Used car dealer sold really dodgy car

[QJumper]

BUG4LIFE said:

The seller did a HPi check. Not their fault HPi doesn't do salvage. The industry standard is HPi. Still crap for the buyer, but the buyer should make sure they do all the checks they can as dealers can be full of st. The dealer WILL say the HPi check said the car is clean. Though I hope they accept responsibility for selling such a car and help the OP's Sister.

I agree that people should do all the check they can before buying, but they shouldn't have to, as that's what they're paying the dealer for.

The reason people buy from dealers, and pay the associated premium, is because they assume that the dealer has done all the necessary due diligence. Many car buyers don't know what to check or look for, and so are entirely in the hands of the dealer for an accurate assessment of the car. That's not unreasonable, and is how the law sees it. So, people are paying for either an honest and accurate description and history of the car they're buying, or the accompanying legal protection if the dealer makes a mistake, or is full of st.

I really don't understand those who are saying that an inexperienced, non professional buyer should have checked and seen the condition of the car before buying it, and yet somehow appear to absolve a professional expert for not identifying the same things when either buying, or subsequently preparing and selling it. The assumption somehow being that the car is sold "as seen", which clearly isn't the case with a dealer sale.

I do agree that it may not be the dealer's fault if HPI didn't record the write off, and also that perhaps the dealer didn't know. Either way, it may not have been the dealer's fault, but it is his responsibility.

I agree with those who say to approach the dealer calmly, with all the information, and request a return and refund (less usage). If no joy then take it to the finance company.

[swiftguy]

Dan W. said:

If you want to pm me the reg i can do a proper trade HPI for you so you can see what us dealers would have seen.

Thanks for the offer Dan, at this stage I'm not sure if I'm comfortable passing over identifiable information.

Assuming your trade HPI would still return a 'Not insurance write off'

I think we've established there is a discrepancy between what HPI shows and what v-check shows - v-check searching additional databases to provide a more accurate result

[Dan W.]

swiftguy said:

Dan W. said:

If you want to pm me the reg i can do a proper trade HPI for you so you can see what us dealers would have seen.

Thanks for the offer Dan, at this stage I'm not sure if I'm comfortable passing over identifiable information.

Assuming your trade HPI would still return a 'Not insurance write off'

I think we've established there is a discrepancy between what HPI shows and what v-check shows - v-check searching additional databases to provide a more accurate result

No worries.

[Deep Thought]

QJumper said:

BUG4LIFE said:

The seller did a HPi check. Not their fault HPi doesn't do salvage. The industry standard is HPi. Still crap for the buyer, but the buyer should make sure they do all the checks they can as dealers can be full of st. The dealer WILL say the HPi check said the car is clean. Though I hope they accept responsibility for selling such a car and help the OP's Sister.

I agree that people should do all the check they can before buying, but they shouldn't have to, as that's what they're paying the dealer for.

The reason people buy from dealers, and pay the associated premium, is because they assume that the dealer has done all the necessary due diligence. Many car buyers don't know what to check or look for, and so are entirely in the hands of the dealer for an accurate assessment of the car. That's not unreasonable, and is how the law sees it. So, people are paying for either an honest and accurate description and history of the car they're buying, or the accompanying legal protection if the dealer makes a mistake, or is full of st.

I really don't understand those who are saying that an inexperienced, non professional buyer should have checked and seen the condition of the car before buying it, and yet somehow appear to absolve a professional expert for not identifying the same things when either buying, or subsequently preparing and selling it. The assumption somehow being that the car is sold "as seen", which clearly isn't the case with a dealer sale.

I do agree that it may not be the dealer's fault if HPI didn't record the write off, and also that perhaps the dealer didn't know. Either way, it may not have been the dealer's fault, but it is his responsibility.

I agree with those who say to approach the dealer calmly, with all the information, and request a return and refund (less usage). If no joy then take it to the finance company.

Precisely. The dealer is deemed to be the expert and should do whatever due diligence they need to.

That has not happened. Not necessarily the dealers "fault", but they are deemed the expert.

[BertBert]

QJumper said:

I do agree that it may not be the dealer's fault if HPI didn't record the write off, and also that perhaps the dealer didn't know. Either way, it may not have been the dealer's fault, but it is his responsibility.

