Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Son privately sold car, private buyer has raised court claim citing failures under the Consumer Rights Act & that my son received a Fraudulent MOT certificate!!

Recommended Posts

My 18 Yr old son bought a car to fix up and sell on to make a bit of money. He had a friend from a garage helping to fix it up.

It was then taken for an mot, any advisories that needed to be done were done and then re mot'd. He put the car up for sale and someone came to have a look at it and test drove it. He was happy with the car and paid a deposit  and then cane back a few days later to collect the car and pay the rest of the money.

The buyer contacted my son about 10 days later saying the car had broke down and there was a hole in the engine block so it was leaking oil. My son explained to him he wasn't a mechanic and wasn't aware of any issues with holes in the engine block. So he is now trying to say the mot is fraudulent.

He has made.a claim for £1200 plus daily interest. We have never had to deal with this before so if anyone could advise on how to reply and defend the claim I would appreciate it. He is only 18 and not a mechanic, he assumed the car was fine when it passed the mot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou very much for your help. There was no oil leak when it went for the mot and the buyer said the oil leak was after it broke down so around 10 days after he bought it.

He said it had been taken to a garage who said the car had the hole in the engine block and believed it was a fraudulent mot. But we haven't seen any report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which Court have you received the claim from ? HM Courts and tribunals service. Online civil money claims

Name of the Claimant ? Harvey Benson

How many defendant's  joint or self ? self

Date of issue – 14th February 2024

Particulars of Claim


What is the claim for – 

1. I am seeking a full refund of £1,200 from the defendant for the sale of a vehicle which was found to be faulty immediately after purchase.

2. The vehicle has a significant engine defect, specifically a hole in the engine block, and the tyres are severely cracked, rendering the car unsafe and undriveable.

3. These issues suggest that the vehicle was not as described at the time of sale and that the MOT certificate provided may have been fraudulent.

Reasons Why the Defendant Owes Money:

1. The car was sold with pre-existing conditions that were not disclosed, which constitutes a breach of the Consumer Rights Act of 2015.

2. The vehicle is not fit for purpose, not of satisfactory quality, and not as described at the point of sale.

3. The immediate breakdown and tire condition indicate that the MOT certificate may not reflect the true state of the vehicle at the time of sale.

4. As per the Consumer Rights Act of 2015, the buyer is entitled to a full refund for a faulty product if a claim is made within 30 days of purchase.

5. The defendant has thus far not provided a refund despite the clear entitlement under consumer protection law, necessitating this claim.

I trust that the above explanation clearly outlines the basis of my claim without delving into a detailed timeline, which can be provided upon request.


Timeline summary
Date What happened
28th January 2024 Placed a deposit of £200 for the car with Liam.
1st February 2024 Paid the remaining £1,000 to complete the purchase of the car.
8th February 2024 The oil warning light on the car activated, indicating a potential issue with the engine. - Upon closer inspection, discovered that the tires were cracking, suggesting age or wear not consistent with a recent MOT pass.
9th February 2024 The car broke down and was leaking oil. A visual inspection did not reveal the source of the leak. - Took the car to a garage at 14:30 for a professional inspection. - The mechanic discovered a hole in the engine and indicated that this issue would have been present for some time, not just over the week I had the car. - The mechanic also confirmed that the tires' condition was such that they would not have passed an MOT, suggesting the certificate may have been fraudulent. Sent Liam a message requesting a full refund and included photos of the hole in the engine. Received no response.
11th February 2024 Sent another message to Liam regarding the refund. After this attempt to communicate, he blocked my number and on social media, preventing further contact.


What is the total value of the claim? £1200 PLUS 8% interest rate

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? The court papers were sent to my girlfriends address, it wasn't my home address

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Son privately sold car, private buyer has raised court claim citing failures under the Consumer Rights Act & that my son attained a Fraudulent MOT certificate!!

This is from the claim history 

I asked for the extra 14 days to file the defence just to make sure I've got everything I need to reply with.

I've never done this before so not sure what I'm doing or how to word it in the defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The car was in his name. He didn't tax it but he did SORN it.

Where do I find the claim history?

I can't see anything other than the deadline is 18th March at 4pm 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing that let's me see stages. The only thing it says is

You have an extra 14 days to respond

You must respond before 4pm on 18 March 2024.

We’ll email both you and Mr Harvey Benson confirming the additional response time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He was the registered keeper yes  he bought it I think in December. He didn't drive it as he put a SORN on it. I didn't see the car so I'm not sure of the condition of the tyres but I assume for them to pass the mot they were at a legal standard. There is no photos showing any cracks in tyres.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The defence form is online. Yes he is involves in it I just came on here to get some advice for him as he is dyslexic and not great with wording or spelling things so thought it would be easier for me to help him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My son has just had a letter saying someone has applied for the v5 on this car.

I didn't realise he had given the full v5c to the lad that bought it without filling it in.

obviously the other lad has just applied for the v5.

Do we wait and see what happens with the court claim or should he tell dvla straight away he doesn't own the car anymore

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • AndyOrch changed the title to Son privately sold car, private buyer has raised court claim citing failures under the Consumer Rights Act & that my son received a Fraudulent MOT certificate!!

I'm really sorry to be  a pain but I didn't realise the paperwork was sent to his girlfriends address, not our home address do I need to inform them of the wrong address 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's never lived at that address he's always lived with me but the lad who bought it only knew where his girlfriend lived so had sent it to that address 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...