Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Being sued for private car sale *** Claim Dismissed ***


Alesha
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1412 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

My daughter sold her car privately at the weekend.

There was a small oil leak which became apparent after she advertised it for sale and she reduced the asking price to take account of this, having had a quote.

She made the purchasers aware of this.

 

They checked it over, test drove it and were happy to go ahead with the sale and paid by bank transfer.

They took all the documentation, including the V5 which she should have retained, saying that they would transfer ownership and save her the trouble - highly dubious I know as it is her responsibility to inform DVLA but without an address it seems impossible.

 

They then contacted her saying that there was a smell of burning oil and fumes as they drove home and there were other leaks as well (they didn't specify) which they said she knew about (she didn't). There was not and never had been a smell of burning oil while she was driving it.

 

They now are asking for return of their money.

She does not have their address and so is unable to transfer ownership with DVLA online which puts her in a very vulnerable position.

 

She sold the car to them in good faith with no attempt to mislead.

They are refusing to give their address.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its a person to person private sale..as much as I hate the saying, tough luck, buyer beware.

I don't think you having already advised them of the issue and subsequent reduction on price

should they wish to issue a court claim, they wouldn't stand a chance.

has she written evidence/screenshot etc  of the original advertised price ?

 

cant see the v5c being any issue at all.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately she has the name but not the address of the purchaser so it's impossible to complete the online transfer process so she remains legally responsible for the car. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid my response is going to be a bit more doom and gloom than my site team colleague.

I'm afraid the principle of "buyer beware" is a pretty old principle and it doesn't always protect the private seller. However, I think you will have to wait and see what they come back to you about in writing. My understanding so far – as you don't even seem to know their address or who they really are in – is that everything has been done on the telephone.

If they decide to come back at you in writing with a list of defects then I am afraid we will have to look at it carefully because although you won't be particularly affected by consumer protection legislation, there are still basic rules of contract which could protect the purchaser.

I'm sorry also to give a bit of a slapped wrist here, because the selling of vehicle in the circumstances without even ascertaining the identity of the purchaser and without keeping the necessary documents to inform the DVLA of the new ownership is highly irresponsible. I suppose this is going to put the frighteners on you – but you had better be aware of the possibilities.

The first thing that occurs to me is that this vehicle may have been bought by a trader who was anxious not to add any more owners to the vehicle because that would reduce the value even more. Therefore you might have some fairly unscrupulous trader selling your vehicle on to another private purchaser who themselves may not properly register the vehicle so that if it attracts any parking fines or any other attention from agencies, could come back to you as you are the registered owner. You would be able to deal with this problem eventually but it would certainly be complicated.

Also an extreme scenario is that the vehicle could eventually be used for unlawful purposes – and once again the registration leads back to you.

I think that your daughter had better read the thread and had better take the lesson.

As I have said, the use of the vehicle for some unlawful purpose is probably an extreme idea and is unlikely to happen. However, the idea that the vehicle has been bought by trader who wants to conceal the fact that it has had an additional purchaser – him/herself – is a highly possible scenario.

You haven't told us anything about the vehicle – what is it, model, make, mileage, condition, price, – and also how was advertised, where was advertise, and what claims did you make for it.

I do hope you don't hear anything more about this problem but you better give us all the information and if there is any fallout as a result of what your daughter is done then of course come back here and we will be very pleased to try and help you. In the meantime I would suggest that you contact DVLA and tell them that you have now parted company with the vehicle and that it is no longer yours. Even though you won't be able to give them the address of the new owner, you will be able to give them the name and you had better put it on record. I'm not sure if it's an offence not to have the details of the new owner and to pass them on to DVLA – but I would suggest anyway, that you tell DVLA.

Before you start doing this though, standby for maybe one or two other people to contribute to this thread and to disagree with me. I think you need to have a range of opinions on this.

 

One further thing – you may be tempted simply to take the vehicle back – but unfortunately you won't be able to be certain that it is in exactly the same condition as it was when you sold it. This could give you another problem that may be if you decide to cut your losses and tell the purchaser to return the vehicle, you may not be completely happy when you receive it – and they will simply be a dispute as to what has happened to it during its absence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. What you have suggested about a motor trader had occurred and yes she has been naive about this. They were sufficiently satisfied to purchase the car and they did know about the problem. She had been driving it up until the morning of the sale with no problems and she had told them about the oil leak - it's otherwise in very good condition, has a long MOT and has been serviced regularly. There's also the issue of insurance should she accept return (she transferred insurance to her new car )

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've asked you a number of questions in my post and you haven't addressed them.

Please would you do this. It's a bit difficult having to chase people for answers all the time

 

Just to add to my original doom and gloom scenario, even if the vehicle is returned to you and you accept it – if it happens to you have received any parking fines or anything else during the period which it has been out of your possession, then you could also be challenged for that.

If the purchaser does contact you again and you eventually decide to accept the return of the vehicle, I certainly wouldn't do it without having first ascertained the name and address of the purchaser – and verified this by some evidence – and also get a signed statement that they were indeed in possession of the vehicle from XXX date until XXX date.

All very complicated and distasteful – but I'm afraid that this is the consequence of what your daughter has done

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have spoken to DVLA and been told to write a letter with the details. Even though there is no address available it will be on record that she is no longer the keeper and that will be backdated to the time of sale.

 

I'm sorry I haven't addressed your questions. It's a Mini 07 registration 70,000 miles, service history, well maintained, bodywork perfect, 2 former owners MOT  December and recently serviced. Price £1900. As far as we are aware there were no other issues apart from the small oil leak - they are claiming there is oil all over their drive but there has never been any oil on our drive. (My daughter did suggest that they might not have screwed the oil cap on properly). In fact a local garage looked at it the day before the sale and their description of the leak was 'slightly damp'. It was advertised on Gumtree and Facebook Marketplace. The advertised price was £2250. There was no smell of burning oil when they test drove, nor had there been any such smell or fumes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Keep screenshots of the advertisements that you placed – not just copying the text – after that I'm not sure that there is too much you can do. Just wait.

I see that you have had a local garage look at the car and their description of the leak was "slightly damp". Can you get this from the garage in writing? I suggest that you do so immediately before the recollection becomes fuzzy in the mind of the person who looked at the car. Be prepared for the garage to be reluctant to give you this information in writing because they may think that they are incurring some liability. They won't be – but that's what they may think. Stay polite with them and if they refuse to give it to you in writing then let it go – rather than making enemies. Try to get the identity of the person who made that comment and even – if you can – without giving offence – get a picture of them.

Then all you can do is inform DVLA in writing – as you have been advised – and also wait and see if there are any further contacts.

If there are contacts then I suggest that you inform them that you must have therefore verified name and address before you can deal with any of their concerns. Don't commit yourself to anything else. Once you get their name and address then maybe you can start to deal with things.
Come back here
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

DVLA were informed and she received confirmation that they have updated their records and she is no longer the registered keeper. However they are not going away.  They have emailed her to say they have sent a signed for letter with images. She wasn't in but the postman left a card.

 

She does have a screenshot of the advertisement.

It was originally advertised at £2500 but she thought this might be a little high so reduced it to £2250 - the advertisement reflects this. (She was unaware of the oil leak at this point - it was brought to her attention by a prospective buyer).

 

She was faced with the choice of getting it repaired or selling with the price reduced to reflect the cost of repair and was told the cost would be £200 and chose to reduce the price to £2000. She made the buyers aware of this and they examined it, test drove it and offered £1900 which she accepted. They went home, transferred the money and presumably taxed and insured it before driving away. It all happened very quickly and she did suggest they could go away and think about it but they were very keen. 

 

They are accusing her of dishonesty which she finds very upsetting as she was perfectly upfront about the problem. 

She had been driving the car every day and had driven to work that morning with no apparent problems 

 

There was never any oil under the car which surely would have been noticed and no smell of oil or fumes.

How the oil leak suddenly became so catastrophic when they drove it away is a mystery.

 

They have had a garage look at it and had a quote of £250 but she had reduced the price by £350 which was surely reasonable.

The car has been spotted out and about so they are obviously using it.

 

It's really difficult to understand what is going on and what their motives are.

(They did say they had been to the bank to see if they could get their money back, which is a very strange thing to do.)

Perhaps they just changed their mind after being in such a hurry.

 

It's very stressful and worrying. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I understand from a previous post that in fact it was purchased by a trader? How do you know this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know this - just suspected as they took the V5 to save her the trouble. I think the same thought had occurred to you. We know the name as it was on bank transfer together with reg no of car as reference. Despite being asked for their address, they did not give it. (The car has been seen on the road in a very clean and shiny condition.) We just wonder if they are trying bullying tactics to get her to refund some of the money to sell on at a better profit. All conjecture but nothing seems to add up. They were quite happy to buy at the price with the disclosed fault. There were no other problems that she was aware of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will have to give a fuller reply later – but at the moment I would say stand your ground. Even if you haven't got evidence of what was said during the transaction I would make a statement about it right now – as verbatim as possible – timed and dated – and keep a very close record of anything that happens in the future.

I'll come back later and see if I have anything else to add

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you have seen it being driven around clean and shiny then the chances are that it's not in the hands of a trader. In a way that's a shame because if it had been examined and bought by a trader that would probably give you a better case. However, when was the last time they contacted you? I have a sense that this is something which is simply going to go away.

