I part ex'chg my car to a dealer, he is saying it blew up on way home. What are his/my rights? *** Claim struck out ***

[raydetinu]

Bluff, ignore.

But be prepared to defend if it goes that far.The deal was done on the day and he has no comeback.

[daisymouse1975]

Thankyou for your support at this very worrying time

[Dragons Dennis]

Ok. Let me give you some hope here and hopefully put your mind at ease. My advice is from several angles. One, from a former car dealer. Two from a law degree student. Three from someone with a fair amount of experience in county courts. Four, from someone who has studied consumer law.

 

The essence of the matter is that you part exchanged a car which was faulty. The car had an existing engine problem when you part exchanged and the dealers price to you reflected this faulty engine by way of him asking you for a £750 contribution to fix the faulty engine. There is the contract. You give him £x for the new car, less the part exchange value for your old car, less a £750 fee for the engine faults on your old car. Once all monies have changed hands and the old car is given to the delaer and you collect the new car, the contract is fulfilled.

 

ANY problems that subsequently occur with your old car after completion of the contract are irrelevant as far as you are concerned. If however you have probelms with your new car, the dealer would still be liable to attend to those under SOGA. You have absolutely no responsibility towards the dealer for further probelms that may or may not occur with your old car.

 

As far as county court is concerned, do not be worried or intimidated at all. IF the dealer does proceed with a claim, you will assume that he must know what he is doing and have a plausible claim. Not the case at all. Anyone can take anyone else to court. I could take Prinmce William to court if I choose. I have no case, but could have a claim all the same. In court it would be dismissed as there is no actual case to answer. So, do not be worried by the fact that this dealer may well take you to court.

 

At county court the case would be heard in a room, not a court as such. Chambers. It would be heard by a district judge. They do not wear a wig and gown, just smart office wear - a suit usually. They are NOT there to make you feel intimidated at all. The DJ will read the claim in full before meeting you and the claimant. Based on the claim and your response he/she will already have decided the outcome, pending any change on the day with evidence/defence. Unless you turn out to be a trader pretending to be a member of the public, the case is clearcut. It is the duty of the dealer to satisfy himself as to the value of any trade in vehicle. He did so and then found he had made a bad decision. Tough. The fact that he is professionally incompetent is not your fault or responsibility. Had he found the fault was actually a small screw that needed adjusting, do you think he would have returened your £750? Of course not.

 

Buying cars as a dealer is very hit and miss. You get good luck and bad luck. Many times I had my fingers burned at auctions when a car I bought as a dealer turned out to be a lemon. My tough luck and just business. I paid £3000 for a car once that needed a new automatic gearbox at a cost of £2800. I simply re auctioned the same car and it sold for £2500. I lost £500. Standard business and better to lose £500 than lose £3000.

 

The claim against you is simply sour grapes. I do feel for the dealer, but it is his duty to make all necessary checks, ie outstanding finance, previously damaged, stolen etc as well as condition of the entire car before offering a price. He cannot the change the offer retospectively because he discovers something he missed at the time of the offer.

 

His terms and conditions cannot over-ride the law. He may well want to use his terms and conditions as contract. Unless the terms and conditions are fair and balanced for both parties, they will be thrown out anyway.

 

Rest in the knowledge that the dealer will not win in court in my opinion.

[steven4064]

DD

 

thanks for the elucidation - I agree entirely

[daisymouse1975]

Court papers came today! He is now claiming £3900 Inc court fees:/ Looking at paperwork he has also sold the vehicle

[watchinginvestigation2011]

Sold it and going after you in court, stand your ground and get help from these helpers here to reply within court allocated dates.

 

Dealer is trying it on xx

[steven4064]

Can you post the particulars of claim. You will need to respond to the papers within 14 days - presumably, you are going to defend. You have 28 days to get in your defence - we will help. Main thing is to ask fro a strike out - this guy has no case!

 

Start here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caveat_emptor

 

and from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/caveat+emptor

A seller who is in the business of regularly selling a particular type of goods has still greater responsibilities in dealing with an average customer. A person purchasing antiques from an antique dealer, or jewelry from a jeweler, is justified in his or her reliance on the expertise of the seller. If both the buyer and the seller are negotiating from equal bargaining positions, however, the doctrine of caveat emptor would apply.

(my emphasis)

 

This is useful too - http://en.allexperts.com/q/UK-Scottish-Welsh-935/2009/3/help.htm

When you buy privately, the law says that you have fewer rights than when buying from a trader. The principle of 'caveat emptor' or 'buyer beware' operates. You have no legal right to expect the goods to be of a satisfactory quality (although cars should be roadworthy, whether bought privately or not). You are entitled, however, to expect the car to be correctly described. So, if the seller had claimed that it was in 'excellent condition' for example, then you might have been able to argue misrepresentation.

Edited June 8, 2011 by steven4064

[daisymouse1975]

his claim is the vehicle was unfit to drive, when it left us it was fine apart from the turbo fault. The driver who collected filled out carbon copied forms confirming this, which we have 2 copies of. The dealer has entered this paperwork to the court BUT on his copy it now says Turbo fault, smoking engine and oil light on, these are not on our copy so can only assume they have been added after the event. This seems to be what his case is based on as the garage that done the report after the breakdown have stated 'the vehicle should have been stopped when it stated to smoke and the oil light came on, all damage was causeed when the engine blew out its oil' (driver error) feeling very angry about the paperwork being tampered with :@

[afcwben]

his claim is the vehicle was unfit to drive, when it left us it was fine apart from the turbo fault. The driver who collected filled out carbon copied forms confirming this, which we have 2 copies of. The dealer has entered this paperwork to the court BUT on his copy it now says Turbo fault, smoking engine and oil light on, these are not on our copy so can only assume they have been added after the event. This seems to be what his case is based on as the garage that done the report after the breakdown have stated 'the vehicle should have been stopped when it stated to smoke and the oil light came on, all damage was causeed when the engine blew out its oil' (driver error) feeling very angry about the paperwork being tampered with :@

 

This chap has not got a leg to stand on especially with altered paperwork

[sailor sam]

I agree, the copies of the paperwork will be good evidence to defend the claim. Clearly the dealer hasn't done his homework.

 

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.

 

[steven4064]

As I said above, let's have a look at the POC

 

Even if what is said on the altered papaerwork was true, caveat emptor still applies.

[daisymouse1975]

Details as they are stted on claim form:

 

Brief details of claim

The claimant sold the defendant a vehicle and took a range rover in part exchange. The Defendant stated the vehicle was in acceptable condition to drive. However the engibe failed shortly after hand over and had to be recovered back to Derby at a cost to baytree. A local garage advised the vehicle required a replacement engine at a cost of £2385.00. The defendant has been advised of these issues bit is still denying he/she misrepresented the vehicle. Despite seeking legal advice and contacting the defendant by letter the claimant is no further forward with this matter.

 

Value

Recovery of vehicle £181.80

Pro Driver(delivery & collection) £241.02

Cost of replacement engine £2385.00

Loss of profit on sale £1005.00

 

Particulars of claim

Correspondence, emails and vehicle condition report are attached to support the claim

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Thats the full details off CC paperwork

As stated before we have several points, the vehicle went 130miles after it left us, our paper work confirms there was no problems before the driver left(even thou now the dealers paperwork now has extras!)

The vehicle report states it was 'due to oil starvation, the crankshaft had been so hot it had scarred blue which indicated excessive heat, the pistons had become seized solid in the block and the turbo bearings had collapsed due to oil starvation'. When the vehicle left us it had no lights on and was checked for oil and water, by ourselves and the pro driver, the only thing stated on the pro driver appraisal key sheet was 'annoy damage'(on our copy that we signed anyway) on the sheet given to the court someone has writen engine smoking oil light on turbo failed! at least we kept copies of the original

[queensclose]

The dealer has entered this paperwork to the court BUT on his copy it now says Turbo fault, smoking engine and oil light on, these are not on our copy so can only assume they have been added after the event.

judges just love tempered evidence.

 

and what's loss of profits £1005.00? he should be suing the person who give him legal advice. not you. and he his a professional car dealer?

[watchinginvestigation2011]

Wonder if he is called arthur daley?

[daisymouse1975]

Yes meant to be a specialist car dealership! Wish we had never heard of him, at least the claim gets smaller with each demand, the 1st verbal demand was for 8k

[queensclose]

Yes meant to be a specialist car dealership! Wish we had never heard of him, at least the claim gets smaller with each demand, the 1st verbal demand was for 8k

 

all this needs to be in your defence. the dealer has shown he can be dishonest and untruthful

[ihateyes]

what catches me is delivery and collection £241.00...

 

wasnt this part of the part exchange??? so how can he claim this???

he is already suing for recovery of vehicle.........

I hope you win, i hope you tell us the make of your oiginal car, then we can all ask him for a smoky, oil starved XXXX car!! then laugh!!

 

Good luck...

[steven4064]

So, who is going to have a first go at a defence?

 

Put it here and we can all comment, add bits, etc

 

Here's some bullet points:

 

- DH told him about the problems, nothing was hidden

- He is a car dealer, who presumably knows about cars, saw the car before he agreed the sale and he took the car anyway.

- It was only after he had taken it that he claims to have discovered other faults

- Caveat emptor applies, therefore

- "The claimant's statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim" CPR 3.4(2)(a) so court is invited to strike out his statament of case

Edited June 9, 2011 by steven4064

[afcwben]

From what I have seen here, the dealer is really chancing his arm on this one, maybe he thinks he will scare the OP into giving him money before it gets to court, not realising that the OP is getting advice from CAG

[steven4064]

Nail on the head, I think afcwben

[sailor sam]

The fact that the dealer's agent signed agreeing that the vehicle was of 'satifactory' condition upon collection, should make this water tight for the OP. especially as that document has now been 'adjusted'.

 

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.

 

[steven4064]

The fact that the dealer's agent signed agreeing that the vehicle was of 'satifactory' condition upon collection, should make this water tight for the OP. especially as that document has now been 'adjusted'.

Presumably, daiseymouse, you have this document that the agent signed. It would be a good idea to attach a copy to the defence.

 

Have you replied to the court saying you are going to defend the whole of the case? (there is a tear-off form on the court papers)

[gbjadyy]

im in the trade and this thing cant go anywhere as far as i can see, the car went into dealer hands, he drove it and knew it was faulty, its upto him to decide to what extent that fault maybe so he can offer a deal accordingly but if his own conclusions of repairs costs are wrong then thats his problem, he offered a deal and the customer accepted that deal, if it was me i would send him a letter explaining this also mentioning any legal action will be met with a fight and in the event the dealer lost a court battle ( which he would) then you would claim all your legal costs back from him, im sure he will find that he has to give in and go away unless he does want to risk paying for your court costs

[steven4064]

gbjadyy - you are absolutely right. Unfortunately (and stupidly), the dealer has already started court proceedings.

 

Since no one else is stepping up to the plate, here is a draft defence. What do the various contributors to the tread think? (I have put it in the correct format)

 

In the XXXXXX County Court

Claim No. XXXXXX

 

 

Between

 

 

XXXXXXXXX Ltd

Claimant

 

- and -

 

Daiseymouse

Defendant

 

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

DEFENCE

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

1. On xx/xx/xxxx I purchased a car ("the Purchased Vehicle") via the Internet from the Claimant, an established car dealer, who took the vehicle registration number XNNNXXX (“the Trade-in Vehicle”) in part exchange as part of the sale agreement (“the Agreement”). I paid £241 for delivery of the Purchased Vehicle and collection of the Trade-in Vehicle.

 

2. On the day before delivery was due (xx/xx/xxxx), I telephoned the Claimant and informed him that there had been a problem with the Trade-in Vehicle, that I had paid a garage £1000 to fix the car but that it needed a new turbocharger. He said he was happy to go ahead with the deal and take the car even though it needed a turbocharger as long as I covered the costs of the replacement part and fitting. On that basis, I made an additional payment to the Claimant of £750 by credit card to cover the costs of him replacing the turbocharger once he had taken delivery of the Trade-in Vehicle.

 

3. On the xx/xx/xxxx, the Claimant’s representative (Mr xxxxxxxx) delivered the Purchased Vehicle and took the Trade-in Vehicle away, having inspected it and found that it was as I had described. He signed a receipt agreeing that the Trade-in Vehicle was of satisfactory condition upon collection (attached as exhibit A).

 

4. About 4hours later, I received a phone call from the Claimant saying the engine had seized/blown up on the Trade-in Vehicle. A couple of days later, the Claimant phoned again to and said the engine has not seized as it was turning over, but said he would strip down the engine to look for the fault and that he would contact me later in the week to talk about damage. Since then he has phoned a number of times demanding that I pay for the repairs to the engine.

 

5. I assert that, as the agreement was between an established car dealer (the Claimant) and a consumer (the Defendant); that, as the Claimant is knowledgeable about cars, was informed of the turbocharger fault and agreed to the deal provided that I pay for the replacement; that, as I paid £750 for the replacement turbocharger; that, as the vehicle was inspected by the Claimant’s representative who agreed that it was in a satisfactory condition, the principle of caveat emptor clearly applies.

 

6. On this basis, I respectfully request that the court strikes out the Claimant’s statement of case under CPR Part 3.4(2)(a) as the Claimant’s statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

 

I believe that the facts stated in this statement of case are true.

 

 

Signed Daiseymouse this xth day of June 2011.

Edited June 10, 2011 by steven4064

[gbjadyy]

just sounds like a didgy bloke and he dont like it when he loses money but thats the game in this trade, some you win and some you lose, nobody is perfect but everybody is right !!!, now go and put the the kettle on terrence , im getting one my heads ! lol