Sold a car privately - court papers received
Discussion
Sorry it's another one of these threads.
The facts:
Sold my partner's 2011 VW Golf via an eBay classified ad a couple of weeks ago on bank holiday Monday.
Car was advertised for a couple of months before selling. Perhaps irrelevant but the car (owned for 3.5 years) was being sold as we have 4 cars and it has had very little use since being MOT'd in Jan.
70k miles, full VW and specialist history, in good condition cosmetically and mechanically; premium tyres all round, new rear brakes, battery etc. Has also been under extended VW warranty all the time we've had it.
It has air con and in the ad it stated it was working - which was correct at the time of advertising it couple of months ago. However as stated it had sat unused.
Interested buyer contacts me on Sunday, knocks £300 off the price via email and travels from London to Wiltshire to see it on bank holiday Monday.
On picking him up from the train station it is apparent the a/c isn't blowing cold which I point out apologetically and we drive to my house in the car for him to inspect it. He test drives the car (thrashes the nuts off it, BTW) and returns to my house to have a poke around the engine bay, looks through the service history etc. We discuss the a/c issue and whilst I suspect it may need re-gassing I make clear I have had not investigated it, am not mechanically minded and it could just as easily be a more involved/ expensive repair. I suggest knocking £50 off and he agrees. As an alternative suggest I can book it into VW to get it looked at as it is under warranty - he seems keen to take the car that day, so declines that option.
He agrees to buy it (£5.3k), we scribble a receipt (sold as seen, no warranty) and off he goes with the car.
He puts car into garage in London two days later and has it fixed. He then texts me to say it needed a new condenser at a cost of £632 and he is now out of pocket. I make clear that whilst it is unfortunate it did not simply require a re-gas I am not willing to contribute and could have had it looked at under warranty. He asks for 50% of the cost back and gives a deadline for me to send him the money before issuing court proceedings.
I again make clear he knew of the fault when inspecting the car and it was sold as seen, he agreed to purchase anyway.
Fast forward to the following week and court papers received to state he has made a money claim against me for the repairs + interest + loss of earnings + court fee. I have to respond by the end of the month.
Reason for the claim stated as: "car advertised in very good condition, during inspection he noted the air con was not working and that I claimed it just needed the gas topping up which would cost £50. We agreed to reduce the cost of the car by £50 to cover this".
That's a total misrepresentation of the actual conversation which was that; a) I could get the car put into VW and have the problem investigated under our warranty, or; b) knock £50 off and he takes the car 'as is'.
Obviously I dispute what he has said but does he have a case against me?
The facts:
Sold my partner's 2011 VW Golf via an eBay classified ad a couple of weeks ago on bank holiday Monday.
Car was advertised for a couple of months before selling. Perhaps irrelevant but the car (owned for 3.5 years) was being sold as we have 4 cars and it has had very little use since being MOT'd in Jan.
70k miles, full VW and specialist history, in good condition cosmetically and mechanically; premium tyres all round, new rear brakes, battery etc. Has also been under extended VW warranty all the time we've had it.
It has air con and in the ad it stated it was working - which was correct at the time of advertising it couple of months ago. However as stated it had sat unused.
Interested buyer contacts me on Sunday, knocks £300 off the price via email and travels from London to Wiltshire to see it on bank holiday Monday.
On picking him up from the train station it is apparent the a/c isn't blowing cold which I point out apologetically and we drive to my house in the car for him to inspect it. He test drives the car (thrashes the nuts off it, BTW) and returns to my house to have a poke around the engine bay, looks through the service history etc. We discuss the a/c issue and whilst I suspect it may need re-gassing I make clear I have had not investigated it, am not mechanically minded and it could just as easily be a more involved/ expensive repair. I suggest knocking £50 off and he agrees. As an alternative suggest I can book it into VW to get it looked at as it is under warranty - he seems keen to take the car that day, so declines that option.
He agrees to buy it (£5.3k), we scribble a receipt (sold as seen, no warranty) and off he goes with the car.
He puts car into garage in London two days later and has it fixed. He then texts me to say it needed a new condenser at a cost of £632 and he is now out of pocket. I make clear that whilst it is unfortunate it did not simply require a re-gas I am not willing to contribute and could have had it looked at under warranty. He asks for 50% of the cost back and gives a deadline for me to send him the money before issuing court proceedings.
I again make clear he knew of the fault when inspecting the car and it was sold as seen, he agreed to purchase anyway.
Fast forward to the following week and court papers received to state he has made a money claim against me for the repairs + interest + loss of earnings + court fee. I have to respond by the end of the month.
Reason for the claim stated as: "car advertised in very good condition, during inspection he noted the air con was not working and that I claimed it just needed the gas topping up which would cost £50. We agreed to reduce the cost of the car by £50 to cover this".
That's a total misrepresentation of the actual conversation which was that; a) I could get the car put into VW and have the problem investigated under our warranty, or; b) knock £50 off and he takes the car 'as is'.
Obviously I dispute what he has said but does he have a case against me?
He can't prove what he said and neither can you so it will default back to 'buyer beware' and the receipt saying sold as seen.
Nothing to be concerned about, either they genuinely believe they have some consumer rights (which unless the car is sold in a dangerous state, they don't) or they're simply trying it on. Either way, they'll be in for a surprise when it's ruled in your favour.
