No such thing as trade sale or no warranty
Discussion
JD66 said:
Someone then bought one without checking it over, ignored the terms of sale and complained to trading standards when it went wrong.
Basic principle of consumer regulation assumes that you shouldn't have to "check over" something sold by a commercial seller, of anything. If you want a cheap car and have the skills and knowledge, and don't want this reassurance, why don't you by cars at auction or privately and avoid paying the dealer mark up? Terms of sale are meaningless if they break the law. The law is a minimum level required of all sellers of any goods in terms of quality and honesty. Why should car sales be any different?
JD66 said:
The problem with these types of prosecutions are that they ruin things for the person looking for a cheap runaround who knows what they're looking for and knows it's a trade car so to check it before purchase. There was a large main dealer my dad always used to go to where they sold the trade ins out the back for spares or repairs. We bought 3 cars from there over a 13 year period (a focus, a primera and a sunny) and all had fsh and were very reliable and cheap due to the sales terms. Someone then bought one without checking it over, ignored the terms of sale and complained to trading standards when it went wrong. The dealer got prosecuted and now a car that would have cost £500 is now £2500 as they have to deal with it if it goes wrong and all the people who got cheap decent cars for at least 13 years are missing out as they're being scrapped or being sold for several times the price.
There are other avenues to buy such cars such as private sales and auctions.A lot of confusion here. There is a big difference between consumer legislation such as the consumer rights act and the RTA. You cannot sell unroadworthy cars unless they are basically trailored away. That has always been the case and continues to be. This also applies to private sellers. There is nothing "consumer" about it. Trading Standards can and will sometimes prosecute in such cases as happened here.
Once you get into the CRA then it is a different ball game. TS will sometimes get involved in unfair trading etc. but they will never get involved in arguments about faults or whatever under the CRA as that is a civil matter between seller and buyer.
Basically, if you are selling either as a trader or private it pays to run a car through an MOT before sale as it very much reduces or mitigates any chance of comeback of this nature under the RTA.
Once you get into the CRA then it is a different ball game. TS will sometimes get involved in unfair trading etc. but they will never get involved in arguments about faults or whatever under the CRA as that is a civil matter between seller and buyer.
Basically, if you are selling either as a trader or private it pays to run a car through an MOT before sale as it very much reduces or mitigates any chance of comeback of this nature under the RTA.
LeoSayer said:
There are other avenues to buy such cars such as private sales and auctions.
But even then it's illegal to sell a car that's not road worthy.I got caught out years ago, had a Golf GTI with short MoT, I knew it was going to need welding & other work so offered it for sale as a project. Buyer turns up with his mechanic friend, spent ages going through it, went away having chipped the price somewhat.
A couple of days later he's on the phone demanding his money back as car wasn't roadworthy. Transpired he had taken the car to a VW specialist who listed all the faults and cost for them to repair and he didn't like it. After taking advice, I was in the wrong and he had his rights.
Turned out OK as sold it again to a young chap who did the work himself and was happy with his cheap GTI.
Incidentally, it is very, very rare to Trading Standards to bring a prosecution on a customer purchased car which I can only assume means the rust was pretty bad.
Normally, if they build up enough complaints against a seller they will go and buy a car from them themselves and then prosecute. The problem with a customer car is that, say, if they claim two tyres were illegal the seller can just say "they weren't the tyres on the car when I sold it - they're trying it on because his/her partner doesn't like the car" and it gets thrown out.
There has to be evidence it was unroadworthy at the actual exact point of sale, not two days later.
Normally, if they build up enough complaints against a seller they will go and buy a car from them themselves and then prosecute. The problem with a customer car is that, say, if they claim two tyres were illegal the seller can just say "they weren't the tyres on the car when I sold it - they're trying it on because his/her partner doesn't like the car" and it gets thrown out.
There has to be evidence it was unroadworthy at the actual exact point of sale, not two days later.
Output Flange said:
That can't be true.
Look at all the "barn find" classics for sale on eBay. Are you telling me that they're all illegal sales?
Only going by the advice I received at the time. Wasn't in a position to defend whatever way he wanted to fight it, the car was only £250 at the time.Look at all the "barn find" classics for sale on eBay. Are you telling me that they're all illegal sales?
JD66 said:
The problem with these types of prosecutions are that they ruin things for the person looking for a cheap runaround who knows what they're looking for and knows it's a trade car so to check it before purchase. There was a large main dealer my dad always used to go to where they sold the trade ins out the back for spares or repairs. We bought 3 cars from there over a 13 year period (a focus, a primera and a sunny) and all had fsh and were very reliable and cheap due to the sales terms. Someone then bought one without checking it over, ignored the terms of sale and complained to trading standards when it went wrong. The dealer got prosecuted and now a car that would have cost £500 is now £2500 as they have to deal with it if it goes wrong and all the people who got cheap decent cars for at least 13 years are missing out as they're being scrapped or being sold for several times the price.
