Legal Advice regarding Car Sale
Discussion
e-honda said:
The Spruce Goose said:
makes no difference as pointed out.
It does make a difference, if it was an eBay classifieds ad, the OP followed eBay's terms and conditions by treating the offer as non binding with no intention to form legal relations, the claimant violated them by claiming his offer was intended to form legal relations.
Seems odd, I thought people reneging on deals etc was normal.
I can perhaps understand in a car dealer but I'd have thought a private sale was held to the same standards.
Does this work in Reverse?
I've a TV for sale on Facebook. Some guy made an offer. I accepted. He didn't show up.
Can I sue him for the £100?
All seems a bit odd. I've read the while thread (slow night, glass of wine, nothing better to do) and I'm shocked someone was so upset by your backing out of a deal they'd take you to court over it!
Back when I was working we had a client back out of a contract at the last minute. Was all verbally and agreed on Emails. We had invested in some new equipment and even a new member of staff to service this client.
In the end the client pulled the plug and backed out. We ended up making use the lad we'd hired in another part of the business, but and ended up using the equipment a few months.
Our (small - one guy!) legal team looked into it and apparently nothing could really be done.
I can perhaps understand in a car dealer but I'd have thought a private sale was held to the same standards.
Does this work in Reverse?
I've a TV for sale on Facebook. Some guy made an offer. I accepted. He didn't show up.
Can I sue him for the £100?
All seems a bit odd. I've read the while thread (slow night, glass of wine, nothing better to do) and I'm shocked someone was so upset by your backing out of a deal they'd take you to court over it!
Back when I was working we had a client back out of a contract at the last minute. Was all verbally and agreed on Emails. We had invested in some new equipment and even a new member of staff to service this client.
In the end the client pulled the plug and backed out. We ended up making use the lad we'd hired in another part of the business, but and ended up using the equipment a few months.
Our (small - one guy!) legal team looked into it and apparently nothing could really be done.
The Spruce Goose said:
Go on then what is your defence?
I would included a copy of this page Selling with Classified Adshttps://www.ebay.co.uk/help/selling/listings/listi...
A copy of the ebay user agreement
https://www.ebay.co.uk/help/policies/member-behavi...
I would have stated
The car was advertised for sale on ebay classifieds, a copy of this advert has been included in the claimants file.
The messages exchanged directly between the claimant and myself were normal for a sale of this type conducted using ebay, as explained in "Selling with Classified Ads".
By using ebay both the claimant and myself were bound by ebay's user agreement.
It was my belief that the buyer's offer was not binding, but expressed a buyer's serious interest in the item, in accordance with section 7 bullet point 3 of the ebay user agreement, and did not form the basis for a legal contract.
CarCrazyDad said:
Seems odd, I thought people reneging on deals etc was normal.
Commonplace, possibly actionable, but in almost all cases isn’t because the parties involved either don’t realise they can, or can’t be bothered.Some people feel sufficiently aggrieved to take it all the way. This is likely to rise depending on the perceived loss, particularly if there is emotion involved.
What eBay or any other platform says about transactions is academic really, it is UK contract law that matters. One follows the other, not the other way around.
In this case the judge applied the common sense logic that a contract had been formed that the OP reneged on. It’s pointless to get tied up in legalese, semantics and what eBay T&Cs say when a district judge is just going to apply “man on the Clapham omnibus” logic to it.
CarCrazyDad said:
Seems odd, I thought people reneging on deals etc was normal.
I can perhaps understand in a car dealer but I'd have thought a private sale was held to the same standards.
Does this work in Reverse?
I've a TV for sale on Facebook. Some guy made an offer. I accepted. He didn't show up.
Can I sue him for the £100?
All seems a bit odd. I've read the while thread (slow night, glass of wine, nothing better to do) and I'm shocked someone was so upset by your backing out of a deal they'd take you to court over it!
Back when I was working we had a client back out of a contract at the last minute. Was all verbally and agreed on Emails. We had invested in some new equipment and even a new member of staff to service this client.
In the end the client pulled the plug and backed out. We ended up making use the lad we'd hired in another part of the business, but and ended up using the equipment a few months.
Our (small - one guy!) legal team looked into it and apparently nothing could really be done.
Technically yes, once a contract is created (see requirements for a contract previously posted) if one party doesn't meet their obligations of the contract then they are on breach whether it's a contract between private individuals or companies.I can perhaps understand in a car dealer but I'd have thought a private sale was held to the same standards.
