Legal Advice regarding Car Sale
Discussion
You are fine
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
VAGLover said:
You are fine
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
Wow. By that logic I get a plumber to do some work for me after agreeing everything. But because I've not paid him (yet) it's not a contract so I don't have to? Herp derp.For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
meatballs said:
VAGLover said:
You are fine
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
Wow. By that logic I get a plumber to do some work for me after agreeing everything. But because I've not paid him (yet) it's not a contract so I don't have to? Herp derp.For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
If the OP agreed to sell the car, took the money, then backed out and refunded it - then the guy could sue him.
VAGLover said:
You are fine
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
Why talk about things you don't understand? For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
He didn’t pay you. No contract. No loss from you not delivering in the sale.
You should countersue the prick
Contracts need consideration under English law, yes. That does not mean payment needs to be made before a contract is formed...or nobody could ever sue anybody for failure to pay.
You didn't think that one through did you.
VAGLover said:
You are fine
For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
He didn’t pay you. No contract.
A promise to do something is good consideration. Seller promised to sell, buyer promised to pay. Consideration is established and, with it, a contract.For loss of bargain a contract has to happen
For a contract to happen
What is required for a legally binding contract?
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
He didn’t pay you. No contract.
VAGLover said:
Contracts do not have to be in writing to be legally enforceable, with one important exception: a contract for the sale (or other disposition) of land or property must be in writing and contain all the terms agreed, otherwise it is not enforceable.
This is also incorrect - there are loads of agreements that need to be in writing e.g. guarantees, powers of attorney, ship mortgages.
Integroo said:
shake n bake said:
The world we now live in, bizarre isn’t it.
O.P bails on an accepted offer. Buyer gets that much of a s
tty on at losing an agreed deal that he goes to court.
You're both knobs really but the buyer really has an axe to grind.
The basic principles of contract law have been established for hundreds of years.O.P bails on an accepted offer. Buyer gets that much of a s
tty on at losing an agreed deal that he goes to court. You're both knobs really but the buyer really has an axe to grind.
I would do exactly the same thing in the OP's situation and if the buyer gets the hump then tough.
ShyTallKnight said:
Whilst I appreciate the principles of contract law have been established for many many years a modicum of common sense has to prevail in situations like this assuming the OP is just a regular Joe trying to sell his car privately.
I would do exactly the same thing in the OP's situation and if the buyer gets the hump then tough.
Nice to know that some people have no integrity. I would do exactly the same thing in the OP's situation and if the buyer gets the hump then tough.
talksthetorque said:
IANAL but I want to ask you a couple of questions.
What was your car advertised at?
Has the claimant give any evidence of contacting other owners of advertised vehicles to ask for a best negotiated price?
The car was initially advertised at 30k but there were no viewings. I then dropped the price and advertised the car at 27k.What was your car advertised at?
Has the claimant give any evidence of contacting other owners of advertised vehicles to ask for a best negotiated price?
The claimant has not provided any evidence of contacting other owners to ask for a best negotiated price.
Thank all for the replies, particularly Integroo and tinnitusjosh.
Given that the car was sold almost three months ago, and assuming the claimant has not yet purchased a similar vehicle, could this demonstrate that he has no intention to 'effect the cure'?
Also, if this does go to court, will I have the opportunity to have the hearing at my local court rather than have to travel a few hundred miles to the claimants local court?
Is it worth making him a 'without prejudice' offer of a few hundred pounds for breach of contract? I don't think he will be successful with his 'loss of bargain' claim but would like to try to resolve this if possible.
Given that the car was sold almost three months ago, and assuming the claimant has not yet purchased a similar vehicle, could this demonstrate that he has no intention to 'effect the cure'?
Also, if this does go to court, will I have the opportunity to have the hearing at my local court rather than have to travel a few hundred miles to the claimants local court?
Is it worth making him a 'without prejudice' offer of a few hundred pounds for breach of contract? I don't think he will be successful with his 'loss of bargain' claim but would like to try to resolve this if possible.