That was also my first thought. I always buy as a trade sale when possible. mwstewart said:
That was also my first thought. I always buy as a trade sale when possible.
You can still sell cheap run about cars with little comeback because the test of reasonableness means that if they are described as such and both parties aware of the nature of the sale there is in practice little comeback. When referring to the Consumer Rights Act is is also designed to protect the seller from unreasonable demands or expectation from the buyer (an aspect people are too keen to forget).What you can't do, and haven't been able to do for ages, is sell unroadworthy cars or write things like "trade sale" on the invoice.
The relevant part of the RTA is Section 75 regarding unroadworthy vehcicles and note it makes little distinction between trade or private:
75 Vehicles not to be sold in unroadworthy condition or altered so as to be unroadworthy.
(1)Subject to the provisions of this section no person shall supply a motor vehicle or trailer in an unroadworthy condition.
(2)In this section references to supply include—
(a)sell,
(b)offer to sell or supply, and
(c)expose for sale.
(3)For the purposes of subsection (1) above a motor vehicle or trailer is in an unroadworthy condition if—
(a)it is in such a condition that the use of it on a road in that condition would be unlawful by virtue of any provision made by regulations under section 41 of this Act as respects—
(i)brakes, steering gear or tyres, or
(ii)the construction, weight or equipment of vehicles,. . .
F1(iii). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[F2(b)it is in such a condition that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person]
(4)Subject to the provisions of this section no person shall alter a motor vehicle or trailer so as to render its condition such that the use of it on a road in that condition
[F3(a)]would be unlawful by virtue of any provision made as respects the construction, weight or equipment of vehicles by regulations under section 41 [F4or
(b)would involve a danger of injury to any person.]
(5)A person who supplies or alters a motor vehicle or trailer in contravention of this section, or causes or permits it to be so supplied or altered, is guilty of an offence.
(6)A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section in respect of the supply or alteration of a motor vehicle or trailer if he proves—
(a)that it was supplied or altered, as the case may be, for export from Great Britain, or
(b)that he had reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle or trailer would not be used on a road in Great Britain, or would not be so used until it had been put into a condition in which it might lawfully be so used, F5. . .
F6(c). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[F7(6A)Paragraph (b) of subsection (6) above shall not apply in relation to a person who, in the course of a trade or business—
(a)exposes a vehicle or trailer for sale, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that any prospective purchaser would be aware that its use in its current condition on a road in Great Britain would be unlawful, or
(b)offers to sell a vehicle or trailer, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that the person to whom the offer was made was aware of that fact.]
confused_buyer said:
280E said:
OT slightly, but what's the situation regarding the private sale of an 'unroadworthy' vehicle (truly 'private', not a disguised trader)?
Exactly the same as a trader. RTA88 s75 said:
(6)A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section in respect of the supply or alteration of a motor vehicle or trailer if he proves—
(a)that it was supplied or altered, as the case may be, for export from Great Britain, or
(b)that he had reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle or trailer would not be used on a road in Great Britain, or would not be so used until it had been put into a condition in which it might lawfully be so used,
(6A)Paragraph (b) of subsection (6) above shall not apply in relation to a person who, in the course of a trade or business—
(a)exposes a vehicle or trailer for sale, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that any prospective purchaser would be aware that its use in its current condition on a road in Great Britain would be unlawful, or
(b)offers to sell a vehicle or trailer, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that the person to whom the offer was made was aware of that fact.
So a trader can be prosecuted just for advertising an unroadworthy car, even if nobody actually buys it, unless he basically says "THIS IS UNROADWORTHY, TRAILER IT" in the ad. Which is how people can sell/auction restoration projects perfectly legally. They're just honest that they're undriveable projects...(a)that it was supplied or altered, as the case may be, for export from Great Britain, or
(b)that he had reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle or trailer would not be used on a road in Great Britain, or would not be so used until it had been put into a condition in which it might lawfully be so used,
(6A)Paragraph (b) of subsection (6) above shall not apply in relation to a person who, in the course of a trade or business—
(a)exposes a vehicle or trailer for sale, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that any prospective purchaser would be aware that its use in its current condition on a road in Great Britain would be unlawful, or
(b)offers to sell a vehicle or trailer, unless he also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that the person to whom the offer was made was aware of that fact.
