Legal Advice regarding Car Sale

[NewUsername]

I think that the crux of this will be that cars generally don't sell for their advertised price and the claimant will have difficulty in quantifying the size of his 'loss'

Reneging on a deal is poor behaviour and the law protects against it and rightfully so.

Those claiming that they have integrity but 'a grand is a grand' , well you don't have integrity then do you and that's the way the fabric of society is changing unfortunately.

[Integroo]

cs174 said:

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.

With the caveat that contracts for the sale of goods is not my specialism:

SOGA1979 s51:

51.— Damages for non-delivery.
(1) Where the seller wrongfully neglects or refuses to deliver the goods to the buyer, the buyer may maintain an action against the seller for damages for non-delivery.
(2) The measure of damages is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting, in the ordinary course of events, from the seller's breach of contract.
(3) Where there is an available market for the goods in question the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods at the time or times when they ought to have been delivered or (if no time was fixed) at the time of the refusal to deliver.

The presumption in cases of non-delivery is justified by mitigation and the existence of a market. It can be presumed either that the buyer purchased replacement goods on the market, or that it failed to mitigate and broke the chain of causation.

So, failure to purchase replacement goods could be considered failure to mitigate his loss.

In terms of whether or not to make a WP offer, that's litigation strategy and one for you to decide!

[skwdenyer]

As a point of order, a Dutch Auction is one in which the price goes *down* until somebody blinks first. Sometimes called a “Reverse Auction.”

[anonymous-user]

cs174 said:

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.

OP in the agreement made did you state that you agreed to his offer subject to receipt of deposit (i.e. the receipt of payment of the deposit is integral to the forming of a contract), or did you just accept his offer without conditions?

You should have the opportunity to transfer to your local court, which might make the buyer think twice before going to court if he has to travel considerable distance to get there.

If I were you I would ask the buyer to quantify his loss, with evidence to back up his claim so that you can then consider his position (he will need to do this anyway as part of the disclosure prior to court in any case so why not do it now to avoid court). Perhaps then offer to meet him half way between the price he offered and the price the car sold for?

This being PH and a popular place for TVR types, have you also considered that your buyer might be right now reading this thread?

[BertBert]

ShyTallKnight said:

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree - for a situation like this. The OP comes across as a decent chap and he can sell his car to whomever he likes.

Apart from when contract law intervenes. Then possibly other laws as well, discrimination being a possibility.
Bert

[blueg33]

ShyTallKnight said:

Vaud said:

No the right thing to do is honour an agreement, not get into Dutch auctions after you make an agreement.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree - for a situation like this. The OP comes across as a decent chap and he can sell his car to whomever he likes.

He can't sell to whoever he wants if he has already entered into a contract to sell to someone else.

It looks to me like he has entered into a contract.

The claimant may or may not win in court, contract stuff like this is rarely black and white.

Overall moral - don't be a dick and mess people about after you have agreed to sell to them

[Vaud]

blueg33 said:

He can't sell to whoever he wants if he has already entered into a contract to sell to someone else.

It looks to me like he has entered into a contract.

The claimant may or may not win in court, contract stuff like this is rarely black and white.

Overall moral - don't be a dick and mess people about after you have agreed to sell to them

Quite.

[Integroo]

Just to provide a brief summary:

• A contract has probably been formed. The claimant therefore probably has a claim in law for damages for breach of contract.
• The measure of his damages would be the difference in price between the price agreed and the price of an equivalent car on the market.
• The claimant has to take reasonable steps to mitigate his loss i.e. to go to market and arrive at a good deal for an equivalent car. He therefore needs to have the intention to do so.
• The claimant has to evidence his loss i.e. that an equivalent car costs what the claims it does. Actually buying one would be good evidence of this, otherwise he may find this difficult because, as we all know, what a car is advertised for and what it sells for is two different things, and showing that two old sports cars are equivalent may also be difficult (for example, in defence, you could say that car x at 2k more is a better car than the car you sold because it had recent work to the outriggers or w/e). However, the starting point is you sold the car for £1k more than you agreed with the claimant, so he has a reasonable argument for at least £1k in damages.
• Most importantly - do not ignore the claim form! Otherwise you risk the court awarding damages in your absence. Make copies of all correspondence, consider gathering evidence of the costs of equivalent cars.
• You could make a w/p settlement offer - he might accept it, it might embolden him.

