Private seller legal help please

[The Rookie]

Breadvan72 said:

I am sure that you mean well, but you are over complicating things. OP, this isn't a complex thing. Bung in a defence as I suggested above.

Once it’s in, that’s it, he has 33 days from the date of issue (as long as he does the AoS) no need to rush this. Worth researching and getting any legal precedents for example.

[Helicopter123]

For the sake of £875 and a potential bucket load of hassle, why nit just take it back and sell it on to the next punter?

If he has 'gone legal' then suspect that he is not going away.

Always two sides to every story.

[anonymous-user]

The Rookie said:

Breadvan72 said:

I am sure that you mean well, but you are over complicating things. OP, this isn't a complex thing. Bung in a defence as I suggested above.

Once it’s in, that’s it, he has 33 days from the date of issue (as long as he does the AoS) no need to rush this. Worth researching and getting any legal precedents for example.

Research? Legal precedents? This is a try on claim about a sub 1K motor, FFS. It's not a Supreme Court case about charterparties.

OP, take your pick - some of the "advisers" here are more amateur than others.

[cologne2792]

Durzel said:

If I was buying a car with 158k on the clock and no mention of a clutch change in its life I'd be assuming it was "not in the best of health".

Anyway it sounds like he tested the clutch bite to some extent on the drive, and an hour is a fair amount of time to drive around before noticing that the clutch is "shot".

On the face of it you should have no trouble defending it, but could be a disproportionate amount of hassle for the sake of £1k?

We bought a diesel 406 with similar mileage and the seller pointed out just that. The biting point was very high and a little rumble from the DMF. When the car eventually died 100,000 miles and seven years later the biting point was still very high and the DMF vibrated just a tiny bit more.

[Russian Troll Bot]

Helicopter123 said:

For the sake of £875 and a potential bucket load of hassle, why nit just take it back and sell it on to the next punter?

If he has 'gone legal' then suspect that he is not going away.

Always two sides to every story.

Or the buyer will come back with a counter offer of getting the OP to give him £200 to fix the clutch and he'll drop the claim

[anonymous-user]

If the facts are as the OP describes them, he can hang tough.

[InitialDave]

I don't have anything to add in terms of legally sound advice, but idiotic monkeys like your buyer have no business buying cheap cars, and I hope this goes your way, as I expect it will.

[Durzel]

cologne2792 said:

We bought a diesel 406 with similar mileage and the seller pointed out just that. The biting point was very high and a little rumble from the DMF. When the car eventually died 100,000 miles and seven years later the biting point was still very high and the DMF vibrated just a tiny bit more.

Every car is different of course, and there's no reason a well treated car wouldn't last that long on one clutch, as yours did. I was speaking more in general terms - by and large a car with that high a mileage has a higher probability of clutch maladies imo.

[shaqs77]

I was pleasantly surprised in the time I owned it that the clutch has lasted. I do look after my cars though

[The Rookie]

Breadvan72 said:

Research? Legal precedents? This is a try on claim about a sub 1K motor, FFS. It's not a Supreme Court case about charterparties.

OP, take your pick - some of the "advisers" here are more amateur than others.

Yeah, that same approach is taken by those who lose to Private parking companies, even the lowly PE ones for £175.

If a job is worth doing its worth doing properly.

[GT03ROB]

The Rookie said:

Breadvan72 said:

Research? Legal precedents? This is a try on claim about a sub 1K motor, FFS. It's not a Supreme Court case about charterparties.

OP, take your pick - some of the "advisers" here are more amateur than others.

Yeah, that same approach is taken by those who lose to Private parking companies, even the lowly PE ones for £175.

If a job is worth doing its worth doing properly.

Only on PH would an automotive engineer try & teach a barrister how to defend a simple case!! Love it!

[hutchst]

This.

The burden of proof is on the claimant. Keep your powder dry until you see the full detail of the claim that you have to answer.

[anonymous-user]

I really hope you defend this OP. If what you say is correct he doesn’t have a keg to stand on.
And no pre action correspondence isn’t going to looks good for him.

[shaqs77]

Cheers for the support. I am going to stand my ground on the matter of principle.

Luckily I’m a member of unite union and one of the membership perks is the legal service. I’ll be giving them a call tomorrow

[The Rookie]

hutchst said:

This.

The burden of proof is on the claimant. Keep your powder dry until you see the full detail of the claim that you have to answer.

You have to enter your defence by day 33 or you have no defence.

[hutchst]

The Rookie said:

You have to enter your defence by day 33 or you have no defence.

Yes, and......?

[anonymous-user]

GT03ROB said:

Only on PH would an automotive engineer try & teach a barrister how to defend a simple case!! Love it!

Over-engineering has often been a British vice, and the keen but ill informed amateur is another British thing. The case as described by the OP (who unlike many has been very detailed in his narrative) is a simple case that calls for a simple defence. Delay adds nothing. Bang in a short and clear defence promptly and call on the claimant to get on with it.

[anonymous-user]

shaqs77 said:

...I am going to stand my ground on the matter of principle.

...

That would be a very bad idea. Never litigate on principle. In this case, you don't have to because the facts appear to be on your side.

[anonymous-user]

Breadvan72 said:

I am sure that you mean well, but you are over complicating things. OP, this isn't a complex thing. Bung in a defence as I suggested above.

...and make sure the Union dont put you through an 'approved' lawyer who sits on it/makes it too complicated..

[Neonblau]

GT03ROB said:

Only on PH would an automotive engineer try & teach a barrister how to defend a simple case!! Love it!

I was just thinking that too. Entertaining though.