TooMany2cvs said:
So a trader can be prosecuted just for advertising an unroadworthy car, even if nobody actually buys it, unless he basically says "THIS IS UNROADWORTHY, TRAILER IT" in the ad. Which is how people can sell/auction restoration projects perfectly legally. They're just honest that they're undriveable projects...
Yes, absolutely true and something a lot of sellers get caught out on. They buy a car in, get it advertised quickly and "will do the tyres and brakes when someone wants to buy it.". You can't do that.
confused_buyer said:
You can still sell cheap run about cars with little comeback because the test of reasonableness means that if they are described as such and both parties aware of the nature of the sale there is in practice little comeback. When referring to the Consumer Rights Act is is also designed to protect the seller from unreasonable demands or expectation from the buyer (an aspect people are too keen to forget).
What you can't do, and haven't been able to do for ages, is sell unroadworthy cars or write things like "trade sale" on the invoice.
The relevant part of the RTA is Section 75 regarding unroadworthy vehcicles and note it makes little distinction between trade or private:
75 Vehicles not to be sold in unroadworthy condition or altered so as to be unroadworthy.
It's not just cheap stuff I buy like this. I am perfectly happy with 'trade sale' written on the invoice as I see it as an agreement and I'm a man if my word; I wouldn't dream of seeking recompense for an issue I hadn't spotted, regardless of how serious it was, even if whatever act said that technically I am covered.What you can't do, and haven't been able to do for ages, is sell unroadworthy cars or write things like "trade sale" on the invoice.
The relevant part of the RTA is Section 75 regarding unroadworthy vehcicles and note it makes little distinction between trade or private:
75 Vehicles not to be sold in unroadworthy condition or altered so as to be unroadworthy.
It's a shame that people without integrity ruin it for us honest folk.
mwstewart said:
It's not just cheap stuff I buy like this. I am perfectly happy with 'trade sale' written on the invoice as I see it as an agreement and I'm a man if my word; I wouldn't dream of seeking recompense for an issue I hadn't spotted, regardless of how serious it was, even if whatever act said that technically I am covered.
It's a shame that people without integrity ruin it for us honest folk.
In reality you are probably not technically covered. The thing is you can't write "trade sale - no warranty" but you can write "pile of crap which might last 2 hours if you're lucky" as long as you have made it clear during the sale, i.e. you can't take the payment then hand the buyer an invoice with this written on.It's a shame that people without integrity ruin it for us honest folk.
If you sell something as a "pile of crap which might last 2 hours" then the only onus on the seller is that they provide at least a pile of crap which has a 10% chance of lasting 2 hours. Everything has been described correctly, no one has been misled, all consumer legislation still applies and been complied with. It still has to be roadworthy though unless there is strong evidence the buyer is not going to drive off in it and is aware they should not.
confused_buyer said:
In reality you are probably not technically covered. The thing is you can't write "trade sale - no warranty" but you can write "pile of crap which might last 2 hours if you're lucky" as long as you have made it clear during the sale, i.e. you can't take the payment then hand the buyer an invoice with this written on.
If you sell something as a "pile of crap which might last 2 hours" then the only onus on the seller is that they provide at least a pile of crap which has a 10% chance of lasting 2 hours. Everything has been described correctly, no one has been misled, all consumer legislation still applies and been complied with. It still has to be roadworthy though unless there is strong evidence the buyer is not going to drive off in it and is aware they should not.
When I negotiate a trade sale it means no warranty or prep of any kind so that is exactly what has been written on the invoices. I am happy to weigh up the risk and take that responsibility in return fot a reduction in the sale price, and I'll prep the car myself. Said cars are not old bangers.If you sell something as a "pile of crap which might last 2 hours" then the only onus on the seller is that they provide at least a pile of crap which has a 10% chance of lasting 2 hours. Everything has been described correctly, no one has been misled, all consumer legislation still applies and been complied with. It still has to be roadworthy though unless there is strong evidence the buyer is not going to drive off in it and is aware they should not.
Is there a way round it if I as a buyer actually knowingly consent to it?
mwstewart said:
When I negotiate a trade sale it means no warranty or prep of any kind
Which is perfectly legit - there's no come back at all, on top of the buyer's statutory consumer rights.mwstewart said:
Is there a way round it if I as a buyer actually knowingly consent to it?
No, your statutory consumer rights are always there, and can't be waived by EITHER of you...TooMany2cvs said:
mwstewart said:
When I negotiate a trade sale it means no warranty or prep of any kind
Which is perfectly legit - there's no come back at all, on top of the buyer's statutory consumer rights.mwstewart said:
Is there a way round it if I as a buyer actually knowingly consent to it?
No, your statutory consumer rights are always there, and can't be waived by EITHER of you...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff