Another 'sold a car' thread, but with complications

[bearman68]

We are a business, we repair cars.
We fitted our own van with a replacement used engine, new injectors and the like. We did this prior to Covid, and partly as a result of Covid, we never used it, and sold it.
I was scrupulously honest with the buyer, told him what we had done, what we hadn't. Left nothing out, and was very straightforward.
6 weeks later, the engine has (apparently) gone bang, after something around 65 miles.

Is this a DSFO, or a "we need to buy the van back off him" moment?

I saved the ad - it's quite clear in the ad that we have changed the engine for a used one, and the ad is straightforward and honest. As was my conversation with him.

What do you think?

[krisdelta]

It's too late for them to outright reject the vehicle, but you can offer to repair, or refund (it may be easier and less hassle) but worth checking they've not dropped in another, broken engine. Amazing they've only managed 65 miles in 6 weeks. Do they live 100 meters away?

Edited by krisdelta on Wednesday 30th June 18:04

[bearman68]

Our 'personal' van, not a van for sale for profit - does that make a difference?
And it's 6 weeks. So well over 30 days.

[krisdelta]

I've edited my reply as my brain failed to process 6 weeks on the first pass

ttps://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/everyday-money/buying-and-running-a-car/your-rights-if-something-is-wrong-with-your-car?source=mas#

The businesses van? I think you're still in the same situation - post 30 days, rights are diluted from outright "reject".

[bearman68]

Gosh, that article raises as many questions as it answers.

1) He knew the engine had been changed when he bought it, and I explicitly said I had no knowledge of how good it was.
2) I don't know if, because it was 'our' van, if we classify as a trader? It certainly wasn't bought with the intention of selling for profit. (which it definitely wasn't)

Looks like we may have some haggling and discussion in front of us.

[stevemcs]

Was it sold from the business premises ?

[Collectingbrass]

If it was a private sale I'd say play hard ball and demand proof that the engine that went bang was the engine you fitted and that it had been driven within its limits. From what you say I think it more likely that Matt Hancock will still be married to his wife in 5 years time...

Given you're a business (I think) you'll have to work out whether the cost to buy the van back is worth it to keep or enhance your reputation

[bearman68]

stevemcs said:

Was it sold from the business premises ?

Yes.
He could see we are a workshop, not a van retailer.

[bearman68]

I think it likely we will at least have a look at the van, and see what's gone on with it.

It's further complicated by the fact we had kitted it out as a mobile workshop, with batteries, inverter, drawers, tool storage, towing facilities etc etc. I imagine that has been removed, and thus reduces the value considerably.

I think this is going to be an interesting conversation.

[twokcc]

Was the van owned by the business or private individual on v5

[944 Man]

You need to step back and consider how a District Judge in the County Court will view it. Trying to be clever technicalities about whose name was on the V5 arent going to interest him in all likelihood.

What can a the buyer reasonably expect from someone who does it for a living? In lieu of a receipt stating clearly that the vehicle is sold for repair or dismantling then I think that your position is extremely difficult.

[bearman68]

944 Man said:

You need to step back and consider how a District Judge in the County Court will view it. Trying to be clever technicalities about whose name was on the V5 arent going to interest him in all likelihood.

What can a the buyer reasonably expect from someone who does it for a living? In lieu of a receipt stating clearly that the vehicle is sold for repair or dismantling then I think that your position is extremely difficult.

I think this is a good point. I'm not upset by the idea of going to court if I think we have a reasonable and defendable case. If we find for example the coolant has drained out, and the engine overheated, I think we will be willing to take the court route.
But I'm going to be all opposite to normal PH. I think I'll have the van back for a look, and some investigation work, and make any offer (if I make one at all) on the basis of what we find.
I deem a judge to think it right and sensible to see what the matter with it is before accepting or rejecting any claim.

Apologies if this is not extreme enough, but thank you for the replies. You've helped me understand the situation if nothing else.

[kestral]

bearman68 said:

I think this is a good point. I'm not upset by the idea of going to court if I think we have a reasonable and defendable case. If we find for example the coolant has drained out, and the engine overheated, I think we will be willing to take the court route.
But I'm going to be all opposite to normal PH. I think I'll have the van back for a look, and some investigation work, and make any offer (if I make one at all) on the basis of what we find.
I deem a judge to think it right and sensible to see what the matter with it is before accepting or rejecting any claim.

Apologies if this is not extreme enough, but thank you for the replies. You've helped me understand the situation if nothing else.

First of all you should decide if you are a trader of cars or a private seller.

