Andy Land
Well-Known Member
... and just one more from me as it would detract from your original thread.
Does he sell motorpike and sidecarp combinations too?
He certainly doesn't sound like a prawn again christian anyway! :doh:
Bromsgrove Defender
Well-Known Member
I'll have to leave you guys to it. I need to get my skates on or I'm gong to be late for a meeting 
Last edited:
sypher
Well-Known Member
I'll have to leave you guys to it. I need to get my skates on or I'm gong to be late for a meeting
You Cod of come up with something batter then that just for this sole porpoise
.
Crock of **** thread, call to consumer direct.
My opinion on this is:-
The op is naive, but fact he has advert and paid the advertised price it appears the trader could be seen as misrepresenting the goods and avoiding his legal responsibilities-a disclaimer is only valid until tested in court
You could also investigate "unfair contracts"
Thanks again folks. I have scanned the Terms on the invoice and you can view them here ---> Ts&Cs printed on my Car Sales Invoice. on Twitpic
Isn't it also illegal to sell an unroadworthy car under the The Road Traffic Act 1988?
His details are now with Consumer Direct and they are keen to send to OFT.
Isn't it also illegal to sell an unroadworthy car under the The Road Traffic Act 1988?
His details are now with Consumer Direct and they are keen to send to OFT.
Andy Land
Well-Known Member
Item 4 on there which is the one causing the issue is wrongly worded anyway. It half implies that the vehicle you are buying is a donor vehicle to repair itself!
You have a good chance with that one mate
where were these terms on the invoice?
if the trader was genuine and selling a scrap vehicle youd expect it to be spelt out in big letters in words of one syllable on the invoice heading and/or in the main vehicle description with the major faults listed, with a dissclaimer saying there may be additional other faults.
small print on the back could be perceived as a deliberate intent to deceive.
if the trader was genuine and selling a scrap vehicle youd expect it to be spelt out in big letters in words of one syllable on the invoice heading and/or in the main vehicle description with the major faults listed, with a dissclaimer saying there may be additional other faults.
small print on the back could be perceived as a deliberate intent to deceive.
Terms were on the front of the invoice.
Hi, I wonder if someone could peruse the letter below and let me know if it is suitable? This is in response to feedback I got from the original post here.
LETTER BEGINS
29/07/2011
Attn: XXXX XXXX
Used Car Specialist
XXXXXXXXX,
Hamilton,
XXX XXX
Dear XXXX, I bought a Land Rover Discovery 2, registration SD51 XKK from you on 16th June 2011 for £3,995 which is not as advertised, and not fit for purpose.
The problems are: faulty crankshaft, cylinder and turbo unit, resulting in the failure of the vehicle to drive. (see engineer’s report enclosed).
I wish to reject the goods and claim a repair or refund.
NOT AS ADVERTISED
The vehicle was described in your Autotrader advertisement as being in “excellent condition” and did not describe any faults. Furthermore, no faults were brought to my attention by you, before making the purchase.
NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
In view of the fact that the vehicle failed only 5 weeks after purchase, the faults described above were inherent at the time of purchase.
If I do not receive a response from you within 14 days of receipt of this letter, I will proceed with legal action through the Small Claims Court, whereby the onus will be on you, the trader, to prove that the car was fit for purpose at the time of purchase.
Yours sincerely,
Me
LETTER ENDS
LETTER BEGINS
29/07/2011
Attn: XXXX XXXX
Used Car Specialist
XXXXXXXXX,
Hamilton,
XXX XXX
Dear XXXX, I bought a Land Rover Discovery 2, registration SD51 XKK from you on 16th June 2011 for £3,995 which is not as advertised, and not fit for purpose.
The problems are: faulty crankshaft, cylinder and turbo unit, resulting in the failure of the vehicle to drive. (see engineer’s report enclosed).
I wish to reject the goods and claim a repair or refund.
NOT AS ADVERTISED
The vehicle was described in your Autotrader advertisement as being in “excellent condition” and did not describe any faults. Furthermore, no faults were brought to my attention by you, before making the purchase.
NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
In view of the fact that the vehicle failed only 5 weeks after purchase, the faults described above were inherent at the time of purchase.
If I do not receive a response from you within 14 days of receipt of this letter, I will proceed with legal action through the Small Claims Court, whereby the onus will be on you, the trader, to prove that the car was fit for purpose at the time of purchase.
Yours sincerely,
Me
LETTER ENDS
The seller has the right to replace,repair or refund generally, we had a guy with a range rover back along-my advice is
You want a Refund
A repair gives the trader anther opportunity to bodge it by just throwing a set of shells in.
You want to walk away with cash in hand
Andy Land
Well-Known Member
Can you make the 'failed after five weeks' a little bit less?
Three weeks seems a little better, unless you've already informed otherwise. Basically the longer you say it took for the faults to occur the more likely it is that the court won't believe they were inherent when purchased.
Good Luck buddy.
Three weeks seems a little better, unless you've already informed otherwise. Basically the longer you say it took for the faults to occur the more likely it is that the court won't believe they were inherent when purchased.
Good Luck buddy.
read what Fanny has said - the law states that any faults found within 6 months are considered to be present at purchase unless the seller can prove they werent.
Posturing he is hoping your back out, get the small claim in for repairs to unfit vehicle
Unless things have changed recently, i believe the limit for the small claims track is £5000.
I think, as Fanatic is suggesting, the way to go is ask for a full refund and if he refuses, get a quote for full repair to your satisfaction at a reputable garage, and sue for this amount plus any costs. I'd be very surprised if you didn't win, but i would say that winning isn't a guarantee that you'll get the money.
Ryder
Having a senior moment
It is also worth noting that to my knowledge.. if he is a sole trader (no more puns please god!) then he also carries unlimited liability. That liability would go with him even if he stopped trading and started up with a new name. The only way for him to avoid that liability would be to declare bankruptcy.
Were he a limited company... things would be different since you would have been sold the car by the company and not the individual. The seller in this case would have been acting as an employee of the limited company.
If it states his name or his trading name with no indication of being limited on the invoice then he is going to have a hard time running away from this.
Obviously I am not a legal type chap and it would be irresponsible for me to make guesses about his guilt or otherwise... I do know however, that I would chase this thing all the bloody way!
Were he a limited company... things would be different since you would have been sold the car by the company and not the individual. The seller in this case would have been acting as an employee of the limited company.
If it states his name or his trading name with no indication of being limited on the invoice then he is going to have a hard time running away from this.
Obviously I am not a legal type chap and it would be irresponsible for me to make guesses about his guilt or otherwise... I do know however, that I would chase this thing all the bloody way!