Edited by Integroo on Wednesday 21st August 11:27

[ElectricPics]

Integroo said:

cs174 said:

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.

With the caveat that contracts for the sale of goods is not my specialism:

SOGA1979 s51:

51.— Damages for non-delivery.
(1) Where the seller wrongfully neglects or refuses to deliver the goods to the buyer, the buyer may maintain an action against the seller for damages for non-delivery.
(2) The measure of damages is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting, in the ordinary course of events, from the seller's breach of contract.
(3) Where there is an available market for the goods in question the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods at the time or times when they ought to have been delivered or (if no time was fixed) at the time of the refusal to deliver.

The presumption in cases of non-delivery is justified by mitigation and the existence of a market. It can be presumed either that the buyer purchased replacement goods on the market, or that it failed to mitigate and broke the chain of causation.

So, failure to purchase replacement goods could be considered failure to mitigate his loss.

In terms of whether or not to make a WP offer, that's litigation strategy and one for you to decide!

SOGA 1979 was superseded by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Neither apply to private sellers.

[Integroo]

ElectricPics said:

SOGA 1979 was superseded by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Neither apply to private sellers.

Wrong twice, impressive.

The parts of SOGA1979 that implied terms into consumer contracts were replaced by the CRA15. Section 51 is very much still in force and does not only apply to consumer contracts.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing ...

Edited by Integroo on Wednesday 21st August 12:07

[ging84]

Is it probable that a £20k+ sale contract was formed simply on the basis of a WhatsApp message?

[Vaud]

ging84 said:

Is it probable that a £20k+ sale contract was formed simply on the basis of a WhatsApp message?

For the judge to decide and will depend on the full exchange, but yes it could be.

IANAL but these guys are:
https://parissmith.co.uk/blog/even-emails-text-mes...

There is a similar case in their comments as well (the fence)

[Integroo]

ging84 said:

Is it probable that a £20k+ sale contract was formed simply on the basis of a WhatsApp message?

Why wouldn't it be?

Contracts generally do not have to be in any particular form, notably they do not generally have to be in writing (subject to certain exceptions, for example for land). Contracts can be formed orally, or by e-mail, or may be implied from the conduct of the parties, or may be formed by clicking a button to accept terms and conditions on a website. The value of the contract is meaningless - it could be for £10,000,000.

The key elements for contract formation under English law are an offer and acceptance (tick, evidenced by WhatsApp), consideration (tick, a car in return for money), intention to create legal relations (i.e. a meeting of minds)(tick, evidenced by WhatsApp) and certainty of terms (apparently tick, contract being buyer will buy car for 26,500 and seller will sell car for 26,500).

Obviously it is for a court to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the above elements exist but there is certainly nothing preventing a contract being formed and evidenced by way of WhatsApp messages.

[ging84]

If the car was originally offered for sale on eBay classifieds and that is how the buyer was made aware of the car being for sale, would it not be fair to assume that in the absence of any further discussion the sale was on the basis it was advertised as.
As someone suggested above that eBay classifieds t&c state that on motors a bid or offer is not binding, but an expression of serious intent.

Was there anything in the WhatsApp conversation that suggested that this offer had changed from an expression of serious intent to an actual intention to form a legal contract?

[Integroo]

ging84 said:

If the car was originally offered for sale on eBay classifieds and that is how the buyer was made aware of the car being for sale, would it not be fair to assume that in the absence of any further discussion the sale was on the basis it was advertised as.
As someone suggested above that eBay classifieds t&c state that on motors a bid or offer is not binding, but an expression of serious intent.