You only say you repair cars. But do you "trade them"

[bearman68]

kestral said:

First of all you should decide if you are a trader of cars or a private seller.

You only say you repair cars. But do you "trade them"

We do not buy and sell cars for profit. (or even with the intention of profit)

That sounds evasive - it's not intended to be. We clearly repair cars with the intention of making money. We will rent cars with the intention of profit. We occasionally sell cars to the scrap or for breaking. But our business is not buying and selling cars and vans. We are actually auto electricians.

[MDMA .]

bearman68 said:

kestral said:

First of all you should decide if you are a trader of cars or a private seller.

You only say you repair cars. But do you "trade them"

We do not buy and sell cars for profit. (or even with the intention of profit)

That sounds evasive - it's not intended to be. We clearly repair cars with the intention of making money. We will rent cars with the intention of profit. We occasionally sell cars to the scrap or for breaking. But our business is not buying and selling cars and vans. We are actually auto electricians.

But can the buyer see that you buy/sell cars/vans on a regular basis either online or by other means? If so, I think the court will take the view that you are a trader.

[meatballs]

cra said:

“Trader” means a person acting for purposes relating to that person’s trade, business, craft or profession, whether acting personally or through another person acting in the trader’s name or on the trader’s behalf

Therefore I'm not sure whether you regularly sell vehicles comes into it?

You fixed your business van as part of your profession, and sold then sold it? Sounds like you could be said to be acting in relation to your business to me?

If so I doubt saying you had no idea how good the engine is will cut any mustard. Goods should be fit for purpose and the onus is on you to prove that they were at the point of sale. You will have to have good evidence of what caused the failure and I suspect you would need someone independent to back you up?

I would think the advert would pretty much have to state its considered undriveable and priced accordingly to get you out of it?

That's my take, fingers crossed you find a stone has holed the radiator and all the coolant has leaked out or somethig similar?

[Aluminati]

bearman68 said:

We do not buy and sell cars for profit. (or even with the intention of profit)

That sounds evasive - it's not intended to be. We clearly repair cars with the intention of making money. We will rent cars with the intention of profit. We occasionally sell cars to the scrap or for breaking. But our business is not buying and selling cars and vans. We are actually auto electricians.

VAT charged on sale of commercial ?

[Gluggy]

bearman68 said:

It's further complicated by the fact we had kitted it out as a mobile workshop, with batteries, inverter, drawers, tool storage, towing facilities etc etc. I imagine that has been removed, and thus reduces the value considerably.

Call me a cynic but I reckon that was the they buyer's idea all along - get van, strip out expensive kit, drive (65) miles to sell said equipment and then do whatever is needed to make the engine go bang....

They then come back to you shouting the odds about a full refund on a now forked van and when you mention the missing fittings their reply will be something along the lines "I didn't buy a toolbox, inverter etc. I bought a van and its stuffed so i want a refund"

I'd say its not unreasonable for you make a deduction for the (assumed) missing but stuff unless by some outside chance they return it as equipped when sold I cant see the buyer playing ball.... so it comes down to (IMNAL) fighting it legally and / or suffering trial by (anti)social media or paying them out for the easy life.

Edited by Gluggy on Thursday 1st July 00:27

Edited by Gluggy on Thursday 1st July 00:28

[fouronthefloor]

You do repairs and engine diagnostics for a living?
Put yourself in the position of the buyer and then think how a judge would look at it.

[krisdelta]

Gluggy said:

bearman68 said:

It's further complicated by the fact we had kitted it out as a mobile workshop, with batteries, inverter, drawers, tool storage, towing facilities etc etc. I imagine that has been removed, and thus reduces the value considerably.

Call me a cynic but I reckon that was the they buyer's idea all along - get van, strip out expensive kit, drive (65) miles to sell said equipment and then do whatever is needed to make the engine go bang....

They then come back to you shouting the odds about a full refund on a now forked van and when you mention the missing fittings their reply will be something along the lines "I didn't buy a toolbox, inverter etc. I bought a van and its stuffed so i want a refund"

I'd say its not unreasonable for you make a deduction for the (assumed) missing but stuff unless by some outside chance they return it as equipped when sold I cant see the buyer playing ball.... so it comes down to (IMNAL) fighting it legally and / or suffering trial by (anti)social media or paying them out for the easy life.

Surely if that was the game plan they'd have complained on day 28, rather than when their rights are less clear? To my mind, the OP is trading - the "intent of profit" is moot, that isn't a test to determine if a consumer has rights or not. The OP's business repair and have sold a vehicle to a consumer and should look to resolve the issue on that basis. That doesn't mean "refund", but it does need to be reasonable.