Feb 2016 a purchase was made following a telephone call to the seller for advice and to confirm the correct parts were ordered for my vehicle registration on eBay with PayPal for £289.97.

Shortly after fitting the clutch, it failed. The seller refused a refund or to cover mechanics costs, instead charged me to return the kit for warranty replacement.

The replacement parts actually consisted of one new flywheel and other used parts with visible contamination rendering them unusable in several mechanics views, and missing all fitting bolts.

The seller told me to get bolts and he would refund costs, but in trying to do this I discovered that the supplied item was not actually as described but a cheaper model for a lesser powered vehicle, hence its premature failure.

I re contacted the seller to request the collection of the kit and delivery of the correct kit as originally ordered. The seller refused to do this, even asking for more money to correct their supply mistake.

Failing to get satisfaction I raised a PayPal dispute. They were great all be it a little slow, fully investigated the case, looked at pictures of the part supplied compared with the actual part advertised (confirmed with two independent suppliers) and found my case worthy of a refund under Buyer Protection. This happened Jul 2016 after everything had been returned to the seller at my expense.

Last week (Jul 2017) I get served a county court claim, addressed incorrectly, for £489.97 plus court fees, claiming the warranty replacement to have been damaged beyond use (a solid flywheel, returned as supplied) and assigning a £200 value to what they even describe as a free of charge item in the particulars.

They also listed the person that fitted the clutch as a co-defendant, claiming he trades as a Limited MOT company, that is totally wrong.

I have acknowledged receipt and now have a few weeks to present an online defence.

PayPal say he doesn't have a case as we both agreed to their T&Cs and to abide by their mediation should a dispute accour. They also say the seller had the chance to contest and ruling from PayPal under Seller Protection which if won/agreed would have seen a fully reimbursement from PayPal. Obviously I am not privy to the facts of this.

Doing research into other buyers being taken to court by this seller (there are many), it seems that there is a pattern of providing evidence inconsistent with the truth and trying to evade CRA2015 by claiming a trade sale not private at distance.

Is there any precedent case I can quote to help defend myself?

Has anyone had similar experience and won?

Thanks