Car Purchase Hell!

[myth3_16]

Hi Everyone,

 

Just trying to get some advice really. I bought a second hand car on the 22/03/2014 for £995. I was also asked to sign a 'Sold as Seen' piece of paper which I did. One question I forgot to ask while I was there was 'when was it last serviced?'.

 

I decided to the decent thing and book the car in for a service as the MOT is due in May so I wanted to know if there was anything that needed doing to the car as the previous MOT had no advisories on it so if anything were to go wrong then it would have to be something that has gone wrong in the last 12 months. Am I right??

 

Well I took it in for a service today (27/03/2014) only to be told that the car is unroadworthy and is only good for one place......THE SCRAPYARD!

 

My question is this: Am I within my rights to contact the dealer I got it from to ask for a refund of my money or do they have me over the barrel with this 'Sold as Seen' crap! as the car can be sold as seen but even the advert that I saw on the AutoTrader website has a few things in it that are questionable.

 

In the advert the dealer states that 'MOT WARRANTY AND FREE SERVICE INCLUDED'

 

I can say that the car was sold with no Warranty, no mention of a free service or an MOT. The MOT certificate that was produced was one that was obtained when the car was last MOT'd in May 2013. I checked this on the .gov website to check if the two matched up and that there was actually no advisories. In the advert the dealer also states that the interior is unmarked (yet one of the photos' clearly shows a stain on the passenger side door upholstory) and also there was cigarette butts and ash still in the ash tray.

 

LOW MILEAGE 4X4 PART EXCHANGE TO CLEAR FANTASTIC CONDITION - here is a list of what the garage found:

 

3 tyres need changing, 2 x Rear cylinders Leaking, Pads/Discs (Discs badly corroded), Fuel Tank Leaking, Gear box leaking, Transfer box leaking, Play in steering box, play in both front bearings, rear spring broken, all break pipes corroded (except one over back axle), Front D-Bushes badly worn, No O/S/F/R Indicator, exhaust leaking from manifold, exhaust dropped off and alternator not charging.

 

Not all that fantastic condition in my eyes. What do you think??? If i had known all this I would not have touched the car with a 10ft barge pole. The 'Sold as seen' clause is good for bodywork, paintwork etc but unless you have it up on ramps etc to look underneath you have to take their word that it is mechanically sound which in this case it is far from it.

 

You thoughts are welcome.

 

Regards,

 

Brett Rogers

[dx100uk]

selling of goods act covers you

take it back.

 

dx

[dx100uk]

sold as seen is no get out

 

means nothing.

 

dx

[heliosuk]

This is another example of what is wrong with SOGA and the public wanting champagne with beer money!

 

It's a £1K car so will need work and the service report is very, very subjective. Given the standard of some of garage technicians these days and the way the industry works the reality is there is probably nothing wrong with it.

 

It would also help if the OP stated what the car was, age and mileage as rather than quote chapter and verse about SOGA it needs to be born in mind that SOGA also takes into account "commensurate with age and mileage".

 

So if the car bought is a 4X4 Landrover Defender which is 15 years old, one has to be reasonable. It ain't going to be great is it?

[dx100uk]

soga who mentioned that..

 

the deal is less than 7 days old.

 

take it back cancel the deal

 

basic contract law here me thinks..?

[citizenkain]

yeah,you want to be taking that back asap!

[heliosuk]

soga who mentioned that..

 

the deal is less than 7 days old.

 

take it back cancel the deal

 

basic contract law here me thinks..?

 

Er....you did DX in post #4 .

 

And this is the bit I love about this post......."and also there was cigarette butts and ash still in the ash tray"

Optional extra perhaps? Next thing we know it'll be a complaint that it wasn't a full packet of cigarettes.

[dx100uk]

no that's the selling of goods act

 

not the sale of goods act

 

theres a big diff

 

no matter

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Everyone,

 

Just trying to get some advice really. I bought a second hand car on the 22/03/2014 for £995. I was also asked to sign a 'Sold as Seen' piece of paper which I did. One question I forgot to ask while I was there was 'when was it last serviced?'.

 

I decided to the decent thing and book the car in for a service as the MOT is due in May so I wanted to know if there was anything that needed doing to the car as the previous MOT had no advisories on it so if anything were to go wrong then it would have to be something that has gone wrong in the last 12 months. Am I right??

 

Well I took it in for a service today (27/03/2014) only to be told that the car is unroadworthy and is only good for one place......THE SCRAPYARD!

 

My question is this: Am I within my rights to contact the dealer I got it from to ask for a refund of my money or do they have me over the barrel with this 'Sold as Seen' crap! as the car can be sold as seen but even the advert that I saw on the AutoTrader website has a few things in it that are questionable.

 

In the advert the dealer states that 'MOT WARRANTY AND FREE SERVICE INCLUDED'

 

I can say that the car was sold with no Warranty, no mention of a free service or an MOT. The MOT certificate that was produced was one that was obtained when the car was last MOT'd in May 2013. I checked this on the .gov website to check if the two matched up and that there was actually no advisories. In the advert the dealer also states that the interior is unmarked (yet one of the photos' clearly shows a stain on the passenger side door upholstory) and also there was cigarette butts and ash still in the ash tray.

 

LOW MILEAGE 4X4 PART EXCHANGE TO CLEAR FANTASTIC CONDITION - here is a list of what the garage found:

 

3 tyres need changing, 2 x Rear cylinders Leaking, Pads/Discs (Discs badly corroded), Fuel Tank Leaking, Gear box leaking, Transfer box leaking, Play in steering box, play in both front bearings, rear spring broken, all break pipes corroded (except one over back axle), Front D-Bushes badly worn, No O/S/F/R Indicator, exhaust leaking from manifold, exhaust dropped off and alternator not charging.

 

Not all that fantastic condition in my eyes. What do you think??? If i had known all this I would not have touched the car with a 10ft barge pole. The 'Sold as seen' clause is good for bodywork, paintwork etc but unless you have it up on ramps etc to look underneath you have to take their word that it is mechanically sound which in this case it is far from it.

 

You thoughts are welcome.

 

Regards,

 

Brett Rogers

 

Perhaps just ask for your money back, would save having to read some of the sh*te the 2nd hand dealers on here post.

[Conniff]

only to be told that the car is unroadworthy and is only good for one place......THE SCRAPYARD

You cannot sell an unroadworthy car to a consumer. Confirm that you are not in the trade myth3 ?

The clause "Sold as seen" has no legal standing with a sale to a consumer.

Grab a copy of the Autotrader advert and hang on to it.

Contact the seller, [confirm it was a proper car dealer with a car sales site?] demand your money back in full. Furnish him with a copy of the report, (hang on to the original).

You must tell him that as the car is unroadworthy it is his responsibility to collect the car.

Don't drive any at all as not only will you be endangering youself and others, it is unlawful to knowingly drive a car in that state.

[Conniff]

Lets keep the thread on track pse guys. Off topic posts removed.

[heliosuk]

Hold on Conniff.

 

Lets look at the facts.

 

Car advertised as" to clear"....the dubious bit is the fantastic condition. So perhaps there is something to go on with respect to mis representation but then again this is subjective as we don't know what 4X4 the OP has bought. True though as the seller is obviously a trader they cannot hide behind the sold as seen supposed disclaimer.

 

Then we see the statement the car is only fit for the scrap yard. Well that's an unqualified opinion isn't it. All of the issues raised are subjective but remember it was advertised as to clear. So is it unroadworthy or not?

 

What it does show though is an abuse of the spirit of the law and this is clearly shown by the OP in that the ash tray was full!

 

In addition to this, perhaps the site team can again explain why a post has mysteriously disappeared, namely one that referred to a house purchase and an I phone.

[heliosuk]

no that's the selling of goods act

 

not the sale of goods act

 

theres a big diff

 

no matter

 

Please explain DX as selling and sales are pretty much the same after all they share the same acronym.

[oddjobbob]

Let's face a couple of facts here:

 

 

You don't get very much 4 x 4 for £995.

 

 

The ashtray being full is an irrelevance.

 

 

There is a clear bias in this thread against the motor trade (of which I WAS a member... now retired)

 

 

It's quite right that you can't sell an unroadworthy vehicle to a member of the general public, but common sense (sadly lacking in many cases) should tell you that a 4x4 car for £995 with a few weeks MOT is going to b e a drama.

 

 

This all depends on what the OP signed as his sold as seen invoice.

 

 

If it just says 'sold as seen' then that's not good enough and the dealer should either refund him or make the car roadworthy.

 

 

in the list of faults it states that tyres need changing - but if they are actually legal but low on tread then they don't need changing, same applies to most of the other faults, it all depends on whether they would be MOT failures or advisories.

 

 

If however the sold as seen piece of paper states that the car is not necessarily fit for any particular purpose and is being sold for parts / scrap purposes then the OP can't take it back, he's stuffed.

 

 

Helios was right in an earlier post, champagne ideas, beer money, a £995 4 x 4 simply WILL have faults, it's just inevitable.

[Conniff]

I agree with what you say ojb excepting for the 'sold as seen'. It matters not how it is worded, the car wasn't advertised as parts so can't then be sold as parts.

A consumer cannot have their statutory rights taken away even if they sign a chit saying they relinquish them, it will not stand up in a court of law.

 

Oh, and the ashtrays. It was to come serviced to the ashtrays should be empty.

 

 

As for the tyres, and the stain, those are things that could be classed as 'reasonably be expected to have seen at the time of purchase', so no claim on them unless the tyres are below the limit.

[oddjobbob]

Hi Conniff

 

 

Sorry mate. IF and only if the invoice states that the car is sold for parts / scrap and is not necessarily fit for purpose then the vehicle is indeed sold as seen with no comebacks.

 

 

Otherwise you could buy a crashed car from a scrapyard and then complain it wasn't roadworthy.

 

 

But you are completely correct in that in nearly all cases a vehicle does have to be 'fit for purpose'.. i.e. able to go from a to b in a safe manner when sold by a dealer

[Conniff]

It's the advertising that is key, it didn't say it was for parts, (unless we haven't been told that part), so the advert can't be overridden / amended / cancelled. It must be as advertised.

 

 

We could do with being told who did the service, was it a proper VAT registered garage or was it Kwik-Fit.

[Mike_hawk]

I don't seem to recognise any 2nd hand dealers posting on this thread at all so before you start, you might like to get your facts right and look at and grasp the reality of the situation.

 

Or are you another who suffers from Ply Residual Angle Torque?

 

I read the post, thanks... and my advice stands. The reality is that I don't suffer fools

 

It may be short and to the point but the end result from all the residual waffle is the same.... The OP should engage with the seller in the first instance. If its a retail sale and the vehicle was advertised as the OP states there can be no further argument.

 

The tiresome references to what a consumer should expect for a given value are wearing a little thin. Clearly if all retailers were to act within the statutory instrument/s and did not attempt to generate profit by what is effectively misreprentation we would never see a post such as this again.

[oddjobbob]

I read the post, thanks... and my advice stands. The reality is that I don't suffer fools

 

It may be short and to the point but the end result from all the residual waffle is the same.... The OP should engage with the seller in the first instance. If its a retail sale and the vehicle was advertised as the OP states there can be no further argument.

 

The tiresome references to what a consumer should expect for a given value are wearing a little thin. Clearly if all retailers were to act within the statutory instrument/s and did not attempt to generate profit by what is effectively misreprentation we would never see a post such as this again.

 

 

The problem is though that we live in the real world and not the one that you aspire to. All the while dealers put 'fantastic condition' on a £995 4 x 4 and all the while consumers showing no common sense whatsoever actually suppose this can EVER be the case - i.e. expecting a vehicle that is probably 4% of its cost when new to be a minter then then this sort of thread will carry on forever.

 

 

I have a great deal of respect for Helios who knows his stuff and I really do think your post against him was unwarranted.

 

 

Not that that makes a blind bit of difference to you as you live in utopia land where all the milk is full cream pasteurised and the honey flows like water, and all cars are like new even when they're 10-15 years old.

 

 

Doubt it'll happen in my lifetime, maybe yours if you're very young.

[Mike_hawk]

I believe your friend Helios assumed the post was a response to him... it wasn't but there you go, in his assumption he decided to offer no more than a personal insult.

 

I'd certainly like to believe that all consumers are blessed with the common sense to walk away

from a bad deal, unfortunately that is not the reality and some will either be suckered in or be so innured in their belief that nobody would wrong them that they'd take a sales pitch or advert as gospel.

 

As I said, if the trade didn't misrepresent there wouldn't be an issue or the need for consumer protection.

[citizenkain]

the car that the op has bought in my opinion would be classed as a fixerupper,an old banger that you would buy cheap and sort,the type of person that would buy that would be someone with a garage and a load a tools and the time to mess about,a lot of folks like doing that,my father used to always buy bangers. The problem with the someone in a garage checking a car over for an mot is purely subjective,you are going to get a big list of problems,anyone that's been in to kwikfit and asked them to check the brakes including me,is gonna get a huge list cos that's what they do,obviously the op was looking for something different when he bought this car,as has been said he needs to consult with the person that sold him it and see what he can get out of him,maybe a few quid towards the work or his money back if hes not happy.

[raydetinu]

where is myth3?

[Conniff]

The problem is though that we live in the real world and not the one that you aspire to. All the while dealers put 'fantastic condition' on a £995 4 x 4 and all the while consumers showing no common sense whatsoever actually suppose this can EVER be the case - i.e. expecting a vehicle that is probably 4% of its cost when new to be a minter then then this sort of thread will carry on forever.

 

 

I have a great deal of respect for Helios who knows his stuff and I really do think your post against him was unwarranted.

 

 

Not that that makes a blind bit of difference to you as you live in utopia land where all the milk is full cream pasteurised and the honey flows like water, and all cars are like new even when they're 10-15 years old.

 

 

Doubt it'll happen in my lifetime, maybe yours if you're very young.

 

Your post is very offensive. If a dealer puts 'Fantastic condition' on a car, then the law says that is how it must be and the price attached to that statement matters not one iota, it can be 1p for all it matters. How it is described is how it 'must' be.

 

If the car is un roadworthy, the seller must be reported to Trading Standards for investigation. It is a criminal offence to sell a car that is in a dangerous condition.

[oddjobbob]

The thing is Conniff, we do actually agree on quite a few matters.

 

 

IF the ad said 'fantastic condition' then the dealer must want his head tested. Putting that on a £995 4 x 4 is just asking for trouble. Phrases such as 'good looking car' (if it is) and 'drives well' (if it does) are far more innocuous and less likely to land the dealer with a time bomb waiting to go off.

 

 

I'm not really on anyone's side here - as stated above, if the dealer openly and knowingly misdescribed the car then he's an idiot and no mistake: however I seem to recall in an earlier post that it was also described as 'to clear'

 

 

The fact remains that there are literally thousands of cars like this described for sale on Auto Trader and Ebay in 'fantastic condition' when common sense tells you that this cannot be the case. Any 4 x 4 that originally cost £25,000 or more and is now under £1000 will be a 'bit of an old girl' at very best.

 

 

These ads are available for all to see and since I live in the real world I would use my common sense to avoid them. The OP here has displayed very little of that when buying this car, you simply can't buy a £25000 car for £995 and expect it to be in fantastic condition - no matter what the ad says. I DO agree that the ad was misleading if that was what it said, but this isn't la la land, it's the UK in 2014 and buying secondhand cars - especially at the lower end of the market - is not for the faint hearted.

 

 

Despite your statement that the law says that the law says this and that we have seen on here time and time again that SOGA does - and should - take into account the age and price paid for the vehicle and an automatic 'win' for the consumer is far from guaranteed.

 

 

Your final statement that it is a criminal offence to sell a car that is unroadworthy is true unless the invoice states that it is being sold for spares / repair and that the vehicle may not comply with the RTA. Otherwise you could buy a crashed car from a scrapyard and take them to court because it was unroadworthy.

 

 

I / we don't know exactly what basis the op bought this car under, hopefully for his sake it was just a standard car invoice, on which, as we are all aware, 'sold as seen' means nothing.

 

 

But it's still the case that he will have his work cut out trying to get much recourse on a £995 4 x 4 - although personally, if the dealer has totally misdescribed the car and pressured him into it, then I hope the OP wins. Really, yes I do.

[heliosuk]

But Conniff, it might be "Fantastic Condition" for a £995 4X4 of indeterminable age and mileage advertised as "A part exchange to clear". Why does a subjective report from a garage make it un roadworthy? Tyres need changing...why? Drivetrain leaks.....well to be expected on any car as you know as well as I do it's impossible to seal. By their nature they leak from new. Objectively...how much are they leaking by? I've seen many sweating/weeping seals reported as leaking to the extent it cost one dealer their franchise and a claw back of £500K. Fuel tank leaking....again what's the objective evidence. Spring broken.....well one would need to see this as is often misinterpreted.

 

SOGA etc clearly states that it has to consider age and mileage and condition in any case and at the moment we just don't know however no dealer advertises a pristine car and outs it for scrap money.

 

Unless the OP can supply what car it is, age and mileage then this will keep going around in circles.

 

What we have here is someone who thought they were buying a 1968 Chateau La Tour for £10 only to find it tastes like vinegar. Well that's how I see it.

 

As with many posts, one can speculate as to the rights and wrongs of what has gone on but unless they volunteer the info it's very hard to get and give any objective view.