I agree with those who say to approach the dealer calmly, with all the information, and request a return and refund (less usage). If no joy then take it to the finance company.

Agree about the dealer's responsibility. Regarding the finance co, I think I'd go there to get their take on the approaches to be made first rather than second. It's extremely likely (almost certain) that the dealer knew there was damage from how it's been described (even if they didn't do the slavage check). If you go to them they will just bluff and bluster and deny.

[Deep Thought]

BertBert said:

QJumper said:

I do agree that it may not be the dealer's fault if HPI didn't record the write off, and also that perhaps the dealer didn't know. Either way, it may not have been the dealer's fault, but it is his responsibility.

I agree with those who say to approach the dealer calmly, with all the information, and request a return and refund (less usage). If no joy then take it to the finance company.

Agree about the dealer's responsibility. Regarding the finance co, I think I'd go there to get their take on the approaches to be made first rather than second. It's extremely likely (almost certain) that the dealer knew there was damage from how it's been described (even if they didn't do the slavage check). If you go to them they will just bluff and bluster and deny.

I think them knowing or not knowing it had damage is a moot point that as you say they'll deny anyway.

The key here is the Cat S write off.

[joropug]

There is an avenue to pursue you might not have thought of, the insurance company.

I know that some insurance companies have bought cars back off the public after they failed to add the CAT marker to HPI - as it was cheaper than paying compensation/risk of bodged repairs causing injury etc.

Find the insurer and contact them

[QJumper]

joropug said:

There is an avenue to pursue you might not have thought of, the insurance company.

I know that some insurance companies have bought cars back off the public after they failed to add the CAT marker to HPI - as it was cheaper than paying compensation/risk of bodged repairs causing injury etc.

Find the insurer and contact them

On that note, it might also be worth checking if there's legal cover included on the policy, as that may also be useful if you have to pursue it.

[BUG4LIFE]

Deep Thought said:

QJumper said:

BUG4LIFE said:

The seller did a HPi check. Not their fault HPi doesn't do salvage. The industry standard is HPi. Still crap for the buyer, but the buyer should make sure they do all the checks they can as dealers can be full of st. The dealer WILL say the HPi check said the car is clean. Though I hope they accept responsibility for selling such a car and help the OP's Sister.

I agree that people should do all the check they can before buying, but they shouldn't have to, as that's what they're paying the dealer for.

The reason people buy from dealers, and pay the associated premium, is because they assume that the dealer has done all the necessary due diligence. Many car buyers don't know what to check or look for, and so are entirely in the hands of the dealer for an accurate assessment of the car. That's not unreasonable, and is how the law sees it. So, people are paying for either an honest and accurate description and history of the car they're buying, or the accompanying legal protection if the dealer makes a mistake, or is full of st.

I really don't understand those who are saying that an inexperienced, non professional buyer should have checked and seen the condition of the car before buying it, and yet somehow appear to absolve a professional expert for not identifying the same things when either buying, or subsequently preparing and selling it. The assumption somehow being that the car is sold "as seen", which clearly isn't the case with a dealer sale.

I do agree that it may not be the dealer's fault if HPI didn't record the write off, and also that perhaps the dealer didn't know. Either way, it may not have been the dealer's fault, but it is his responsibility.

I agree with those who say to approach the dealer calmly, with all the information, and request a return and refund (less usage). If no joy then take it to the finance company.

Precisely. The dealer is deemed to be the expert and should do whatever due diligence they need to.

That has not happened. Not necessarily the dealers "fault", but they are deemed the expert.

I think you're both living in a dream world. Yes, I agree you pay a premium cos a dealer SHOULD make sure they are selling a 'good' car. But at the end of the day, they just want to sell cars with as little work as possible. Of course there are many many many great dealers, who put in the extra work [in a world of the Internet and social-media, it doesn't take much for a bad dealers name to get around] but there is just a many who don't give a st about the customer and just want a sale.

Do your own checks. Do not trust a dealer, even manufacturer dealers.

[Deep Thought]

BUG4LIFE said:

I think you're both living in a dream world. Yes, I agree you pay a premium cos a dealer SHOULD make sure they are selling a 'good' car. But at the end of the day, they just want to sell cars with as little work as possible. Of course there are many many many great dealers, who put in the extra work [in a world of the Internet and social-media, it doesn't take much for a bad dealers name to get around] but there is just a many who don't give a st about the customer and just want a sale.

Do your own checks. Do not trust a dealer, even manufacturer dealers.

I sold cars for around 20 years and had many proactive and positive discussions with Trading Standards and Citizens advice at the time on the customers rights.

Legally - the dealer is deemed the expert. They are expected to know.

That is how that would pan out in a court of law. Dealer didnt do their due diligence to the level that would have discovered that.

That can end up being really unfair on the dealer at times, but thats how it is.

[CrippsCorner]

swiftguy said:

I can't believe the level of downplaying, this isn't just a scratch or a dent! A whole wing has been replaced, damage enough to the window pillar to be painted.

So you think the car air-bag components wiring just left hanging, damaged, not connected - is all ok? The occupants lives at risk is all ok?

The odd occasion where my own car has had an accident, wing damage, it is always be recorded at the very least cat N (or was D).

How on earth can you say a car that has at the very least wing damage, the insurance would not record it.

This has not gone through insurance, scrap parts have been used.

Edited by swiftguy on Sunday 14th August 16:34

I've had cars before that have had damage, but paid for the repair myself, therefore no category as insurance weren't even aware.

[BertBert]

CrippsCorner said:

I've had cars before that have had damage, but paid for the repair myself, therefore no category as insurance weren't even aware.

That didn't happen here as it went for salvage (see the pic), was bought and then repaired by the buyer to end up at the dealer who may or may not be the same person (we have nothing to go on either way).

[BertBert]

BUG4LIFE said:

I think you're both living in a dream world. Yes, I agree you pay a premium cos a dealer SHOULD make sure they are selling a 'good' car. But at the end of the day, they just want to sell cars with as little work as possible. Of course there are many many many great dealers, who put in the extra work [in a world of the Internet and social-media, it doesn't take much for a bad dealers name to get around] but there is just a many who don't give a st about the customer and just want a sale.

Do your own checks. Do not trust a dealer, even manufacturer dealers.

It doesn't matter what you or anyone else would do in the future, the past cannot be undone. And that's why there is the CRA,

[QJumper]

BUG4LIFE said:

I think you're both living in a dream world. Yes, I agree you pay a premium cos a dealer SHOULD make sure they are selling a 'good' car. But at the end of the day, they just want to sell cars with as little work as possible. Of course there are many many many great dealers, who put in the extra work [in a world of the Internet and social-media, it doesn't take much for a bad dealers name to get around] but there is just a many who don't give a st about the customer and just want a sale.

No, you pay a premium because the dealer is legally required to make sure they're selling a "good" car, and it's why there are laws to protect buyers from dealers who don't. It's not about putting in the "extra work", but about putting in the legally required/expected work.

Of course the dealer can choose whether and how much of that to do, but it doesn't really matter whether the dealer was dishonest, optimistic, lazy, or simply unlucky because, being the "expert" in the transaction, he carries the legal responsibility.

[Driver101]

CrippsCorner said:

I've had cars before that have had damage, but paid for the repair myself, therefore no category as insurance weren't even aware.

Why would you not just claim through your insurance?

[RECr]

Lots of people worry that their prenium will skyrocket if they make a claim, so pay for the repair themselves.

[Heartworm]

Some people are insured 3rd party only so insurance won’t pay out,

[Wheel Turned Out]

Has your sister made a determination in light of it? Is this something she's willing to actively pursue to get the resolution if they don't accept responsibility?

Cynicism on my part admittedly but I can't think of many dealers who would say "yup, we screwed up, we'll pay" - even if the threat of naming and shaming is levied. Going to court even on a "cert" can end up a costly and stressful experience. But then if you don't it's how people end up getting away with it.

How does she actually feel about all this?

[Driver101]

RECr said:

Lots of people worry that their prenium will skyrocket if they make a claim, so pay for the repair themselves.

Crippscorner suggested he repaired his car to avoid it being categorised by the insurance company. I can understand people paying for small repairs, but repairs verging on a write off I don't.

Unless you're young with no NCB or have a poor claim record a claim doesn't make that much difference.

[RECr]

I suppose some people may own a shed (probably a classic to them) that they value more highly than the market does, want to keep it, and don't want it "tainted" by a CAT marker.