Was there anything in the WhatsApp conversation that suggested that this offer had changed from an expression of serious intent to an actual intention to form a legal contract?

As I understand it, winning an eBay auction for a car does not form a contract as per the eBay Terms and Conditions. That is entirely separate from the question as to whether or not a contract was formed over WhatsApp.

It sounds like what happened was the claimant sent the seller a message offering a sum, there was a period of haggling, then the seller said something along the lines of "okay, i'll take that, come pick it up tomorrow". That's sufficient to form a contract. The fact he then messaged the second buyer to tell him he has sold the car and cancel the inspection - and only then he got a higher offer from the second buyer - is a fairly good indication he had come to an agreement with the first buyer.

[WinstonWolf]

Andy20vt said:

cs174 said:

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.

OP in the agreement made did you state that you agreed to his offer subject to receipt of deposit (i.e. the receipt of payment of the deposit is integral to the forming of a contract), or did you just accept his offer without conditions?

You should have the opportunity to transfer to your local court, which might make the buyer think twice before going to court if he has to travel considerable distance to get there.

If I were you I would ask the buyer to quantify his loss, with evidence to back up his claim so that you can then consider his position (he will need to do this anyway as part of the disclosure prior to court in any case so why not do it now to avoid court). Perhaps then offer to meet him half way between the price he offered and the price the car sold for?

This being PH and a popular place for TVR types, have you also considered that your buyer might be right now reading this thread?

I very much doubt the buyer will post after pulling such an asshole stunt...

[NewUsername]

WinstonWolf said:

Andy20vt said:

cs174 said:

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.

OP in the agreement made did you state that you agreed to his offer subject to receipt of deposit (i.e. the receipt of payment of the deposit is integral to the forming of a contract), or did you just accept his offer without conditions?

You should have the opportunity to transfer to your local court, which might make the buyer think twice before going to court if he has to travel considerable distance to get there.

If I were you I would ask the buyer to quantify his loss, with evidence to back up his claim so that you can then consider his position (he will need to do this anyway as part of the disclosure prior to court in any case so why not do it now to avoid court). Perhaps then offer to meet him half way between the price he offered and the price the car sold for?

This being PH and a popular place for TVR types, have you also considered that your buyer might be right now reading this thread?

I 'm surprised the seller had the balls to post after pulling such an asshole stunt...

Could be viewed two ways really.....

[ging84]

Integroo said:

As I understand it, winning an eBay auction for a car does not form a contract as per the eBay Terms and Conditions. That is entirely separate from the question as to whether or not a contract was formed over WhatsApp.

It sounds like what happened was the claimant sent the seller a message offering a sum, there was a period of haggling, then the seller said something along the lines of "okay, i'll take that, come pick it up tomorrow". That's sufficient to form a contract. The fact he then messaged the second buyer to tell him he has sold the car and cancel the inspection - and only then he got a higher offer from the second buyer - is a fairly good indication he had come to an agreement with the first buyer.

Why is it a separate question?

I put up a sign offering something for sale, in my t&c I state that all offered are non binding.
No one buys, so I take down my sign.
Someone contacts me and says I saw your sign last week, is it still available, I say yes make me an offer..... offer is made, I accept. If there is no discussion on terms, is it not reasonable for me to believe the offer to be non binding?

[Integroo]

ging84 said:

Why is it a separate question?

I put up a sign offering something for sale, in my t&c I state that all offered are non binding.
No one buys, so I take down my sign.
Someone contacts me and says I saw your sign last week, is it still available, I say yes make me an offer..... offer is made, I accept. If there is no discussion on terms, is it not reasonable for me to believe the offer to be non binding?

Yes, but as far as we are aware the car was not won via eBay auction, so it is irrelevant.

[Neonblau]

Interesting thread. I have nothing to add but I do love reading threads like this where a bunch of randoms quite happily come on and spout all sorts of crap and contradict legal professionals.