Auction House - Misrepresentation / Negligence
Discussion
I wont mention specifics of the car or of the large and reputable auction house itself - but id welcome any knowledgable opinions on this situation.
Background we brought a car from auction which was catalogued as a matching numbers, perfectly restored, matching numbers example of a seminal 'small' 60's british car.
Chassis and engine numbers were provided and all matched with DVLA, confirmed by a HPI report we ran prior to offering.
So we buy the car, it arrives with post sales guidance its been sorn and that the v5 is outstanding with the DVLA (has been for weeks for them to sort this) - clearly theres no guarantee they will make the changes, or may insist on an inspection, or could issue a Q plate if they arent satisfied.
Subsequently we discover the V5 is missing pending the DVLA correcting the chassis number, engine number and engine capacity..... also that the vendor had told the auction house of this situation but they did not disclose this and the sales room information did not match the car, but the DVLA / HPI info.
Auction house has put their hands up to the mistake, they are cancelling the sale, they've confirmed they were told but made an error in the information used and in not checking in the interim weeks if the V5 had been corrected, nor in the disclosure of this information or withdrawal of the lot. Due to the sorn status and return of the vehicle we've made a material loss of £980 on transport - linked to misrepresentation of the lot and negligence in disclosing material information and providing incorrect information vs the physical car that they were selling.
Welcome thoughts and guidance.
Background we brought a car from auction which was catalogued as a matching numbers, perfectly restored, matching numbers example of a seminal 'small' 60's british car.
Chassis and engine numbers were provided and all matched with DVLA, confirmed by a HPI report we ran prior to offering.
So we buy the car, it arrives with post sales guidance its been sorn and that the v5 is outstanding with the DVLA (has been for weeks for them to sort this) - clearly theres no guarantee they will make the changes, or may insist on an inspection, or could issue a Q plate if they arent satisfied.
Subsequently we discover the V5 is missing pending the DVLA correcting the chassis number, engine number and engine capacity..... also that the vendor had told the auction house of this situation but they did not disclose this and the sales room information did not match the car, but the DVLA / HPI info.
Auction house has put their hands up to the mistake, they are cancelling the sale, they've confirmed they were told but made an error in the information used and in not checking in the interim weeks if the V5 had been corrected, nor in the disclosure of this information or withdrawal of the lot. Due to the sorn status and return of the vehicle we've made a material loss of £980 on transport - linked to misrepresentation of the lot and negligence in disclosing material information and providing incorrect information vs the physical car that they were selling.
Welcome thoughts and guidance.
Edited by bennno on Thursday 28th August 09:21
bennno said:
Background we brought a car from auction
So are you just a transport company, and the buyer of the car is kicking off? Surely your contract with the buyer is sound and you'll get paid for the transportation no matter if it were a car or a milkfloat or a hot dog stand, that was on your truck/trailer?123DWA said:
Is there anything in the auction houses T&C about consequential losses?
The contract contains the standard words, but misrepresentation by negligence cant be excluded by terms if they were demonstrably given the right information by their vendor but did not subsequently use it. They gave me the client consignment copy which is different from what they used.I'll start with a letter to the MD.
(to the other post - no we are the buyer of the lot and paid for the transport which id now seek to recover as a direct loss.)
bennno said:
The contract contains the standard words, but misrepresentation by negligence cant be excluded by terms if they were demonstrably given the right information by their vendor but did not subsequently use it. They gave me the client consignment copy which is different from what they used.
I'll start with a letter to the MD.
(to the other post - no we are the buyer of the lot and paid for the transport which id now seek to recover as a direct loss.)
Think he was being sarcastic ( Bought & Brought)I'll start with a letter to the MD.
(to the other post - no we are the buyer of the lot and paid for the transport which id now seek to recover as a direct loss.)
bennno said:
(to the other post - no we are the buyer of the lot and paid for the transport which id now seek to recover as a direct loss.)
Aaaaah apologies, you didn't make it clear. I thought you had transported the car and then the true buyer was refusing to accept it and you were somehow involved in trying to sort out the mess!At any auction I've been to (a proper car auction, not eBay) they are quite clear on the status of the V5, for example "V5 present". If it were not present, by all means you could assume just applying for one via the V62 route (and paying £25) would get one, but its an assumption on the buyer, not the responsibility of the auction house.
Correcting a chassis number AND engine number at the same time is quite a big thing for DVLA to simply correct, I agree it ought to have been disclosed but that's all history anyway since they've now unwound the deal. I'd say you have to suck up the collection costs, but not necessarily its return costs - or have they only agreed to the money back once its returned?
What kind of HPI check did you do, did you buy an enhanced one with a guarantee - some of them give a compensatory payout if their check proves to be wrong in one way or another.
In any case, unless you're buying lots of cars and are happy to take on a bunch of admin and/or add another RK etc, NEVER BUY A CAR WITHOUT THE V5 is a good rule to have.
paul_c123 said:
Aaaaah apologies, you didn't make it clear. I thought you had transported the car and then the true buyer was refusing to accept it and you were somehow involved in trying to sort out the mess!
At any auction I've been to (a proper car auction, not eBay) they are quite clear on the status of the V5, for example "V5 present". If it were not present, by all means you could assume just applying for one via the V62 route (and paying £25) would get one, but its an assumption on the buyer, not the responsibility of the auction house.
Correcting a chassis number AND engine number at the same time is quite a big thing for DVLA to simply correct, I agree it ought to have been disclosed but that's all history anyway since they've now unwound the deal. I'd say you have to suck up the collection costs, but not necessarily its return costs - or have they only agreed to the money back once its returned?
What kind of HPI check did you do, did you buy an enhanced one with a guarantee - some of them give a compensatory payout if their check proves to be wrong in one way or another.
In any case, unless you're buying lots of cars and are happy to take on a bunch of admin and/or add another RK etc, NEVER BUY A CAR WITHOUT THE V5 is a good rule to have.
This is a bit different, the auction house were given the vin and engine numbers from the car and but were told by the vendor they didn’t match the v5, that the v5 had been sent to the dvla as part of an outstanding request by the vendor to correct the chassis no, change the engine number and capacity. At any auction I've been to (a proper car auction, not eBay) they are quite clear on the status of the V5, for example "V5 present". If it were not present, by all means you could assume just applying for one via the V62 route (and paying £25) would get one, but its an assumption on the buyer, not the responsibility of the auction house.
Correcting a chassis number AND engine number at the same time is quite a big thing for DVLA to simply correct, I agree it ought to have been disclosed but that's all history anyway since they've now unwound the deal. I'd say you have to suck up the collection costs, but not necessarily its return costs - or have they only agreed to the money back once its returned?
What kind of HPI check did you do, did you buy an enhanced one with a guarantee - some of them give a compensatory payout if their check proves to be wrong in one way or another.
In any case, unless you're buying lots of cars and are happy to take on a bunch of admin and/or add another RK etc, NEVER BUY A CAR WITHOUT THE V5 is a good rule to have.
The auctioneer however didn’t then disclose any of this, they published chassis and engine records which matched those held by the hpi / dvla but not the physical car, they didn’t disclose what they’d been told by the vendor about the mismatch and the v5 being with the DVLA for requested changes.
I’d done a full hpi based on the information published by the auction house, it seems however they neglected to cross check the car on arrival nor use the detail provided by the vendor, nor to disclose vital information which was known, so it appears potential misrepresentation and negligence.
I’ll share how this goes.
bennno said:
nor to disclose vital information which was known, so it appears potential misrepresentation and negligence.
It wasn't vital information to them, in fact they probably chose NOT to disclose it for business reasons. Not disclosing information isn't necessarily misrepresentation or negligence.May I ask, how many cars do you buy from auction per year? Or look at/bid on? The reason being, its important to get a feel for the wording of adverts and to understand what ISN'T being said, as well as what is. It goes back to "IS THERE A V5?" which is a basic thing in buying a car. One answer can reveal further questions, for example if there isn't, why not? Are they a lease company? Is the car a repo? etc etc Same with condition. You'll see non-runners where they say "head gasket failure" and you get the car home to find the head gasket has failed. And you'll get others with "non-runner" and it can be literally anything up to and including multiple parts missing, or the engine block has split in two. Buying from auction is a risk and you need to price the risk into your max bid price. They say, the ones you say "no" to are often the best decisions.
Do you have the option of waiting for the V5 (or going the V62 route)? It might be better to wait it out and hear from the DVLA, especially with Tuesday's announcement, than lose £900+ on double transport (seems a lot for transport).
paul_c123 said:
It wasn't vital information to them, in fact they probably chose NOT to disclose it for business reasons. Not disclosing information isn't necessarily misrepresentation or negligence.
May I ask, how many cars do you buy from auction per year? Or look at/bid on? The reason being, its important to get a feel for the wording of adverts and to understand what ISN'T being said, as well as what is. It goes back to "IS THERE A V5?" which is a basic thing in buying a car. One answer can reveal further questions, for example if there isn't, why not? Are they a lease company? Is the car a repo? etc etc Same with condition. You'll see non-runners where they say "head gasket failure" and you get the car home to find the head gasket has failed. And you'll get others with "non-runner" and it can be literally anything up to and including multiple parts missing, or the engine block has split in two. Buying from auction is a risk and you need to price the risk into your max bid price. They say, the ones you say "no" to are often the best decisions.
Do you have the option of waiting for the V5 (or going the V62 route)? It might be better to wait it out and hear from the DVLA, especially with Tuesday's announcement, than lose £900+ on double transport (seems a lot for transport).
I've brought several, but this is different from the scenarios you are describing, it's a classic auction of relatively high value cars.May I ask, how many cars do you buy from auction per year? Or look at/bid on? The reason being, its important to get a feel for the wording of adverts and to understand what ISN'T being said, as well as what is. It goes back to "IS THERE A V5?" which is a basic thing in buying a car. One answer can reveal further questions, for example if there isn't, why not? Are they a lease company? Is the car a repo? etc etc Same with condition. You'll see non-runners where they say "head gasket failure" and you get the car home to find the head gasket has failed. And you'll get others with "non-runner" and it can be literally anything up to and including multiple parts missing, or the engine block has split in two. Buying from auction is a risk and you need to price the risk into your max bid price. They say, the ones you say "no" to are often the best decisions.
Do you have the option of waiting for the V5 (or going the V62 route)? It might be better to wait it out and hear from the DVLA, especially with Tuesday's announcement, than lose £900+ on double transport (seems a lot for transport).
The auctioneer was advised in writing by the vendor that the engine number and chassis number were incorrect as they did not match the V5 / DVLA records, so the car couldn't be HPI'd and that the corrected v5 was not yet available as it was with the DVLA for their review.
Instead of sharing the vendor provided engine and chassis numbers and the DVLA issue on the salesroom information, the auction house provided the incorrect chassis and engine numbers which didnt match the physical car but the DVLA information which was attempting to be corrected.
Long and short is that theres a reasonable obligation for a agent to represent items for sale accurately and where there is a major discrepancy to withdraw such a vehicle from sale, or at the very minimum to disclose the issue.
Will revert with outcome.
bennno said:
Long and short is that theres a reasonable obligation for a agent to represent items for sale accurately and where there is a major discrepancy to withdraw such a vehicle from sale, or at the very minimum to disclose the issue.
I know its a classic car auction. The point being, its still a car and the admin is the same.At the risk of repeating earlier comments, its whether they'll also cover consequential losses. They've already (offered to) unwind the sale. I don't think they are obliged to cover consequential losses.
I am guessing from the replies so far, this was advertised with "V5 to follow" or some other similar wording, rather than "V5 present". And that you don't want to try the V62 route.
paul_c123 said:
I know its a classic car auction. The point being, its still a car and the admin is the same.
At the risk of repeating earlier comments, its whether they'll also cover consequential losses. They've already (offered to) unwind the sale. I don't think they are obliged to cover consequential losses.
I am guessing from the replies so far, this was advertised with "V5 to follow" or some other similar wording, rather than "V5 present". And that you don't want to try the V62 route.
I've already written there was no reference to the v5 not being present on this lot.At the risk of repeating earlier comments, its whether they'll also cover consequential losses. They've already (offered to) unwind the sale. I don't think they are obliged to cover consequential losses.
I am guessing from the replies so far, this was advertised with "V5 to follow" or some other similar wording, rather than "V5 present". And that you don't want to try the V62 route.
Why would I use a v62 when the dvla currently don't recognise the chassis number, engine number and capacity - they might insist on inspection, reject changes or award a Q plate - why would i take that risk.
bennno said:
I've already written there was no reference to the v5 not being present on this lot.
Why would I use a v62 when the dvla currently don't recognise the chassis number, engine number and capacity - they might insist on inspection, reject changes or award a Q plate - why would i take that risk.
But they didn't say "V5 present" on the listing?Why would I use a v62 when the dvla currently don't recognise the chassis number, engine number and capacity - they might insist on inspection, reject changes or award a Q plate - why would i take that risk.
You'd use a V62 (plus £25 cheque) because you have a car, but not a V5. It would start the process off. Plus with the fact the auction house will take it back, its not really any loss to you except for £25.
Are you aware of the changes made on Tuesday? https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... covers it pretty well. I don't think there's any danger of a Q plate being assigned.
The auction house is doing the correct thing by cancelling the sale due to misrepresentation.
Any other losses incurred are down to the T&C's that were agreed to so you could participate in the bidding. If consequential losses are not covered then it is a goodwill discussion with the auctioneers as the misrepresentation wasn't by the seller or you could take them to the small claims as a last resort.
There are risks when buying at auction rather than retail from a dealer.
Any other losses incurred are down to the T&C's that were agreed to so you could participate in the bidding. If consequential losses are not covered then it is a goodwill discussion with the auctioneers as the misrepresentation wasn't by the seller or you could take them to the small claims as a last resort.
There are risks when buying at auction rather than retail from a dealer.
You've done well getting the auction house to readily admit their mistake and cancel the sale. If classic car auction houses t&cs offered consequential loss payments in instances of misrepresentation I suggest they would soon all be out of business!
I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
SFTWend said:
You've done well getting the auction house to readily admit their mistake and cancel the sale. If classic car auction houses t&cs offered consequential loss payments in instances of misrepresentation I suggest they would soon all be out of business!
I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
After a letter without prejudice has secured a full refund for the auction lot, plus the £500 I requested towards the transport costs incurred.I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
bennno said:
SFTWend said:
You've done well getting the auction house to readily admit their mistake and cancel the sale. If classic car auction houses t&cs offered consequential loss payments in instances of misrepresentation I suggest they would soon all be out of business!
I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
After a letter without prejudice has secured a full refund for the auction lot, plus the £500 I requested towards the transport costs incurred.I think your best outcome in terms of the transport costs will be a goodwill partial compensation offer.
good result under the circumstances.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff