it will go into Administration anyway.

Mojooo

13,287 posts

203 months

Saturday 4th February 2023
quotequote all
CRA1G said:
Looking at the dealers company accounts if the plaintiff wins in court i would have thought more than likely it will go into Administration anyway.
Its not a civil case - if found guilty he will get a criminal penalty - so probably a fine (personal one)