My opologies... I missed that bit. Sometimes we deal with a number of threads at the same time so it is quite easy to get "distracted" so it's always best to clarify things in case we miss something. No, not at all. Just putting forward what may be asked in court so we can potentially see a way around the argument.

Actually you have raised a good point. OP states "As soon as I drove the car it was obvious the rear brakes were badly binding" and that "the trader is 25 miles away I was not happy to drive with brakes binding". Question begs then septicpig, why didn't you take it straight back instead of driving it 25 miles home?

Ebay tend to be a law unto themselves. But I would ring them and explain the position and ask their advice. It would be interesting to see what they say!

Ok, could you keep us updated please?

In that case, I think it is reasonable to ask for the costs of the parts then. Clearly you should (if not already) write to the seller asking this and include COPIES of the receipts for the parts. Give him 7 working days to resposnd after which you will then need to send an LBA (letter before action) prior to making a claim to the small claims court. No doubt you are aware that you can do it on line.

Interesting one this. Can I ask if you bought the car as a consumer or "a fully qualified mechanic". Reason I ask is we need to establish that the car was sold via a normal "consumer" transaction and not as a "trader to trader" transaction. SOGA would probably note apply to the latter. Assuming you bought it as a consumer and have rectified the faults yourself, I think it is reasonable to ask the seller for a contribution to the parts. The problem as I see it though, the seller could argue that he could of obtained the parts cheaper so you may not succeed in recovering your total losses. Also, you say that you gave the seller reasonable opportunity to resolve the problem. It would help enormously if you have written evidence to back this up. So did you put anything in writing to the seller in respect of the issues?

Thought so. But clearly you only THINK you know the law. There is no "exact" legislation posted on here (so far) that specifically excludes cars from DSRs. Goods subject to "fluctuations in the financial markets" can be anything from gold bars to diamonds. Plus you are forgetting one thing, the sale was not completed so the full purchase price was never paid, just £500 of it thus the deposit does not relate to the value of the car. In other words, what difference does it make if the car was worth £10k when the deposit was placed and it dropped in value by £300 when the OP cancelled it? Furthermore, what dealer is going to "drop" the value of the car prior to delivery? I simply think you are arguing for the sake of it and have nothing constructive to contribute to the thread. You haven't even suggested that the OP seeks legal advice which kind of proves my point that you are batting for car traders, not the consumer. OP, I stand by my previous advice; go see a consumer law solicitor for clarification and do come back to let us know what happens.

Able to read perfectly well thanks, and understand consumer law. DSR's do not exclude cars (used or otherwise) and you have not provided any legislation which SPECIFICALLY supports this as you claimed in post #14. The amount of refund paid by the OP would not affect the value of the car. The OP is merely asking for a refund of his deposit within a reasonable time scale. Yes, the seller may argue any losses or costs he has incurred by the cancellation but he would need to show evidence of this (assuming the OP progresses to a court claim). As I have said, the OP should consult a consumer law solicitor for clarification. Exactly what advice have you bought to the party other than attempt to shoot everyone else's down in flames. Makes me suspect that you are a trader yourself.

The fact the OP didn't provide reasonable opportunity to the seller to inspect and rectify thus mitigating his costs, does not mean that the OP dosn't have a case. It would be for the judge to decide what proportion of the OP's claim would be reasonable under such circumstances.

I doubt that the OP's car's price "fluctuates" significantly in the time scale given here. I think you will find that the "goods" you are referring to is probably precious metals such as gold or silver, not cars. Cutting to the chase, I suggest that the OP clarifies his position as far as the DSRs are concerned by taking a copy of any paperwork with him to show a consumer law solicitor. It certainly dosn't help the OP you trying to point score by trawling up some ambiguous exemption. In post 14, you said you could post a "link to the legislation" supporting the fact that "DSRs do not apply to car sales". So far you havn't (not even one for used cars).

But there are exemptions and variations to all such transactions (probably). You clearly specified in post #14, that "DSR's do not apply to car sales". I was merely pointing out that this may not be correct as far as the OP's case is concerned.

Doubt if the police will be interested at this stage (if at all). You will need to send him a 'letter before action' (LBA) prior to taking any proceedings indicating that you require to arrange a return of the vehicle for a full refund giving him 7 working days to respond. Send by recorded delivery.

I'm pleased for you at your outcome but I must make the following observations; I think Postggj actually gave good advice here. Having been through a similar case myself, I can tell you that had it been necessary for you to pursue the matter via the court, you should of named both the seller and finance company as co-respondents. No doubt the finance company has recovered it's monies from the dealership anyway and decided that going to court would not have been a waste of time for them. I would suggest that behind the scenes, the finance company and dealership came to a mutual agreement as it would not of been in either of their interests to go to court as (and quite rightly so), you had such a strong case. HOWEVER, I think if the dealership had not played ball with the finance company, then they would of defended the claim as they could surely not of alone been held responsible for the failings of the car. They simply would of applied to have the matter adjourned so that the dealer could be added as co-respondent. Yes, the ultimate outcome would of been the same (probably) but the process could of taken much longer. So I think your comments on the advice you were given were a bit harsh as I think the advice was perfectly reasonable and accurate (I do also speak from experience). Aside of that, I thank you for letting us know of the outcome and endorse your other comments.

Please do. In the meantime this seems to suggest otherwise; http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/consumer_protection/oft689.pdf

Did you contact the Sheriffs for advice?

Some silly advice here. You may of stood a chance IF you had proof you had broken down (like a job sheet from a breakdown garage or something) but that would of been for the LA to have decided upon. If you choose to take it to the adjudicator, it will be looked at in black and white and almost certainly rejected. There was probably an alternative spot for you to stop at for example (even yellow lines would of probably been more exceptable). I agree with G&M, I would pay the discounted rate while you can. Please Note The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only. I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action. Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

But it appears the OP cannot pay it due to an admin 'error'. If it was me and I was 'guilty' of what ever the offence is, I think I would simply send the ticket off with the payment enclosed but keep a photo copy of the original ticket. Please Note The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only. I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action. Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

There isn't any... but neither is there stating that 'actual' money has to change hands for a transaction to be regarded as a 'sale'. The simple fact is that if a consumer walks into a business with something of a monetary value to purchase something and that 'something' is accepted as full (or part) payment, then the transaction becomes a sale just like any other. If I was wrong then anything bought using vouchers, tokens, gold bars or anything else other than actual 'cash' would be deemed to remove the statutory rights of the consumer. I think you will find that isn't the case.

FPN's are issued by the Police, not 'traffic wardens'. Are you sure it's not a PCN? Please Note The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only. I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action. Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

With respect, I think that is rubbish... unless you can back it up with some legislation. The car will have monetary value... it dosn't have to be actual pound coins which changes hands. If the seller accepts the OP's car as full 'payment' for the car he has for 'sale', then that is a genuine transaction just like any other.

But money dosn't have to change hands as the OP is 'trading' his car for one the trader is selling. Presumably the OP's car has some monetary value which just happens to appear to be the same value as the one he is 'buying'.

Further to my previous post, this has happened; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526504/Hit-run-CYCLIST-ran-girl-30mph-ignoring-red-light-pedestrian-crossing-jailed-NINE-MONTHS.html?login#readerCommentsCommand-message-field Makes you wonder what the sentence would of been had the cyclist been driving a car. The law applying to cycling needs to be bought up to date. Here is the perfect example why. Please Note The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only. I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action. Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

If your'e a private individual, it cannot be a 'trade sale'. If you buy from a trader (i.e. a dealer or business) then you have protection under the SOGA. The seller is not legally obliged to provide a warranty BUT he/she would be responsible for any inherent defects which may occur (i.e. anything which was present at the point of sale). A trader is expected to know what he is selling and that it is of satisfactory quality, fit for the purpose and as described. P.S. to this; it would be illegal to attempt to remove or reduce your statutory rights by implying that the car is "sold as seen" or any similar wording on a receipt.

Thank you for the update. It will be useful to to others! Please Note The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only. I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action. Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

I'm not to up on bankruptcy TBH, but I found this; http://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/casehelpmanual/P/Proofs%20(ISCIS).htm You need to find out if judgement was set aside. If not, I would issue the warrant of execution and get it passed onto the high court sheriffs here; http://thesheriffsoffice.com/ In fact, I would contact the Sheriffs for advice one you know whats going on with your judgement.