Car Dispute

[PGFG]

I have recently bought a car that had a tampered Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) making the car unroadworthy.

The seller is a private seller but I want to raise to the court that he has been selling multiple cars as a clear source of income. Making him a trade dealer.

 

I have recently gained his home and business address making small claims court an option.

I have messaged him giving him a chance to fully repair the car or to restore and repair it to make it legally road worthy.

 

I have proof of his trade dealings from facebook which also is connected to his business partners who have been advertising the cars as well.

I understand I will have less rights if the judge deems him not to be a trade dealer however him selling me an illegal car is a criminal offence meaning I have the right to end the contract agreed on facebook and am entitled to a full refund.

 

Under the selling of goods act section 13, it states that the car must match description.

On Facebook it stated 'Everything works perfectly' which in fact it does not.

 

He said the car had two previous owner and that the MOT was completed on the 09/11/20 when it fact it was done on the 10th.

Given all these legs to stand on is a small courts claim feasible? 

[BankFodder]

Welcome to the forum – and I'm sure we can help you.

However, you have posted your story in a solid block of text and it makes it very difficult for people to read and it discourages them from helping you.

Please will you repost your story – spaced and punctuated please so that it is easier for everyone to deal with.

Thanks

[dx100uk]

post spaced

thread moved to vehicle retailers forum.

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

Yes, a small claim is absolutely feasible.

You need to make sure that you've got evidence of the tampering and also so that a judge can understand it, I think you need to get a little bit of very simple documentation about what this is and how the tampering works and what it achieves.

Secondly, you need to accumulate a good file of evidence showing this person's trading activities and the fact that they are posing as a private seller when in fact they are in business.

In terms of any contract, if the car is unroadworthy then it is in breach of contract.

You don't give us any information about what the car is, when you bought it, or how much you paid. Please could you give us the information.

Also, who are you dealing with? Don't be shy about putting this up on the forum. There is no disadvantage to you.

Finally, you're talking about the wrong act of Parliament. The sale of goods act has been superseded by the consumer rights act 2015

[BankFodder]

Additionally, although on the basis of what you say, if you bring a claim against them then your chances of success are much better than 95% – the problem will be, as ever, the problem of enforcement.

If this person all these people are serious about ripping people off and avoiding their consumer obligations, then you can be sure that they will be quite good at avoiding the enforcement of judgements. This needs to be very seriously thought about before you start investing money on bringing a claim which will be successful but won't bring you any return

[ukshane4life]

you need proof that it was already blanked and if you believe it shouldn't of passed mot get vosa involved

[PGFG]

The car is a Vauxhall Astra 2011 1.3 Diesel. I bought it for £1285. I’m going to get an AA check in the car to evaluate it’s damage with a report.
 

This person has a business address and a home address which I have both found.

 

Attached to the business address is a name which he is friends with on Facebook who is advertising the same cars and the same goes for his wife too.

 

I have the home address’ of all names attached to the business so I’m not sure running is an option for him or his associates. 

 

I won’t be releasing his name but I can say he is based in Newham, East London.

[BankFodder]

I don't think that you have told us when you bought the car. However, you have referred to a conversation in which they apparently told you that the MOT had been carried out on 11 November so that suggests to me that you bought it after that date.

Although it seems as if you are dealing with quite a dodgy crowd, you may as well go through the paces of asserting your proper rights. Because you have discovered this issue within the first 30 days – you can add to the strength of your position by sending them a letter asserting a right to reject the vehicle under the consumer rights act.

If a car manifests a defect within the first 30 days then you are entitled to reject it out of hand with no chance of repair but you must assert your right in writing.

Send them a letter immediately – recorded delivery – informing them that you are rejecting the vehicle and telling them on what grounds and say that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act.

It won't make a whole lot of difference, but later on if you find yourself having to take court action, then it will all help.

Please let us know when you have had the AA check.

Meanwhile, I suggest that you contact me at our admin email address and let me know the identity of the garage and any other identity clues that you have unearthed. It may enable us to give you additional help

[phil40000]

I think you will find that the AA/RAC vehicle reports clearly state on them 'not to be used as a legal defence' or something similar.

 

There are forensic engineers who specifically examine vehicles for the purpose you describe and produce a report that is suitable for court use, this can be prohibitable regarding cost. TBH courts/judges seem ok with reports/inspections carried out by most well established garages and if they are a VOSA approved MOT station then that helps.

 

Obviously if your Uncle Baz produces something scrawled on the back of an old ECP invoice that won't help. A typed, dated and signed report on letter headed paper will suffice.

Edited December 12, 2020 by phil40000
correction

[BankFodder]

It doesn't matter what disclaimers the reports have on them. They are all useful

[phil40000]

so you are suggesting that it is prudent to submit a document, that could later be used in a legal/court case, which clearly states that it is non admissible in such circumstances.

 

Surely that is akin to buying a life jacket which clearly states that it is not designed for water survival!

 

can I ask if you have been present in a small claims court when a case has been brought against a motor trader?

[FruitSalad1010]

I would expect it could be argued that selling a life jacket which is not designed for water survival could fail any reasonable test for mis-selling and should aptly have the name of the item changed to something more suitable.

 

In any case I propose the best way to obtain an independent report if you are in any doubt as to the reports you are already in receipt of is to take the vehicle to a reputable garage and request a quote for the work including details as to why the work needs to be carried out.

 

If a garage is apprehensive to do this then offer to write the report and request that they sign it, confirming its validity.

 

A garage shouldn't take issue with this as they would no doubt hope to win your business as a result of their helpfulness.

[PGFG]

This case has been settled as he agreed to give me the money back. Thanks everyone 

[dx100uk]

got it yet?

 

dx

 

[PGFG]

Not yet. After he gives me the money I’ll cancel the court claim via the form