Does this work in Reverse?
I've a TV for sale on Facebook. Some guy made an offer. I accepted. He didn't show up.
Can I sue him for the £100?
All seems a bit odd. I've read the while thread (slow night, glass of wine, nothing better to do) and I'm shocked someone was so upset by your backing out of a deal they'd take you to court over it!
Back when I was working we had a client back out of a contract at the last minute. Was all verbally and agreed on Emails. We had invested in some new equipment and even a new member of staff to service this client.
In the end the client pulled the plug and backed out. We ended up making use the lad we'd hired in another part of the business, but and ended up using the equipment a few months.
Our (small - one guy!) legal team looked into it and apparently nothing could really be done.
In the situation you outline often consequential losses are excluded from damages, i suspect your investing and recruiting wouldn't be taken into account as the buyer wasn't paying you to do that he was buying x number of an item from you what you had to do to supply them wasn't his concern or part of the contract.
Camelot1971 said:
CarCrazyDad said:
I've a TV for sale on Facebook. Some guy made an offer. I accepted. He didn't show up.
Can I sue him for the £100?
Of course you can. It's not black and white if you will win or not though.Can I sue him for the £100?
What does face book charge again ?
My humble opinion on this is that there's an unwritten and obvious convention, that and item is not sold until, you pay a none-refundable deposit.
If buyer A knew he was getting a bargain he should have offered a deposit of at least £200, to secure the deal.
The seller (the OP) shoukd always make it clear during negotiations that the agreement is only final when a deposit is received.
I honestly think my defence, had I made the mistake of not making that clear, would be: I didn't trust that he was going to buy it, as he didn't offer a deposit. I thought it would be obvious that it's still for sale until a deposit is taken.
If buyer A knew he was getting a bargain he should have offered a deposit of at least £200, to secure the deal.
The seller (the OP) shoukd always make it clear during negotiations that the agreement is only final when a deposit is received.
I honestly think my defence, had I made the mistake of not making that clear, would be: I didn't trust that he was going to buy it, as he didn't offer a deposit. I thought it would be obvious that it's still for sale until a deposit is taken.
cs174 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Back on topic, ISTR that the OP in this thread sent me an email asking for advice. If it was the same bloke, I think that I may have chucked a flea into his ear. Pacta sunt servanda: agreements should be honoured. A deal is a deal.
That wasn't me Breadvan72 but I do appreciate your contribution to these forums.Anyway, just to update anyone who is interested, this issue has finally come to a conclusion. The claimant had the case moved to his local court and then Covid happened, hence the delay. Both the Claimant and I were asked if the claim could be dealt with by the Court with neither of us present or represented, we both agreed.
As a recap, I advertised my TVR for sale, had an offer of £26,500 from Buyer A which I agreed to, then a second offer of £27,500 from Buyer B. Asked Buyer A if he would increase his offer which he declined, sold the car to Buyer B for £27,500. The Claimants position was that we'd entered into a Contract and I maintained we'd only agreed the price.
The Court has reviewed the case and has found in favour of the Claimant. The Court awarded the Claimant £1000 plus the fees of £105. I've already paid this in full.
I have paid almost £3,000 in legal fees and my solicitor thought the claimant was mad. The Barrister who attended the hearing (on the advice of my solicitor) thought I'd be able to recover my legal costs as the Claimant was being unreasonable. Only when the legal fees exceeded the initial claim did I bring their services to a halt.
Anyway, the Judge used the 'Chitty on Contracts - 33rd Edition' as guidance and cites Perry v Suffields Ltd, amongst others, as similar examples. Basically, the Judge has concluded that there was an intent to enter into a Contract by agreeing a price for the TVR.
Although the claimant has failed to demonstrate a loss, the Judge ruled that to determine the loss would involve an evaluation by an expert engineer, however, as the car I sold was no longer available this was not possible.
The judgement is 11 pages and I am not a lawyer! If anyone wants to see the full document, I'd be happy to post it up here with personal details redacted.
So, when selling a car, be careful out there, folks. I'm down £4k. Some may say I deserve it but I genuinely thought Buyer A was trying it on. This was reiterated by my solicitor. As it turns out, the free legal advice on PH was more accurate than the legal advice I paid for.
PH, well done again
e-honda said:
Jayne Redland said:
You maybe missed the post saying a Judge has already decided the case?
No you missed the post where the op said he didn't mention them in his defenceGassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff