Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

2nd hand car - engine fault.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3635 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi. This is my first post but I have used some valuable information from this site in the past.

 

I recently bought a Porsche 911 from what appeared to be a very reputable dealer. I had Porsche perform a 111 point inspection yesterday. They informed me of some serious engine problems and advised returning it. I called the dealer with this information and today I sent the following letter accompanying the inspection report, recorded delivery:

 

On 29th June 2014 I purchased, and took delivery of, the above vehicle from XXX. On 2nd July 2014 I discovered that it was not of satisfactory quality. This was highlighted by the report produced from Porsche East London after an official 111 point inspection (attached). Within the report Porsche indicated the following:

 

  • · Knocking noise from right-hand side of engine, suspected bore/piston issue. This was backed up by evidence of discolouration of left-hand side exhaust pipe caused by increased oil use on the right-hand engine bank
  • · Right-hand front coil road-spring snapped
  • · Brake pipe support bracket securing bolt snapped

It was also indicated, which I had experienced from day of purchase:

 

  • · Judder felt through steering when 1st applying brakes

Section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 requires dealers to supply goods of satisfactory quality. However, the vehicle is clearly not of a satisfactory quality which is defined as free from minor defects, safe and durable for a reasonable length of time. You are therefore in breach of contract.

I am legally entitled to reject the vehicle and to be reimbursed for its full purchase price of £xxxxx. I will give you seven (7) days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and advising me of a date by which I will receive payment. If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action that will outline my intention to recover the full amount plus interest , costs and compensation through the Courts.

 

Once an agreement has been reached to the points contained within this letter, you are entitled to the return of the vehicle to your business premises (at your own expense).

 

If they ask to inspect the vehicle do I have to permit them to take it away or can I refuse and demand a refund? One final note, I paid for the majority of the vehicle on Credit Card to cover me under Consumer Credit Act.

 

Thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the report is qualified by the dealer details on it, I can see no reason why he would want to have a look, he wont be able to deny any of the problems highlighted.

 

 

You do have the right of rejection and they do not have the right to insist on a repair or replacement. You can, of course have a repair done, but that will not cancel out your right to reject the car later at a later date.

If the engine problems are as the report says, I can't see them wanting to strip it and rebuild it.

 

 

How much was paid in cash ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether you can reject the car or not will depend entirely on what age it is and how much you paid. A porsche is a sports car. It is likely the engine and box will have been thrashed regularly. The courts know this and will say if it was cheaper than average and/or had high miles you will have got wht you paid for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

· Knocking noise from right-hand side of engine, suspected bore/piston issue. This was backed up by evidence of discolouration of left-hand side exhaust pipe caused by increased oil use on the right-hand engine bank· Right-hand front coil road-spring snapped

· Brake pipe support bracket securing bolt snapped

It was also indicated, which I had experienced from day of purchase:

 

  • · Judder felt through steering when 1st applying brakes

Some of the above depends on how old the car is, how many miles it's done and what you actually paid for it.

Can YOU hear the knocking, is it immediately apparent?

The coil spring is not an expensive fix, but needs doing as soon as possible.

The brake pipe support bolt is minor

The juddering can only be worn discs - IF the car would pass an MOT and the juddering is only minor and the car is more than 5 years old it's probably par for the course.

As said a lot depends on the age, miles and price paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect conniff, I have sold more cars in a month than most people will drive in a lifetime. As such I have a good sound knowledge of consumer law in regards to used car sales. The start of an engine knock in a car that could of been 5% of it's new price would not be considered unsatisfactory quality. It simply means the customer has bought an old clunker at old clunker money with old clunker faults. After all the engine may well go on for a further 2 years before it needs work.

 

That is why I stated as has oddjobbob that to give a proper answer we would need to know the age, miles, model & price paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also in my experience if the first thing a buyer does is take it to the main stealer for a free multi point inspection, it means the buyer is suffering buyers remorse and is hunting a reason to try and get out of the deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also in my experience if the first thing a buyer does is take it to the main stealer for a free multi point inspection, it means the buyer is suffering buyers remorse and is hunting a reason to try and get out of the deal.

 

 

 

 

 

+1, all day long!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also in my experience if the first thing a buyer does is take it to the main stealer for a free multi point inspection, it means the buyer is suffering buyers remorse and is hunting a reason to try and get out of the deal.

 

Speculation and completely incorrect. It was the perfect car. Had everything I wanted but it's a Porsche so I wanted to make sure it was all good before looking forward to a long and happy ownership. I should have had it inspected before hand but as it was a dealer rather than private I thought it would be fine to do it after. 997s are prone to bore scoring and I wanted to make sure it was fine. The 111 point inspection is very common and at £216 is not cheap. Car is an 05 plate with 76k. So average mileage. Model is Carreras S. I'm not going to say what I paid for it but it was market price. It was not discounted. I only paid around 5% by cash as this was the deposit. The responses I have received on here seem to assume I intentionally went out to return it. I didn't. I thought I had found the perfect car. Porsche were the ones to tell me initially that due to the problems and the very short ownership that it would be best to reject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP in the circumstances you describe, obviously NOT an old girl at old girl money, if its got an engine fault, take it back and get your money back.

 

 

Regarding the 'main dealer check' question, yes, I have had many occasions where someone has bought a car from me and then taken it for a main dealer (free) check over.

 

 

If it was within two weeks I just refunded them, you'd never make them happy, so what's the point?

 

 

After that though, I'd just state that I would take it for a fresh MOT at my own cost, and that if it passed the MOT then the government (NOT me!) were of the opinion that it was fit to be on the road, and goodbye.

 

 

However an engine knock on an expensive car is something else entirely and you could spend thousands putting it right (if ever...) so go and get your money back is by far the best thing to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...