Advice needed on problems after buying used car on Ebay.

macman

tinkerbell84 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

The MOT means NOTHING.

Especially since we now know it had put on 4,000 miles between MOT and sale...

nomoneytoday

It's a second hand car sold for somewhere between £845 and £1000.
If you want a perfect car then maybe buy a new(er) one.

Caveat Emptor !

StaffsSW

Classic case of buyer remorse.
Saw a bargain, didn't check it out, been bitten by said bargain.

To buy a car unseen and uninspected and without a test drive, is naive at best, if not plain foolish. Independenbt inspections are available easily enough, and I'd rather spend £100 on an inspection, than £1000 on duff car that will cost anouther £500+ to recitify.

The buyer has admitted they do not know about repairing cars - fair enough, not everyone is, but in that case, would it not have been prudent to take someone who was mechanically savvy to look at the car as well?

Personally, If I were the buyer I'd seek free legal advice to confirm if I did have a case, how tenuous it was, and how much it would cost if I lost, and then make a decsion to either fix the car and cut the losses.

annie42

stevew8975 wrote: »

Classic case of buyer remorse.


Re comment from stevew8975

She did not come on her own. She brought her ex husband who is a taxi driver and ex car dealer who thoroughly inspected the engine and test drove. He then pronounced it sound. The car was dirty because I had not had a chance to clean it as she only lives two minutes away and wanted to come the same day. She paid cash supposedly £925 but I trusted her and I did'nt check only to find she'd only given me £915.

Brooker_Dave

Nail_Lad wrote: »

Wow, Dave Brooker - you're cuddly.

I'm not cuddly, sweetie. I don't swing that way. I sent the roses back....

MX5huggy

She paid cash supposedly £925 but I trusted her and I did'nt check only to find she'd only given me £915.

How would you know if it was 815 or 915 or 975 without counting it!

Brooker_Dave

MX5huggy wrote: »

How would you know if it was 815 or 915 or 975 without counting it!

I think the idea is that she was handed a wad of reddies, and then later counted it, only to find it a tenner short.

Always count the cash in front of the buyer.

winnie81

I would've thought the buyer would've noticed a cracked/chipped windscreen and faulty steering on the test drive? I can see this being laughed out of court with the buyer having to pay all costs!

This says it all.....Caveat Emptor!

JK12345

Morning all :-)

Wow where do I start! lol

" MECHANICALLY THE CAR SEEMS GOOD, PREV OWNER SAID IT HAD ALL NEW BRAKES FITTED.
Here you are making an assumption on how mechanically sound the cars and then quoting the previous owner. So you haven't even bothered to check this car or perhaps you have anf know of a problem."

I am saying the car "seems" fine, it is clear the car has been stood up for the year I have had it and it has no tax or test.



" The MOT means NOTHING."

Thats not the case, for example, if a car passes an MOT and 1 week layer something mechanically goes wrong, then it can be argued that the tester innocently overlooked it, however should for example the brake pipes start leeking from corrosion, the suspension collapses etc, it can be said that there is no way the corrosion etc has suddenly appeared, there would have been signs of it at the time of MOTand advisories issued.

"If you had had a test drive and the steering was faulty then you would have noticed. If you didn't notice then why would you expect the seller to notice (OK they might have known)."

I did notice! and asked the seller and he said it was normal on the V6? I'd never drven one of these (yes I know, totally niave)

"You then say that you have spent all your money on it. If you are that hard up why the hell are you buying such a big and expensive car to run?"

Running costs are not really an issue as I only really go to school and back, and from what I can see the bigger cars are cheaper than the little ones, and most people seem to want the smaller engined cars due to fuel/insurance etc.


There is absolutely NO WAY that this car passed the test in its current state, therefore I have to assume that the seller got the car when it was "right" and therefore can be in no doubt when he sold it it was not! Clearly he knows he has abused the car, and then sold it when it had had its day. The auction says the reason he was selling was he only bought it whilst his was off the road and therefore had no need for it anymore. This isn't so, He specifically told me that he was carless once I took the car, and was needing to go and pick up his new RX8. Only the seller knows what he did to the car, but with the fact he does rallying, and the amount of stonechips, I can only assume it has been behind other cars on a dirt track. or he hi-tailed it from London to Newcastle behind a gritter!!! If it is the former htat it would be natural to assume that the mechanical damage was caused in the same way.

With the guy being into rallying, it is safe to assume that he will have some car knowledge, and also knows what he has done to the car, my gripe is purely that he sold a car that he knew had issues, on the basis that it didn't, and then lied to my face and watched me put a child in the car and drive off!!

In my mind the very fact that they have offered a part refund, is admitting that they knew car was not as described, if they were confident that they had acted in good faith and the car was sound, they would have just told me to go away, or maybe offered the £80 as a "goodwill" gesture?

Anyway, all that aside, I have booked the car in for MOT next Tuesday just to ascertain exactly what is unsafe on the car. As from Sunday I borrow my dad's car, so this one can be parked up until its decided what to do with it.

I really appreciate all your opinions and opinions, certainly food for thought, but I really think the life of this thread is over :-(


"I know this is not a very sympathetic post but I have been where you have car cost £1100 repair costs after 6 months £2,500, wrote it off after 6 months and the pain was over. I bought in a hurry didn't check it throughly, ignored obvious signs and paid the penalty."

OMG I am really sorry to hear that, how long did it take you to stop seething? that is awful :-(

Anyway, I guess it's time for me to put on some dark glasses, look for someone that looks like Arthur Daily, get my mechanic Stevie Wonder, and go and find my next car!! Ooh! not forgetting to remember to smile whilst they take my eyes out! lol

Hope you all have a good day :-)

Jxx

P.S was joking about the paragraph above before anyone jumps down my throat!

emlou2009

JK12345 wrote: »

No, as i said, the car was so dirty, I asked about it because of the stonechips in case one had chipped the windscreen, looking for one chip (which is what I thought there might be) would have been a mamoth task through the muck, but it isn't one chip, its as if its been sandblasted!

if the windscreen was so dirty you couldnt tell the dirt from the chips how was it safe to drive? you wouldnt have been able to see through it, even a simple squirt of screenwash/wipers would have enabled you to see the chips, that is unless you illegally drove it without screenwash...