Greetings everyone! issue with a car bought on Xmas eve e a trader on Ebay

[danceshamen]

I do have a receipt stating "sold as seen" & signed by seller... I did not sign this document.

[dw190]

Yes cash.. this was what he stipulated on the auction.

 

So no chance of claiming there (e bay).

 

Dont leave any feedback on ebay until you've give him the chance to sort it.

[heliosuk]

OK. So you bid on it on an online auction and won.

 

I think this restricts your rights even though the guy is a trader and as Oddjob says shouldn't be allowed to trade.

 

Let's see what Sam and Conniff reckon as I don't think this is clear cut. Personally I'd just get the thing repaired and put it down to experience. Never bid on a car unless you have seen it.

[danceshamen]

Thanks Helios... Shame these idiots are allowed to trade it really is & even more scandalous that nothing has been done to prevent this type of thing by the authorities. What is even more baffling is how many folk try to defend this kind of behaviour & blame the buyer?! Makes you think they are perhaps trying to somehow convince themselves that it's the buyers fault.. No doubt these are the same idiots who think it's OK to do this to someone. Funny how these types will always see fit to blame someone else for their own character flaws.

 

Still i am a great believer in Karma so it will come back to him at some point that's for sure. I will get it repaired anyways as i could never do the same to somebody else & sell them a lemon... As for doing that on an Xmas Eve

[danceshamen]

Oh & thanks dw90 too...& no, I havn't left any feedback yet.

[heliosuk]

You are right dances. You would have thought that in this day and age there are regs in place that are prima farce. However, you need to look deeper as to what this would mean to the economy and society as a whole. Regulation is not the be all and end all and current legislation is far from clear cut especially when it comes to used cars and e bay. It is a very grey area indeed.

 

My advice based on my occupation would be to get the car checked over, work out what is wrong and then come back here for advice on what is needed to get it up to standard.

 

As you say, this was a very underated car and justs needs some dosh spending on it.

[sailor sam]

You need to back up your email in writing and sending by recorded delivery. Indicate that as far as you are concerned, the seller is a trader and you can produce evidence of this if necessary. You are also aware that the car was previously 'won' by someone else who is willing to provide a statement to the effect that he declined to buy the car due to it having a HGF and as such, you can show that the seller was aware of this.

 

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.

[ericsbrother]

Your seller is probably a man of straw so suing him for your money back will end up as a court victory but no money. Better off getting trading standards (as they were) involved and hopefully a prosecution for selling an unroadworthy car will do the necessaries. If he is MOT'ing his own vehicle and it proves to be duff he will lose his VOSA certification and if he works for someone else then that person will not be happy at all with his action. So, check out your MOT and get someone TS to take up the matter.

[Conniff]

Lets talk about the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended).

 

That states: "if the fault was obvious and it would have been reasonable to have noticed it on examination before buying the goods"

 

I would say that a vehicle is something you should not buy without taking it for a test drive, it is expected that a prospective buyer will take it for a test drive, which of course brings in the 'reasonable to have noticed'.

 

I would say it is a fault that it would have been reasonable to have expected to have been noticed on examination. If the buyer didn't do a proper examination of the car, that isn't really the fault of the seller.

 

Then again, the regulations also says "that they should be as described" and in this case, they aren't 'as described' especially in view of the further information that has come to light about a previous prospective buyer.

 

So which one takes precedence? I would say seeing as there is a denial of this specific problem in the written advert, the 'not as described' will take precedence here. Also, the 'sold as seen' is an attempt to limit the buyers rights which can't be done. I would also say that 'price paid' doesn't come into it this time.

 

The above would be covered under both trade and private sale.

 

So what do you do? You get a quote for the work and ask if he is willing to pay for it or give you a complete refund.

 

Is it the sellers name and address on the V5?

Is this the Rover 'K' series engine?

 

 

The above is not an authoritative interpretation of the law.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Conniff

[sailor sam]

Lets talk about the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended).

 

That states: "if the fault was obvious and it would have been reasonable to have noticed it on examination before buying the goods"

 

I would say that a vehicle is something you should not buy without taking it for a test drive, it is expected that a prospective buyer will take it for a test drive, which of course brings in the 'reasonable to have noticed'.

 

I would say it is a fault that it would have been reasonable to have expected to have been noticed on examination. If the buyer didn't do a proper examination of the car, that isn't really the fault of the seller.

 

Then again, the regulations also says "that they should be as described" and in this case, they aren't 'as described' especially in view of the further information that has come to light about a previous prospective buyer.

 

So which one takes precedence? I would say seeing as there is a denial of this specific problem in the written advert, the 'not as described' will take precedence here. Also, the 'sold as seen' is an attempt to limit the buyers rights which can't be done. I would also say that 'price paid' doesn't come into it this time.

 

The above would be covered under both trade and private sale.

 

So what do you do? You get a quote for the work and ask if he is willing to pay for it or give you a complete refund.

 

Is it the sellers name and address on the V5?

Is this the Rover 'K' series engine?

 

 

The above is not an authoritative interpretation of the law.

 

Absolutely. If the OP can get something in writing from the other prospective buyer, he would be covered whether it was a trade or private sale. Personally, I think my suggestion in post 32 should resolve this. The seller ought to be adequately concerned of the implications he would face should the OP pursue the matter legally.

 

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.

[danceshamen]

Hi & thanks all once again for your valuable time & attention.

 

To Update:

I wrote & sent 2 messages via ebay to the seller neither of which i had a reply to after a week of waiting. Meantime i have got the car inspected by an MG Rover specialist. The engine has been stripped & inspected & the Head Gasket has indeed gone. I have taken a series of Photo's clearly showing the damaged area. The bad news is that apparantly the bottom end of the engine having had a previous triple head kit fitted which involved skimming down the engine to make space for it, is now below the minimum level & as the bottom section has a ridge on it, it needs levelling down again which makes fitting a new HG impossible as this would take it below the level of the liners?. Hence i need a complete new engine as if a new HG is fitted it will simply blow again within days/weeks as it will not be able to seal correctly.

 

I have been quoted £700 to fit an equivalent engine.

 

This information i relayed to the seller via telephone to which he said "why didn't you contact me before getting it looked at?". I stated that i had twice sent him emails which were both ignored.. He then checked his messages whilst i was on the phone & read them & agreed they had been sent (although i have copies anyway). He then proceeded to dispute the findings of the MG Rover specialist & accused him of trying to buy the car from me for cheap!! Very bizarre!

 

He has now said he will work with me to get something sorted out although this is of course only verbal at the moment. He has instructed me to get the head inspected by a place where they specialise in doing the head skimming etc as he says he has never heard of the fault which mine has been diagnosed with. He basically accused the MG Rover specialist of talking nonsense.

 

I have again discussed this with the MG Rover specialist who explained to me in depth what was wrong & confirmed the engine was U/S. He said you could fit a new HGF but it would simply be a bodge job which may only last a week or 2 & would definately go again quickly. I also explained the concerns that the seller had raised & he said to get him to call him & he would put him straight...Apparantly this fault is quite commonplace with the K-series 1.8l engine & is regularly discussed on the MG-Rover forums.

 

For the record he said the water system had also been filled with a copper based leak fixing agent & there were also various other bodged issues with the car. Also Drivers window mechanism is U/S due to a twisted motor.

 

Seller is awaiting my contact after engine has been inspected... But havn't i aready done this? Surely the MG Rover specialists opinion should be sufficient?.. It also cost me £125 for this to be done!!

 

Also i feel very unsafe with this being only verbally discussed though am worried about the time it is taking sending him emails etc as he could of course be stalling due to the time limit within which i can give feedback on Ebay etc.. Also i get the impression that he will not respond very well if i keep all communications in writing presumably as he will be aware of the implications etc?

[Conniff]

Don't run out of ebay time. no matter if it's being fixed or not, put a dispute in with ebay, not that they ever settle anything to anyone satisfaction.

 

The garage is correct. Heads and blocks can only take a certain amount of skimming and then have to be replaced. Even if it was still suitable for just one more skim, there probably isn't a gasket suitable to bring back the specified compression ratio so a gasket would indeed blow again and very soon with the increased pressure.

[danceshamen]

Hi all.. to update.

 

Got a second opinion from a local cylinder head specialist who did actually say he would have no issue with fitting a new HGF to that engine. So then spoke again to seller who basically asked me to have think about it all & tell him what i wanted from him..

 

So i priced everything up & found i could get new HGF fitted for £250. Taking into account i have already paid £125 that would total £375. I tried to contact seller by phone 4 or 5 times but it was either always busy, he was out or the phone was sent to answer machine. So i called seller again today (14/1/13) to discuss. He finally called me earlier today & said he had spoken to his legal team who had told him he had nothing to worry about because i had not phoned him to give him the chance to rectify the problem (although he ignored my emails via Ebay which i have copies of) & that because i had gone ahead & got the car looked at without his knowledge that i wouldn't have a leg to stand on?

 

He also disputed the findings of the MG rover specialist & said he didn't think he was a specialist at all & therefore didn't believe him that the Head gasket had gone. Therefore he wouldnt be giving me anything towards the repairs or otherwise. He also stated trhat the car was "Sold as seen" as he clearly wrote on the receipt.

 

I then mentioned that he was actually classed as a trader as he had sold 8 cars in the 12 months prior to the date i bought the car & he seemed a touch suprised by that.. went a bit quiet...then just blurted out it was a private sale sold from his private ebay account & he would not be offering me or contributing anything whatsoever to the cost of repairs or anything.

 

So i have drafted a letter for him... Should i post it here?

[sailor sam]

By all means but make sure there are no identifying references to either yourself or the seller.

 

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.

[danceshamen]

I should also add that the original MG specialist who said the engine liners had dropped, i have since had an in depth conversation with. I asked how come another cylinder head specialist had said they would have no problem just fitting a new gasket. They said that they may well say that but as a specialist with over 16 years of engine rebuilding experience & being a specialist in MG engines they knew that whilst it was possible to fit a new gasket it would be a pointless exercise as it would simply go again due to the issue with the engine liners... They are doing a detailed full report to back this up.

Edited January 14, 2013 by danceshamen

[Surfer01]

Have you contacted TS and informed them that a trader is now trying to appear as an individual to get out of their responsibilities. Even so under the Misrepresentations Act if they said the head/engine was good, then you have a good case against them trading as an individual.

[danceshamen]

To whom it may concern.

 

With Reference to the Sale of goods act 1979.

 

On XXXX I purchased an MG Rover XXXXfrom you, Reg no. XXXXXX I paid £XXXX for the vehicle which was paid for with cash on collection.

 

The car was advertised as follows:

““Hi, welcome to the sale of this lovely MG ZS+. Being the Plus model it has all the extras, the car is in very good condition for the year with only the driver seat showing signs of wear. The body work is in very good condition with only the odd little mark, which I am sure with a bit of polish will come out. Engine and gearbox are sound with no head gasket problems, This car is ideal for a small family but still has the sporty features.””

 

Whilst driving the car home from collection various issues became apparent. The temperature gauge was running high & jumping about. The car was producing abnormal levels of fumes from the exhaust & the heater was not working. Also on arrival home I saw that the water level had dropped & a some creamy residue had built up on the oil cap. On seeking advice from both MG Rover internet forums & various mechanics I was advised these all pointed to Head Gasket failure & I should not drive the car without getting it checked out. I attempted to contact you on numerous occasions to discuss this matter but was unable to do so & I received no reply to my email messages via Ebay. Having now had the car inspected at a cost of £125.00 by a highly regarded MG Rover engine specialist it is apparent that the car has several serious faults.

 

 

1. Blown head gasket
   
2. Dropped liner(s) meaning fitting a new Head Gasket is not advisable as it is liable to blow again & so ideally a new engine is required.
   
3. Drivers door window motor mechanism has twisted causing the window to pop out of it’s runners when lowered & making it impossible to close the window again.
   

 

Whilst I appreciate the car was relatively cheap to purchase these faults are very serious meaning the goods are clearly “not of a satisfactory quality” under the “Sale of Goods Act 1979”. Neither are they as described in the advertisement which clearly states “No head gasket problems”.

 

I also note that you have sold 8 cars in the 12 month period leading up to the date of sale of this car. This would indicate that you are in fact a Trader & not in fact a Private seller as you implied. This means you have also acted unlawfully by adding “Sold as Seen” to the receipt for the purchase as this infringes my statutory rights.

 

I therefore request either, A/ A full refund of the £XXX purchase fee, or B/ The cost of repairs to the vehicle.

Please respond in writing within 7 days from the date of this letter to advise me what you intend to do regarding this matter otherwise I will have no option other than to start proceedings to recover my losses including any legal costs etc.

 

 

Yours Sincerely

 

Do you think this is ok to send as is?

[danceshamen]

Hi,

No i havn't done that.. I have spoken with them & i have a case no however.

[sailor sam]

Seems ok to me. Send by recorded delivery.

 

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.

[danceshamen]

Hi Surfer,

 

Should i add something to the letter regarding the misrepresentations act? I was a bit unclear that if it goes to court, which it looks as though it may do, how does that work? I.E if i prosecute under the "Sale of goods Act 1979" & this for whatever reason falls through due to him being classed as a private seller despite the evidence showing otherwise, can i then switch my attentions to the "Misrepresentation Act" that you mention? Was just unsure how that works etc?

[Surfer01]

You can only use "Misrepresentation Act" if you can prove he was a trader acting as an individual. I would not add it in at this point, however if you add something along the lines that if you do not hear from him soon, you will have to assume that they are a trader. Hopefully he will deny it in writing and then you have them by the short & curlies! Worth a shot.

Mention that at this point you can no longer accept any verbal communication and that they have 14 days to respond in writing before you escalate it etc. Only go down this route if you are determine to go to court. If they do try and phone, try and use a recorder, but tell them that you are recording the conversation.

[danceshamen]

Hi all,

 

To update again. I sent a recorded delivery letter requesting full refund & collection of the car (as will not drive due to head being removed as part of the inpection todetermine the extent of issues) The seller rang me day after with quite aggressive tone & in a threatening manner told me it would end up costing me a fortune. He said it would cost £185 to take him to court, then said the first thing he would do is get it moved to his local court which would cost me a further £85. Then when i lost i would have to cover his very expensive solicitors bill most likely at a cost of around £2-3000. He said the last guy who tried to take him to court ended going up bankrupt as a result.

 

His main argument is that i didn't "phone" him before getting the engine inspected. He appears to have forgotten or isn't bothered that i have evidence that i in fact sent him 2 messages via Ebay (as this was surely the correct way to contact him?) & he did not reply. So after a week of waiting & of course because i needed to find out what was wrong with the car i then paid for a specialist to inspect the engine. They did so & told me the head gasket was definitely shot & advised that they would therefore need to have a deeper look to identify the extent of the damage so they removed the cylinder head to then find one of the liners had dropped etc. They have done a full report on this which i sent to the seller.

 

The seller is still saying that the MG speacialists do not know what they are talking about & he himself has many years experience as a mechanic etc.

 

He is basically telling me to take him to court but threatening me that it will cost me a fortune. So is this correct? Has he got a case that i was not within my rights to get the car inspected by an independent specialist? Or is he merely trying desperately to scare me away?

Edited January 17, 2013 by danceshamen

[danceshamen]

Also lets say i went & i lost the case.. would i have to pay his solicitors fees like he says?

[Conniff]

Have you had a figure to repair and get the car back on the road?

 

Amount claimed - Small claims court fee

 

Up to £300 - £30

Up to £500 - £50

Up to £1,000 - £80

Up to £5,000 - £120

https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

[crem]

the seller rang me day after with quite aggressive tone & in a threatening manner told me it would end up costing me a fortune.

 

He said it would cost £185 to take him to court, small claims court has fixed fees

 

then said the first thing he would do is get it moved to his local court which would cost me a further £85. not true. Court case is at the defendants local court UNLESS the defendant is a company and the claimant is an individual, then it is at the court loal to claimant (you) Even if it was moved, there is no "cost" to move it.

 

Then when i lost i would have to cover his very expensive solicitors bill most likely at a cost of around £2-3000. Defendants costs are not claimable in a small claims court.

 

He said the last guy who tried to take him to court ended going up bankrupt as a result. Really? Ask him for the court case/number. He is either b*llsh**ting, or ..... actually I don't think there is an or....

..