I'm intrigued by the loss of earnings- I wonder how this was caused by the malfunctioning A/C? Perhaps they're a part time ice cream vendor...
Nothing to be concerned about, either they genuinely believe they have some consumer rights (which unless the car is sold in a dangerous state, they don't) or they're simply trying it on. Either way, they'll be in for a surprise when it's ruled in your favour.
I'm intrigued by the loss of earnings- I wonder how this was caused by the malfunctioning A/C? Perhaps they're a part time ice cream vendor...
Bumblebee7 said:
He can't prove what he said and neither can you so it will default back to 'buyer beware' and the receipt saying sold as seen.
Nothing to be concerned about, either they genuinely believe they have some consumer rights (which unless the car is sold in a dangerous state, they don't) or they're simply trying it on. Either way, they'll be in for a surprise when it's ruled in your favour.
I'm intrigued by the loss of earnings- I wonder how this was caused by the malfunctioning A/C? Perhaps they're a part time ice cream vendor...
Car certainly not dangerous - it's been really well cared for (8yrs old and kept under VW warranty, treated to new Dunlops, not ditch-finders etc.) Nothing to be concerned about, either they genuinely believe they have some consumer rights (which unless the car is sold in a dangerous state, they don't) or they're simply trying it on. Either way, they'll be in for a surprise when it's ruled in your favour.
I'm intrigued by the loss of earnings- I wonder how this was caused by the malfunctioning A/C? Perhaps they're a part time ice cream vendor...
BTW I think it's loss of earnings to attend court.
Salmonofdoubt said:
It's probably worth the time and effort to go to court just so you can laugh at his face when it's decided in your favour.
Unless you're a trader of any sort no warranty exists.
I think it comes down to whether I've misrepresented the condition of the car. It was advertised in good faith and whilst it had a fault - that fault was apparent on inspection and the seller was made aware. He was then given the option of a price reduction or for me to put the car in for investigation. He chose to have the reduction and purchased it.Unless you're a trader of any sort no warranty exists.
He's really got some front.
Loss of earnings will be the time he claims he wasn't working getting it repaired.
Claim is absolute nonsense and it would take a dim-witted judge to award in his favour but WHATEVER YOU DO DO NOT IGNORE THE COURT SUMMONS. Otherwise you risk decree being awarded against you in absentia.
Claim is absolute nonsense and it would take a dim-witted judge to award in his favour but WHATEVER YOU DO DO NOT IGNORE THE COURT SUMMONS. Otherwise you risk decree being awarded against you in absentia.
It doesn't matter much what was said or not said by either party. You advertised the car (factually) and he was given the opportunity to inspect it to his own satisfaction. Having done so he decided to buy it.
As you are not a trader there is nothing more to say, as I'm sure whoever looks at the case in court will confirm.
As you are not a trader there is nothing more to say, as I'm sure whoever looks at the case in court will confirm.
Integroo said:
Loss of earnings will be the time he claims he wasn't working getting it repaired.
Claim is absolute nonsense and it would take a dim-witted judge to award in his favour but WHATEVER YOU DO DO NOT IGNORE THE COURT SUMMONS. Otherwise you risk decree being awarded against you in absentia.
Absolutely this !!Claim is absolute nonsense and it would take a dim-witted judge to award in his favour but WHATEVER YOU DO DO NOT IGNORE THE COURT SUMMONS. Otherwise you risk decree being awarded against you in absentia.
The claimant is probably counting on this happening, ie you not turning up. Please follow money claim guidelines for submitting a defence. You may find that he backs down once he realises you will be defending. IMO not following the pre action protocol will not help matters from his side, plus if the car says sold as seen, well that is what it is. A very likely win for you.
xjay1337 said:
I agree (Although IANAL).
However, £632 for an AC Condensor?
I bought one from Euro Car Parts for £35. Fitted it myself in 3 hours (I had a leak so all the gas had already escaped anyway).
And £40 for a regas
The man has been robbed lol. Although that is his problem, not yours.
Anyway, private car sale has no come backs.
Does seem very costly repair, but maybe London weighting....However, £632 for an AC Condensor?
I bought one from Euro Car Parts for £35. Fitted it myself in 3 hours (I had a leak so all the gas had already escaped anyway).
And £40 for a regas
The man has been robbed lol. Although that is his problem, not yours.
Anyway, private car sale has no come backs.
Oxford1971 said:
Absolutely this !!
The claimant is probably counting on this happening, ie you not turning up. Please follow money claim guidelines for submitting a defence. You may find that he backs down once he realises you will be defending. IMO not following the pre action protocol will not help matters from his side, plus if the car says sold as seen, well that is what it is. A very likely win for you.
Interestingly no guidance notes for defendants or forms received with the court papers - all appears to be done online. When logging into the portal, again no guidance on things like how to change court jurisdiction. Assume I have to waste my valuable time researching all of this. My cup of joy overfloweth...etc.The claimant is probably counting on this happening, ie you not turning up. Please follow money claim guidelines for submitting a defence. You may find that he backs down once he realises you will be defending. IMO not following the pre action protocol will not help matters from his side, plus if the car says sold as seen, well that is what it is. A very likely win for you.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff