Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by oddjobbob

  1. OP you need to live in the real world.


    after 18 months use there are no circumstances under which you can attribute any problem to the seller. You'd have great difficulty getting anything after 18 months even if you had bought it from a main dealer, let alone a private seller, where the presumption is 'buyer beware'


    And how on earth can you sue for depreciation? depeciation is part of car owenrship!!


    Are you on medication by any chance?

  2. ''I am given a deposit of £300 to keep it and to make sure that he is doing all the necessary adjustments/ improvements (new tyres, etc.) in order to pick it up in 2 days after he called a finance Company giving away all my details in order to give me a loan. ''


    Looks to me like you bought it OP and then had buyers remorse. In the meantime the dealer took it off sale and possibly refused other enquiries on it. So I am unsurprised he is not happy.


    Suppose you DID want the car and the dealer said 'sorry mate, someone else bought it the next day, here's your deposit back' - you would be livid, and rightly so.

  3. .....................

    Ok, 1st post on here so bare with me....


    Bought a car in mid Feb this year for 3.5k, 6weeks later an engine mount fails and the dealer tries to fob off with "I'll get it fixed for you at trade cost". I use my right to reject and compose a letter to demand it repaired under the CRA. YOUR RIGHT TO REJECT IS 30 DAYS NOT 6 WEEKS.


    At this point I find out that the dealer xxx motor company, is actually xxxx body repairs (I won't name and shame as we are still in dispute). The sales invoice hadn't included this info and I wasn't made aware at time of sale. SO WHAT?


    If I'd known I was buying from a body repair shop I wouldn't have bought the vehicle. The company director is also his wife, but under her maiden name on companies house. So it took me a bit of FB stalking and 2hrs searching on companies house to even be sure who to reject the vehicle to. SO WHAT?


    I get no responce, so compose another letter, giving more detail on the fault and why I'm rejecting. Then get a letter back from "law firm". Basically saying it's an old car so it'll break down, deal with it. I reply with chapter and verse, an mention that their 'member' did not disclose who they are on the sales receipt along with a request to confirm the milage at time of sale as my invoice says exactly 75,000. So in the eyes of the law I had completed only 150miles.balso for copies of a service check on the vehicle and or pdi as I have no copies given to me at time of sale. IF THE ACTUAL MILEAGE WAS SAY 74600 AND HE PUT 75000 THATS FINE.


    They come back two weeks later with, yes the dealer rounded up the milage on the sales receipt! (illegal) NO IT'S NOT And have included a copy of a pdi and service. Turns out the service check was completed after I'd laid down my deposit and taken for a test drive (also illegal) NO ITS NOT So he had no idea the condition of the vehicle when he put it on the forecourt, I took a testdrive in what could have been a death trap. BUT IT WASN'T SO YOU SUFFERED NO LOSS.


    At this point Ive already contacted the back for a chargeback. Which has gone into my bank account, but he can still dispute in the next 6 weeks. I've responded to "law firm" with your member has committed a criminal offence(s) NO HE HASN'T and I'll take it to small claims if he tries to refute the chargeback. BEST OF LUCK WITH THAT


    Due to the severity SEVERITY? REALLY? of the above and flat refusal of liability LIABLE FOR WHAT? on the dealers part I've also reported direct to the local trading standards with the above info and evidence to back it up. NOTHING I CAN SEE HERE TO BACK UP TBQH


    Now I'm happy to take home to scc if required as I'm 100% I'd get cost of the car back just on the mis selling of the vehicle under the wrong trading name. I'D SAY NO BETTER THAN 50% TBH However, how likely are trading standards to take action and if so how do I find out if they have? NOT VERY LIKELY AT ALL IF THIS IS THE ONLY COMPLAINT, MORE LIKELY IF IT IS A TRADER ALREADY ON THEIR RADAR


    He's basically only checking cars after they are sold and is pretending his main trade is a car dealership rather than a body repair shop. He could potentially be taking vehicles that have come through the body repair shop, offering customers a part ex and doing a quick fix to what could be prang on a vehicle and then selling on for big profit through the sales site HE'S PERFECTLY WITHIN HIS RIGHTS TO DO THAT AS LONG AS HE'S NOT SELLING INSURANCE WRITE OFFS WITHOUT DECLARING IT.(what I suspect with my car due to the type of fail and his reaction on the phone).

  4. Where have Helios' an my posts gone?


    FWIW I AGREE that the op should get his money back - ridiculous, they can't just keep his money.


    And I'm not suggesting any fraud either - but the OP SHOULD have declared his Cat D at the time.


    These motoring boards are getting quieter, which is unsurprising if you're going to censor them to show only your POV.

  5. And the dealers response could be:



    Yes we admit that happened but subsequent due diligence checks prior to execution of the contract showed up material facts which had been deliberately withheld. We contend that this was done with intent to defraud.



    How do you intend to get out of that?



    Hi Helios


    the OP should have declared that his car was a Cat D....without question.


    the dealer eventually did the right thing by hpi checking it and backed off (i would have backed off too)


    the dealer ought to have held the original deal open but taken the px element out of it.


    But they cannot 'fine' the OP for trying to defraud them. Only a court can fine you for doing something wrong.

  6. But surely the contract has not been cancelled? The car you wanted to buy is still available at the price you wanted to pay for it- £11500? They are only saying come and pick your car up. All that's changed is the part exchange....which is NOT as you made it out to be, ie Cat D write off. Quite right they don't want to take it in px. The fact that you sold the Cat D car for £500 less than the px price shows they were correct to not give you the agreed amount for it.


    Did the Cat D occur during your ownership? If so you should have told them. I agree they are in the trade and should have checked on the day, but they took your word for it that it was ok...and it is likely their policy to only hpi pxs at a later stage


    As for still advertising the car you bought, this is common practice. It's done to attract sales calls, and anyone that phoned up for it would have been told 'we've just taken a deposit on it, sorry...however we've got this one which is 6 months older, blah blah'

  7. funny that as your subsequent statement on this post seems to support the fact. Further as you know until money exchanges hands the contract is open and the op has openly and publicly admitted he knowingly did not inform the trader of a major material fact that would affect the contract price. I think if this went to court the trader would have a good chance of winning. As i point out the trader did indeed carry out due diligence prior to contract conclusion where the issue became apparent. However under these circumstances the trader should return the deposit and the op should bare this in mind when trading in the car. At the end of the day is the op prepared to go the distance with the challenge? It will cost more than the deposit lost, carries huge risk and could potentially cost the op more than the deposit. I'd personally advise the op walks away and put's it down to lessons learnt


    this ^^^^^

  8. Who knows? You might be right, for the op's sake let's hope you are.


    Why on earth any reputable dealer would want to be involved in acar like this I've no idea.


    But I can foresee a battle....the ad could not be clearer that it's spares or repairs and there's nothing wrong with offering acar of this nature to the public. Also as stated the ad did not contain any 'puff' merely a statement of facts about the car.


    we shall see!

  9. I know....thy should never use that phrase! 'Sold as seen' carries no weight whatsoever from a car dealer. Illegal was perhaps too strong...just meaningless.


    However, 'spares or repairs' is perfectly ok.


    Presumably 'sold as seen 'implies that it might well be a good car, have a look, make your own mind up, whereas 'spares or repairs' implies it is definitely not a good car.


    The ad said:


    make mileage


    spares or repairs


    The ad did NOT say

    drives well

    excellent condition

    starts first time

    excellent bodywork




    Indeed, the condition of the car is not implied in any way.


    The OP bought what was advertised I'm afraid

  10. You're not the OP, and writing in the first person is not helpful.


    The whole reason that consumer legislation exists is because of stuff like you've written here. Thankfully we no longer live in that world.


    You are spouting nonsense, I've no idea what you mean about writing in the first person.


    Let's be clear. The OP bought exactly what the advert said it was - a car suitable for spares or repairs. As a dealer you cannot sell a car 'sold as seen', it is illegal to do so.


    Consumer legislation exists, quite rightly, to protect the consumer: but you cannot protect a consumer against themselves, the OP bought the car thinking it would be ok, but it wasn't, and was expressly described as being for spares or repairs.


    As for your comment that we no longer live in those times, the very fact that the op has come here demonstrates that we do.


    Why on earth any dealer would get involved with stuff like this is beyond me....if it's not good enough to retail, send it to auction.


    I am NOT defending the dealer or maligning the op, simply telling it how it is.

  11. Good stuff, I think you stand an excellent chance of arguing that this wasn't a true sales 'n' repairs sale, and that the dealer's trying it on.

    No, I don't, the ad specifically states spares / repairs twice and does not mention if it drives ok or if anything works. They got what was described in the ad.


    If you're selling cars to the general public, advertised on consumer websites, valeted, repaired, taxed, and suitable to drive away on the day, you're going to have a hard time arguing that the words "spares and repairs" or "sold as seen" are anything but trying to avoid your responsibilities to consumers.


    Instead, the traders use these magic words because writing "I don't want to honour the CRAicon" would harm sales, and writing them helps the traders bully people out of their rights.

    Even the idea that there are legions of consumers desperate to buy _entire cars_ for spare parts is an insult to the entire industry.

    Spares / repairs is fine and involves no comeback, as long as the ad is absolutely clear. Sold as seen is a big no no. Consumers see only what they want to see, which in this case was a bright looking modern car for £1000. I do agree slightly sticky ground allowing it to be driven away, but the ad is as solid as a rock, it couldn't be plainer.


    No-one's saying that cars can't be sold for spares/repairs/as seen. The problem comes when you dress a car up as anything but that. It shouldn't be that difficult either; tell people why the car's not a runner, get customers to trailer it away, and don't invest money in making them better!

    This one wasn't dressed up though...yes its been cleaned, but the ad could not be clearer. 'Sold for spares or repairs on behalf of a customer' And why not clean it? People buy with their eyes and not their brain sometimes!

  12. This highlights something that I have noticed that is being used more and more in trade ads


    . Dealers are stating "Sold as spares & repairs" or even "even though it starts we have no knowledge of the condition and advise it is taken away on a trailer.

    ..Sold spares & repairsr" .


    Does this then absolve the dealer of any responsibility under the CPA?


    Sorry if I've hijacked the thread.


    Yes, I think it probably does.


    These spares / repairs things do have a value of some kind and it would be absurd to say thy cannot be sold.


    Spares / repairs = trouble, every time.


    I am a retired car dealer, and if I ever took a px that was trouble I simply sent it to auction, sold as seen.

  13. Well, almost. If a dealer is selling car then you can presume it is roadworthy, safe, and will fairly reliably get you from a to b...bearing in mind the price paid. That doesn't need to be in writing, it's a given in consumer law.


    the difference here is that is was advertised as 'spares or repair'...that is, sold on the basis that you will either use the parts from it for spares or spend money doing the repairs that are required.


    and you weren't quite told 'it just needs a couple of tyres'...sad but true. sorry!


    no doubt your receipt says spares / repairs also?

  14. I'm afraid that's not what I said either.


    No I know it isn't...the reply was to the op.


    Basically ANYTHING on ebay sold spares or repair = trouble.


    I completely agree with you that if the op had evidence that it only needed tyres then that's a different ball game.


    But I'll bet that wasn't quite what was said. The dealer won't be an idiot. It will most likely have been 'well we are selling it spares or repair on behalf of a customer...it does need a couple of tyres though, so we will do them....'


    I expect the receipt says spares or repair too.


    Not good for the op....but spares or repair means, well, break it or repair it.

  15. So basically if any thing is advertised as spares or repair and the faults are told to you in black and white, i.e just requires new tyres, ignore it as they are allowed to hide the other problems.......... :!:


    Yep, that's about right.


    I refer you to my previous answer, spares or repair = scrap or spend, your choice.


    You can't have the penny and the bun...ie you can't buy a £1000 'spares or repairs' car and not expect it to be exactly that: break it for spares or repair the faults. That's what it means.


    £1000 is banger money anyway.

  16. OP I think alot depends on how much you paid for the car. They cannot sell a car 'as is'.... but if it was only a few hundred then the age and price paid would be taken into account.


    So how much was it? Having said that the advert would immediately ring alarm bells....they are virtually saying its not a very nice car!


    Having said that you will probably win.

  • Create New...