Ebay car

[vaisala]

hi all, firstly let me say hi. this is my first post and looking for some good advice please. its long winded so please bear<? with me.

ok about 1 month ago i bought a car off an ebayer for 1900. it was listed in his listing as "described to the best of his knowledge". i went to the sellers house and had a look at the car which he said he had only had for 3 weeks and it had been sitting outside the back of his house.

onl examining the car i thought it seemed ok. not being a mechanic i really didnt know what i was lloking for. he would not let me test drive it because at that moment in time i was not insured for the vehicle. so i thought fair enough. on driving the car home i noticed it had a severe problem in that when i accelarated it pulled to the left severly and when i deccelerated it pulled to the right. on getting home a member of my family said the engine was excessively noisy so much so that i tookk it to renault for a diagnostic check. (£9. they dropped the oil changed oil gave engine flush still not solved. they done further investigation and said it could be anything. each costing £400 to investigate. as for the pulling they said it had been in serious suspension damage within the last 12 months.

on getting the report i emailed the seller who told me that as far as he was concerned he listed it to the best of his knowledge, but he said on the phone that he would pay for the repairs, however the next day i received an email off him stating that i had refused a test drive (lie) and that becaue i had driven it 70 miles home it was tough luck.

he said because he listed it as "to the best of his knowledge" i didnt have a leg to stand on, however i sent him an email before buying the car asking if there were any faults, he replied by saying there were no leaks, electrical or mechanical faults whatsoever. i have spoken to oft who said that i am covered under the sale of goods act 1979 in that when he replied stating that he shot him self in the foot (their words). they told me to write giving him 7 days for a refund or to pursue the matter legally? i have emailed numerous times, however he chooses to ignore them. i sent him a registered letter nearly 2 weeks ago laying out my plans ie 7 days to agree to refund or legal action will start, he replied by saying (via email) his legal rep has told him he is in the right? now my questions are as follows.

1. are oft right in what they say.
2. what do i do next.
3. i really need an idiots guide for the small claims if this is the way forward.
4. has anybody else been in this situation and what was their outcome.


many many thanks for listening. i hear lots of you saying..tut tut ebay and the likes, please no sarcasm, i have no money a family and a useless car.

kindest regards
steve

[raydetinu]

Question about the purchase, did you actually buy iit on Ebay? or pay the seller after you had seen it? one is an auction, the other is a private sale, different rules!
If you paid through Ebay before seeing then it an auction and you have very little come back except through the Ebay/paypal dispute procedure.

if a private sale then he needs to have misrepresented the vehlcle and claiming it had no mechanical faults is certailnly that, so take him to court.

[vaisala]

hi ray,
ebay was the vehicle for the sale, ie i bid on ebay, however i never paid via ebay, it was cash when i got there. oft have assured me the ball is in my court, because he told me it was free from any defects whatsoever.
also they told me that irrespective of him saying to the best of his knowledge it is not a defence as he is supplying the goods, therefore they must be fit for purpose and he has a duty of care to ensure this.

any thoughts on this?
regards
steve

[buzby]

No in a private sale caveat emptor rules. He may not have known of the defects, but it was your error in not even taking it for a test drive beforehand. If you already had a car policy, it more than likely would have covered you third party to try it prior to sale. A private seller owes you no duty of care the onus on suitability rests with you.

If you bid and won, and then at the point of sale decided the vehicle was defective and chose not to proceed, he could not leave you negative feedback, so whilst you broke the spirit of the deal at least you still would have your money.

[yellowt5r]

im having a problem like you but im the seller,my bike was found out to be a cat c write off but i never knew this even done a hpi check and was clear.dont take this the wrong way but you should of checked and been satisfied with what you was buying before you bought it,inspections etc could of been carried out if the seller had nothing to hide id say you dont stand much chance (sorry)

[vaisala]

hi thanks for that, however i think you are mistaken. i did not refuse the test drive, i was not insured, no other policy as i had no car beforehand. he did not say anything about the car on ebay apart from the best of his knowledge. however he did send me an email stating that there were no faults at all whatsoever. so for him to state now that he may have been mistaken, is quite frankly not on. the fact that he wrote this means it becomes part of the binding agreement?
regards
steve

[yellowt5r]

hi you also stated he said to the "best of his knowledge" his knowlege of cars could of been like yours but to state no faults well you have a point,its very hard to prove as you have taken the car so anything could of happened to it since it being in your ownership (from ther courts eyes).did he take you for a test drive??

[vaisala]

no he stated that he wsnt insured like me, also he picked me up from the service station in a rangerover, presumaly so i could not see the performance of the car. another thing to mention is that on the photographs of the vehicle the last stamp was on the bottom of the page now on inspection when i got home, there seems to be another one added on the top of the next page. all the pictures were taken by him, however if the vehicle was sat outside his house as he says for 3 weeks, well were did the other service stamp come from, with a difference of 3500 miles. i phoned the number on the barely legible garage stamp, which was a mobile number and someone just said "hello" on the other end, now if i had a business i certainly would not answer the business phone with "hello". i smell a rat the further i look into this
regards
steve

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by buzby

No in a private sale caveat emptor rules. He may not have known of the defects, but it was your error in not even taking it for a test drive beforehand. If you already had a car policy, it more than likely would have covered you third party to try it prior to sale. A private seller owes you no duty of care the onus on suitability rests with you.

Not quite. Caveat Emptor maybe, but buyer is still entitled to get a vehicle which is a) as described, b) roadworthy, unless they had agreed beforehand that the vehicle was being sold as scrap (clearly not the case in this instance).

Question about the purchase, did you actually buy iit on Ebay? or pay the seller after you had seen it? one is an auction, the other is a private sale, different rules!
If you paid through Ebay before seeing then it an auction and you have very little come back except through the Ebay/paypal dispute procedure.

Incorrect. Ebay, although often selling auction style, is NOT an auction seller and describe themselves as an "online marketplace", and the right are exactly the same as they are through a normal sale.

What is correct is that your rights are considerably reduced when you are buying from a private buyer.

If you want to pursue this, you need to send him a letter pointing out that you intend to pursue him through the small claims court for refund/cost of repairs unless he agrees to comply, pointing out that he is in breach of SOGA 1979 on the points of selling a car not as described and not roadworthy (you'll need to get your mechanic to confirm that is the case before you put it on your letter) and giving him 14 days to comply, but be preapred for the fact that you may well have to take him to court to force him to comply and that it will come down to who the judge believes on balance of probabilities, so if you haven't taken screenshots of the listing supporting your assertions, I suggest you do so asap.

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

Not quite. Caveat Emptor maybe, but buyer is still entitled to get a vehicle which is a) as described, b) roadworthy, unless they had agreed beforehand that the vehicle was being sold as scrap (clearly not the case in this instance).

I'm afraid caveat emptor does not have any 'maybe' attached to it. Additionally, any suggestion that the buyer is entitled to a purchase that is 'roadworthy', is interesting - morally yes but where is this enshrined under statute? Providing it has not been misdescribed, then the seller has provided all the information that is necessary. As for your suggestion that an 'agreement' be made that it is sold as 'scrap' is wide of the mark. There are legal requirements for people who purchase vehicles for scrap, they have to be licensed for a start and have recognised recycling facilities. Ass to this the RK would have to pass over the complete V5 (not simply a change of RK section) to allow the scrapping to take place.

Subsequent information as to how a dealer answers the phone is immaterial, even if a service was botched, none of this has any relevance to a new purchaser who has the opportunity to accept or reject at the point of sale.

The only recourse available is if the seller is misrepresenting their status - a private sale when they can be proved to be a trader, but its a long shot. With the only recourse being court, with no guarantee of success. Or are you suggesting otherwise? Whatever the decided course, the OP will have to spend more money to pursae the matter with no guarantee of success.

[raydetinu]

The threat of court action usually focuses peoples minds if they are casual sellers, and generally wake up and come to some arrangement, partial refund etc.
In this case I think court action would be succesful, mainly by what the Email said.

[vaisala]

many thanks for all your replies,
i think i will pursue it legally through the courts. but like i said in my first post how do i do it, iunderstand i have to send off an n1 form to the courts, but do i have to sent anything to the defendant? or will the court take things on from there?

one last thing, he was selling it on behalf of his daughter, whom i never actually met, so my question is do i take him or his daughter to court as he was the one i communicated with.

regards
steve

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by buzby

any suggestion that the buyer is entitled to a purchase that is 'roadworthy', is interesting - morally yes but where is this enshrined under statute? Providing it has not been misdescribed, then the seller has provided all the information that is necessary. As for your suggestion that an 'agreement' be made that it is sold as 'scrap' is wide of the mark.

Maybe you want to go and tell TS that they're wide off the mark too?

Trading Standards Central - Consumer Advice Leaflets

Whether you buy privately or from a motor trader, you are entitled to expect that the car is roadworthy when you buy it, unless you and the seller clearly agree it is to be sold as scrap. You should take note that a car sold with an MOT Certificate does not necessarily mean that it is roadworthy.

[buzby]

TS..? With their variable track record - I wouldn't waste my breath. (a) TS don't involve themselves in private disputes (b) TS will not 'take action' to represent a consumer irrespective of whether a trader or private dispute is involved (c) TS is a department of your local council. I wouldn't trust my local council to fill a pothole correctly, would you? (d) TS and Consumer watch are there to make the consumer fell 'cared for'. I don't need soothing noises from a disinterested third party. I can make my own. (e) I have been to TS of 4 occasions in the last 18 months to evaluate their performance. Twice I was given completely misleading information, once I was told I'd need to see a solicitor, and the last time my complaint about banking fraud by a local trader had me referred to the BBA - who were not the agency I should have been referred to.

It's nice to know someone holds them in high esteem though!

[vaisala]

im still holding back with the court action, i really do not know if it will be £115 wasted. we are not a well off family and the thought of using that money only to be told caveat emptor really worries me, in a nut shell would you guys go for it if it was you?

regards
steve

[buzby]

In a similar situation, I'd remove the risk element (speculative court action).

You still have the vehicle and there is no issue over title - so getting the problems fixed as cheaply as you can at a non-franchised garage will be your best option. A letter to the seller with a copy of the bill, asking for a contribution might get you something.

The nuclear option is to mask the faults and try to sell it again, but I don't recommend this, as you'd then be knowingly disposing of a problem vehicle.

[vaisala]

well its finally happened, turned a corner about 100m from my drive tonight.....crunch!!! didnt know what it was, phoned a friend who thought it was possibly cv joint, however when he jacked it up, and spun both wheels it crunched from both sides...verdict....final drive in the gear box...jeez i really am raging!!...1900 of hard earned cash to some scam artist in bradford and "caveat emptor"...my god what now..no car no cash and some plonker is living it up knowing he sold me a dodgy car...