I don't know if there is some way of checking online with DVLA to see if you are still the registered owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Following letter to DVLA, they have confirmed that they have updated their records and she is no longer registered keeper.

 

They have just sent a letter recorded delivery to be signed for. There was no one in to sign for it and the buyers have emailed copy of track and trace and it is at the sorting office awaiting collection - the postman also left a card to this effect. My daughter has neither the time nor the inclination to collect it - she suffers from panic attacks, although I feel, rightly or wrongly that it needs to be dealt with.

 

As well as advising them verbally about the oil leak, it was an advisory on MOT (28 Nov) as oil leak but not excessive. It was serviced in December with nothing untoward reported. I really don't see how they can  have an issue. They examined it, drove it and were happy with the price. She checked with the garage only the day before sale, where it was described as 'slightly damp'  and was given a cost of £200. They had it checked after buying and were quoted £250. How they can complain that she misled them is beyond me but they seem determined. Might they take legal action? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that I think you need to collect the letter. It may be a letter of claim – which could herald a possible action. If you want advice here then you will have to keep yourself informed and let us know what is happening.

I'm afraid that you can't run away from this and bury your head in the sand.

If you don't confront this then I'm afraid that panic attacks will become more real and may be more justified.

Get all the information and then we can help you and make sure that you stay in control. If you avoid collecting mail then you hand control over to the other side.

 

If you have seen it being driven around then I think you should make a note of whenever you do see it or use it parked – and take pictures if you can.

This will be very useful evidence that in fact it is of satisfactory quality and that they're happy to be using it – and also that they have had some use out of it so that if you have to consider compensating them in some way – which I doubt – you will be dealt to take into consideration the use they have had of it.

Do you know what the mileage was when you sold it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

IF they fancy thier chances in court they will have to do things properly and that menas supplying an address for the service of documents.

So far they are relaying on bullying her into paying them some money as they ahve realised your daughter is naive and may well fall for this tactic.

IF they start a court action she can eventually invite them to return the vehicle in the same conditon it was sold in and that would include mileage. Any more than  basic back to base mileage will show that they have "accepted" the car regardless of their noise.

dont be in a hurry to use this now though, this is for responding to a proper claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that they seem to be applying bullying tactics – but I disagree completely that you should consider accepting the return of the vehicle.

Make sure you consult with us before this even becomes a matter which you contemplate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies.

 

She will pick up the letter but maybe not for a day or two due to work commitments. I will let you know the contents. 

 

At the moment she has no intention of accepting return of the car, nor of reducing the price further as it already reflects the cost of repair. The purchasers were aware that the price had been reduced to take account of this.

 

I understand that the conditions for selling a car privately are:

The seller should own the car

It should be in a safe and roadworthy condition

It should not be the subject of a finance agreement,

 

All of these conditions were fulfilled, together with disclosure of known problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that it would be rash to summarise the situation and the way you have at the moment.

If they are really proposing legal action – and you have no idea because you haven't read their letter – then I think you should make an urgent arrangement to collect it from the post office and that you should start reprioritising your time/your daughters time in order to obtain it.

I'm afraid that your daughter has been rather over-casual in respect of the sale of the vehicle and it's about time that she started to get serious.

If she's worried about time constraints – then you can be certain that if they do decide to issue a legal action against her, although it won't be over-complicated – there will certainly be time limits with which she will have to comply and also a degree of stress which you won't enjoy and at that point maybe she will start to realise what a "stitch in time" really means.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter was delivered today. I have tried to scan but my scanner isn't working very well. I have copied the points she makes 


 

Quote

 

I am writing this letter regarding the issue I have with the car after purchase, also after contacting you on Facebook on the same day of purchase and updating you with the information that I will do regarding the case. I received an answer from the garage and its estimated costs, after this you have left the conversation with no response. The car is faulty and it had not been advised on the day of purchase, provided false information.

 

1. The Mini Cooper was bought on 18/01/2020, after taking it home fumes were visibly coming from under the bonnet and smelt like burnt oil. Contacted you on18/01/2020 at 18.43 on Facebook.

 

2. Took the car to the garage on Monday 20/01/2020, after quick look they ensured (sic) me the oil leaks, asked me to drop the car for further checks. Messaged you the same day at 20.39. Response was below, according to the response you admitted you reduced the price due to the cost of future repairs and also that you were aware of the fault when you sold it, unfortunately it was not mentioned on the day of purchase, therefore I have bought faulty goods from you.

 

3. The car was in the garage again on Wednesday 22/01/2020. They had a better look at it and cleaned the questioned area from  the bottom. They gave an estimation from £150 to £550 as they have to take the catalyser to be able to see the issue. Also the oil is burning at a higher temperature than it should see below pics of burnt cap and the fumes of burning. Also the oil level was checked and it was under the minimum so it was dangerous to drive and could have ruined the engine completely. (Strange that the oil light wasn't on)

 

4. The car was taken to the garage on 25th January and was picked up on 30th January. Due to oil leak from the oil filter housing seal the water was going into the engine alongside the oil and this was causing the burnt oil smell and this was the reason behind the unusual oil burn. I was lucky as this could have been the head gasket which would have cost a lot more. The repair cost £197.07 and I wish to have that covered under your expenses as the car was sold without mentioning the leak, therefore this is a breach of contract.

 

Conclusion: I am kindly asking you to get an agreement on this issue, otherwise I am thinking to take this further.

 

 

 

 

 

So the whole issue has arisen over the question of the oil leak.
It was on the MOT, which she saw,  as an advisory and she was told about this on the day, together with the fact that it had been checked and the repair would be about £200.  

The car was advertised at £2250 (after research into prices for minis of a similar age and condition) and the buyer  was informed that this was subsequently reduced to £2000 to take into account the cost of the repair. T
hey offered £1900 which was accepted.

To say that it was not mentioned on the day, only afterwards is nonsense. There was therefore in total an allowance of £350 in total, made to cover the cost of repairing the fault, which actually cost £197.07.

They were definitely aware of the oil leak when they agreed to buy. It's difficult to understand where she is coming from.

She also talks, in the Facebook conversation about an unspecified leak   '..also the garage said it is fluid leaks not the oil so it's a separate thing.

Also this leak wasn't mentioned to me not even when I asked if you smelt burnt oil it is all covered in oil.'  We have no idea what she means. Also if it was covered with oil, why buy. The car had been driven on a daily basis, including that morning with no smell of burning oil.

 

They examined the car, including the engine and test drove it and were happy with the car and the price.

They were very eager to buy and in fact the whole transaction, including test driving and examination took about an hour and a half.

My daughter did suggest that they might like to think about it but they declined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading through what you've written – but you have posted a very large unbroken block of text and this is unhelpful. I'm going to space it out for you but please will you present things so that they are well spaced and punctuated and it makes it easier for everybody. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming that you now have their address.

I suggest:

 

Quote

Dear XXX

Thank you for your letter dated XXX

I am a private seller and I was selling my own personal vehicle.

I made you fully aware of all the oil leak related issues of which I was aware. Furthermore it was mentioned in the MOT certificate and also there was an advisory about it.

We even discussed this while we were talking about the sale and I reduce the price to you because of this. You have agreed that there was a price reduction – and although you seem to be suggesting that I only explain the reduction after the sale, this is not at all true and if you want to say differently then I suppose it's a question of my word against yours.

I have no engineering knowledge – and I sold the vehicle to you in absolute good faith. I'm glad that you have noticed that there was no engine warning light and so there was nothing to indicate to me that there might have been any faults other than the ones that I do to your attention.

You took the opportunity to drive the vehicle and to examine it and in fact you arrived at your decision to purchase it from me very quickly. I even said to you that maybe you should take a little time to think about it and you declined.

When you took the vehicle you did not give me your address and despite the fact that I have tried to find you, I have been unable to obtain your address. I do not know why you did not disclose this to me. It has made it extremely difficult to register a transfer of ownership with the DVLA



I notice that you say that you are prepared to take further action. I suppose that means that you are considering making a county court claim against me.

If that's what you have to do then so be it.

Yours sincerely

 

 

Check that what has been said in this suggested letter is correct and if you are happy with it then you might want to send this off or amend it to your own taste.

Be aware that they may issue a county court claim against you. I reckon your chances of succeeding against them as better than 75% which isn't bad – but don't forget there is a risk. Also you will have to allocate time to deal with it.

If you lose then you will have to pay them whatever it is they are claiming plus their court costs which might amount to a couple of hundred quid. How far away from you do they live?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that.

 

No, there is no address on the letter so unless there is a further communication it  is impossible to respond. We seem to be dealing with a very strange mentality here, so they might be prepared to take this to court for the £197.07 it has cost to repair when this was allowed for in the price - pretty close to the estimate of £200 given by my daughter's garage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is pretty amazing. They are sending you communications with an implied threat of legal action and they are asking for some kind of solution and yet they don't give you any route by which you can communicate your response.

I suggest that you simply draft a letter as I have suggested above – and then file it and write on the top – not sent as no address provided. And by and large I don't think you have any option other than to ignore them.

I understand from you that there is aptly no route by which you can communicate with them. If that's the case then they are crazy. Keep the letters and don't worry until something more significant happens

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...