Vaud said:
ShyTallKnight said:
Whilst I appreciate the principles of contract law have been established for many many years a modicum of common sense has to prevail in situations like this assuming the OP is just a regular Joe trying to sell his car privately.
I would do exactly the same thing in the OP's situation and if the buyer gets the hump then tough.
Nice to know that some people have no integrity. I would do exactly the same thing in the OP's situation and if the buyer gets the hump then tough.
tinnitusjosh said:
IAAL but IANYL etc
on these facts i would say 100% that OP has formed a contract and then breached it. Buyer A will presumably be able to evidence the contract by producing the WhatsApp messages.
Buyer A's damages should be an amount sufficient to put him in the position he would have been but for the breach. Had OP performed the contract, Buyer A would be £26,500 down, but with a new TVR. If Buyer A is unable to source an equivalent spec / condition TVR for £26,500 (or less), he has suffered a loss. If the only other same spec / condition TVR costs £28,500, then Buyer A is £2,000 out of pocket and is generally entitled to recover that loss from the seller as a matter of law and, frankly, natural justice.
Reading all the PHers telling OP otherwise has been the highlight of my day, so thanks for that
Can't be 100% sure, but I think this scenario is literally unit one of most contract law textbooks...
Yup, it was pretty much the first bit of contract law I did before moving onto property law, and I am not even a lawyer.on these facts i would say 100% that OP has formed a contract and then breached it. Buyer A will presumably be able to evidence the contract by producing the WhatsApp messages.
Buyer A's damages should be an amount sufficient to put him in the position he would have been but for the breach. Had OP performed the contract, Buyer A would be £26,500 down, but with a new TVR. If Buyer A is unable to source an equivalent spec / condition TVR for £26,500 (or less), he has suffered a loss. If the only other same spec / condition TVR costs £28,500, then Buyer A is £2,000 out of pocket and is generally entitled to recover that loss from the seller as a matter of law and, frankly, natural justice.
Reading all the PHers telling OP otherwise has been the highlight of my day, so thanks for that
Can't be 100% sure, but I think this scenario is literally unit one of most contract law textbooks...
I think it is a good bit of law TBH, reneging on a deal is a s
tty thing to do, even more so if any form of contract has been agreed. Its there to stop t
ts being tts, there is loads of case law on this too.cs174 said:
Is it worth making him a 'without prejudice' offer of a few hundred pounds for breach of contract? I don't think he will be successful with his 'loss of bargain' claim but would like to try to resolve this if possible.
No absolutely not... If you want to waste a few hundred quid suggest using it to get a legal type to prepare a jog on letter on your behalf.VAGLover said:
A valid contract requires the presence of three elements:
1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
Close but not quite;1. an agreement;
2. an intention to create legal relations: this is an intention to form a legally binding relationship,
3. and consideration: ie. payment.
1 - offer and acceptance
2 - intention
3 - FOR consideration THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT PAYMENT HAS TO TAKE PLACE!!
4 - Be legal
(If you think about it for a moment if your suggestion were correct everyone would have to pay for everything when they order it, the contract covers when the payments will be made)
(IANAL)
Edited by Marcellus on Wednesday 21st August 09:01
Its pretty clear there was a contract in place for A to purchase the car.
OP then reneged on the deal. Accepting an offer of £1000 more from B.
In the absence of any other basis its seems quite likely that A can demonstrate that the market value of the car he agreed to buy was a minimum of £27500(being the actual price it was sold for).
Unless he can demonstrate an additional loss I can't see how his claim can be worth more than £1000.
Personally I would make without prejudice offer of £1000 and be done with it.
OP then reneged on the deal. Accepting an offer of £1000 more from B.
In the absence of any other basis its seems quite likely that A can demonstrate that the market value of the car he agreed to buy was a minimum of £27500(being the actual price it was sold for).
Unless he can demonstrate an additional loss I can't see how his claim can be worth more than £1000.
Personally I would make without prejudice offer of £1000 and be done with it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff