Sold a car and now the head gasket has gone

Homersimpson · 13 December 2009 at 10:26AM

"Rover 800 t-series engines had an issue where the HGF on one of the oil feeds. It would only seep oil and it would not present as any other issues. So it could be like that for 100,000 miles. If the HFG then failed in a further way, no where near the original failure. Would it be seen as the issue was there for a long period of time or unrelated?"

Oneday77, your absolutely right about this, my 220 Rover Tomcat had a T-series engine with this problem and it didn't get any worse. I sold the car to my cousin and they had no problems with it.

I guess the problem with the courts will be that the legal people involved have absolutly no idea how cars works or why they fail and how much notice you will have before a fault develops. Take the rover k-series (please please take them away;)), they can loose a bit of water and drive absolutley fine for a while as long as you keep the water topped up, then all of a sudden they fail or they can be fine now and fail very quickly.

If the OP's car was losing water it sounds like the purchaser has failed to top it up which has caused the problem after a short period of time.

Homersimpson · 13 December 2009 at 10:32AM

MrSmartPrice, you mention that the seller may have some liability and in your professional experience you have seen the case go against the seller. How often in your experience does this happen in a normal transaction for a cheap car between private individuals? Is this 50/50 or 90/10? Bearing in mind that head gasket failure does not make a vehicle unroadworthy, as point out above the MOT does not test for this. It is an interesting to point to note that if the headgasket had gone to compression (water going into the bores), this may upset the emmissions readings and consiquently the car could fail on this but it didn't in this case as it appears to have passed an MOT.

I'm afraid with second hand cars privatly I always have been of the opinion that when I buy one i'm taking a risk but saving a bucket load of cash at the same time. Sounds like the buyer of this vehicle wants to save the cash and have the full dealer service and liability to me! Mind you I can say this because I have a nice set of sockets and spanners and have rebuilt more old cars than I've had hot dinners (and if you ever see me you will know thats at lot!) as well as major work on newer models for friends and family (engine replacements, head gaskets, gearboxes, clutches, engine managament diagnostics etc. etc.). If only I could charge them for what I do I would be able to afford a new car!

Oneday77 · 13 December 2009 at 11:07AM

MrSmartprice wrote: »

I am attempting to indicate how the Small Claims Court would assess the case. Things in civil courts are rarely black and white, the burden of proof is on 'balance of probability' and submissions from both parties are considered. To get that far you would normally get independent evidence, such as expert's opinion.

What I have said is that there is a clear civil liability that goods are not misdescribed when sold. (This is distinct from the Trade Descriptions Act which is criminal law and applies only to traders.) In civil law it applies to all sales, including private. So it's best to avoid such claims when selling privately.

A District Judge would consider the statement made and assess its accuracy, along with all the other facts of the case. He would decide if there had been misrepresentation and make an award of compensation if appropriate. But be under no illusions how they work in such cases. They will not allow legalese jargon or playing with words. If a car was described as being in good condition they consider such things as age and cost. But carelessly-made expressions such as 'Good Runner', 'Excellent Condition' etc are likely to cost the seller dear if untrue. I have seen it happen on numerous occasions.

Thank you that is a far better balanced response.
So what you are saying is even though you believe something is Good/Excellent don't say it. As a court could/might/has a chance of ignoring the facts that were disclosed to the contrary.
I suppose if it was always black and white then every day would be rainy or sunny, never grey and gloomy but dry

DaveMacD · 13 December 2009 at 11:49AM

So, if the seller stated that 'it's always been a good runner', they absolve themselves of any liability.

Exemplar · 13 December 2009 at 12:07PM

Hi all. Thought I would give you my personal experience of this. I sold a car about 3 years ago to a guy and reciept stated 'sold as see, no warranty implied in writing or verbally' etc etc. About 4 weeks later I get a letter stating that the SAM unit (Smart Roadster brain) had gone and what was I going to do about it. I knew that it left me with no problems. Letters went to and fro stating sorry about your problem etc, caveat emptor etc. Eventually he took me to the small claims court and he won. Cost me £1100 plus costs. So be aware!

Alex

DaveMacD · 13 December 2009 at 12:21PM

!!!!!!, how can you be held responsible for the control unit failing after you sold the car?

MrSmartprice · 13 December 2009 at 7:15PM

Homersimpson wrote: »

MrSmartPrice, you mention that the seller may have some liability and in your professional experience you have seen the case go against the seller. How often in your experience does this happen in a normal transaction for a cheap car between private individuals? Is this 50/50 or 90/10? Bearing in mind that head gasket failure does not make a vehicle unroadworthy, as point out above the MOT does not test for this. It is an interesting to point to note that if the headgasket had gone to compression (water going into the bores), this may upset the emmissions readings and consiquently the car could fail on this but it didn't in this case as it appears to have passed an MOT.

I take your point. But when I was in a position of advising people who were in this sort of position, they were given impartial and realistic advice. Much of the time that amounted to the fact that they had little chance on a private sale. The 'description' was their only chance. If it got to Small Claims Court then the case was normally successful. We didn't waste resources on a no-chancer!

Oneday77 wrote: »

Thank you that is a far better balanced response.
So what you are saying is even though you believe something is Good/Excellent don't say it. As a court could/might/has a chance of ignoring the facts that were disclosed to the contrary.
I suppose if it was always black and white then every day would be rainy or sunny, never grey and gloomy but dry

That's about the score, yes. If a car is in good condition, let it speak for itself. Only a fool will fall into this trap. You do need to answer questions honestly, of course.

Remember that the 'satisfactory quality' and 'fit for purpose' parts of SOGA don't apply to private sales. So if you don't apply an 'opinion' the only comeback will be if there is a factual misdesciption, (1.6 when it's a 1.4 etc) or if it is unroadworthy, which is an absolute offence under criminal law for anyone.

Exemplar · 13 December 2009 at 7:52PM

I agree with everything, but, if you are taken to the small claims court they will nearly always err on the side of the purchaser. My suggestion would be get a second opinion on the head gasket and take it from there. I have not read all of the posts so please excuse any ignorance here but how are you to know that the garage that has said this is not somehow affiliated with the purchaser?

Alex

MrSmartprice · 13 December 2009 at 8:42PM

alcot33uk wrote: »

I agree with everything, but, if you are taken to the small claims court they will nearly always err on the side of the purchaser.

That does tend to be true, but it's not down to any sort of bias in the system. It is usually down to the fact that the seller gets rather cocky about it and consequently doesn't prepare their case properly. Much of the time they don't turn up, which is a guaranteed way to lose.:rolleyes:

thistledome · 13 December 2009 at 10:17PM

I bought a dangerously unroadworthy car from a private seller, who lied blatantly about the condition of the car (Quote: "I've driven my 5 year old Daughter to Ipswich and back in this car and no way would I do that if there was anything wrong with it....").

Although I found out at the time that it can be an offence for a private seller to sell a dangerously unroadworthy car, not one official body would take any interest. The Trading Standards people agreed with me, but told me nobody would do anything about it. The Police were only interested in whether it was stolen or not, nothing else (after they argued with me about whether it was illegal or not and had to admit I was right in the end). A local Solicitor who specialises in Motoring Law told me to forget it.

I paid for the repairs myself (£800) and didn't think of the small claims court at the time. I wish I had.

No wonder most people think that private sellers can do as they please.

Sold a car and now the head gasket has gone

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free