bought a car only to find out it was a cat D

lancebond

colino wrote: »

Did you get a good deal? Hard to tell as you don't mention details of what you chopped in, but if you are happy overall and got it at a great price, let him fix all the bits up and enjoy it.
If it is just an average trade, get your money back, he'll know exactly what misleading by omission is and he's hoping the distance between you will just make your complaint fizzle away.

traded in an 03 MB c220 cdi saloon with 137000 on the clock..

it's not a bad deal (considering the car is a 57 plate... and has the extras) but all in all if a refund is available i'd prefer that

minibbb

May be worth you taking alook at my thread (lower down the page) involving the problems with my used car. Not the same as your issues but it highlights what help trading standards can offer (i.e they'll send you template letters but not much else).

Im in the middle of taking the dealers to small claims court, 9 weeks on and im no closer to getting it resolved. I'd try and come to an arrangement with the dealer if I was you, make copies of all correspondence and send via recorded delivery etc.

I'd write to them now stating that you wish to reject the car, best to get the ball rolling asap. As previously said, selling a write off without declaring it sounds fairly serious so hopefully they'll play ball for you.

Good luck!

fannyanna

Hi OP,

Sorry I haven't read all the responses you've had so far so apologies if I'm repeating things.

The trader did have a legal responsibility to let you know the car had been classed as a write off.

Firstly the car can be perfectly legal and you may have got yourself a good deal. So you may decide you want to keep it.

If you don't you're going to have a little battle with the dealer as you paid cash. I fell foul of the same thing although luckily for me I'd just put down a deposit and had paid on my credit card so I went down the section 75 route and was successful. I also reported it to Trading Standards and as they had identified a pattern of complaints they went and investigated the dealer - no idea what the outcome was but they can prosecute. Here's an example:

http://birminghamnewsroom.com/2010/08/%E2%80%9Cwrite-off%E2%80%9D-car-dealer-clocked-by-trading-standards/

So firstly report it to Trading Standards. Even if they don't investigate as a result of your specific case they may when it happens to the next person. Yeah they're not great but they can't do anything if people don't report it.

Next thing I'd do is write a letter (sent recorded delivery) to the trader outlining that they have breached the law and set out the recourse you expect. Give them 14 days to respond and be clear that you will escalate matters to the small claims court if necessary.

I managed to get some good legal arguments in my correspondance (I had to provide it to my bank for my section 75 claim). I'm fortunate that I work in a legal team so was able to pull some information together myself and then was assisted by the lawyers that I work with.

I'm more than happy to copy and paste some of the legal arguments into a PM for you. They're on my work PC though which I wont have access to until Wednesday but let me know if you'd find them useful.

Good luck.

vaio

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

No need to tell them, though if it goes missing or gets written off the ins co will pay out less than if it was a straight one.....

no need to tell them (unless they ask, which most don't) but, there is at lest one company who exclude write offs in their general assumptions section of their proposal (you know, the bit nobody reads but everybody ticks the box to confirm they have read it)

So the general advice has to be to read the small print

fannyanna

I'd tell the insurance company - can't remember whether you have to or not but our insurance company wouldn't insure the car.

We would of had fun if we'd had an accident and the insurance company then realised we'd witheld that bit of infomration from them.

Honesty is the best policy!

Hammyman

Here's another way to look at it.

TBH, Cat D is pretty much not even worth bothering about. Sure ideally it wouldn't be Cat D but Cat D is applied for all kinds of pathetic reasons, most of them being financial related - even because the vehicle wasn't recovered within 6 months and the insurers paid out. I've seen Cat D just because a car needed a set of locks or the alloys were nicked but a replacement set of original alloys and tyres from the manufacturer cost more than 50% of the value of the car.. I've seen Cat D applied just because a car needed a bolt on wing. Most Cat D have had nothing happen to them that impacts on the safety of the vehicle whatsoever.

If the car was around 20% cheaper than a comparable one, I would say it was priced to take into account Cat D. When you came to sell it on, you'd get around 20% less than comparable cars.

Would I buy Cat D? Yes.

lancebond

Hammyman wrote: »

Here's another way to look at it.

TBH, Cat D is pretty much not even worth bothering about. Sure ideally it wouldn't be Cat D but Cat D is applied for all kinds of pathetic reasons, most of them being financial related - even because the vehicle wasn't recovered within 6 months and the insurers paid out. I've seen Cat D just because a car needed a set of locks or the alloys were nicked but a replacement set of original alloys and tyres from the manufacturer cost more than 50% of the value of the car.. I've seen Cat D applied just because a car needed a bolt on wing. Most Cat D have had nothing happen to them that impacts on the safety of the vehicle whatsoever.

If the car was around 20% cheaper than a comparable one, I would say it was priced to take into account Cat D. When you came to sell it on, you'd get around 20% less than comparable cars.

Would I buy Cat D? Yes.

The bit that gets me, is they said they were unaware of this, but now when I sit and look at it the car is priced accordingly for a cat d


We'll see what happens when he phones tomorrow. I'll update then

vaio

Hammyman wrote: »

Here's another way to look at it.

TBH, Cat D is pretty much not even worth bothering about. Sure ideally it wouldn't be Cat D but Cat D is applied for all kinds of pathetic reasons, most of them being financial related - even because the vehicle wasn't recovered within 6 months and the insurers paid out. I've seen Cat D just because a car needed a set of locks or the alloys were nicked but a replacement set of original alloys and tyres from the manufacturer cost more than 50% of the value of the car.. I've seen Cat D applied just because a car needed a bolt on wing. Most Cat D have had nothing happen to them that impacts on the safety of the vehicle whatsoever.

If the car was around 20% cheaper than a comparable one, I would say it was priced to take into account Cat D. When you came to sell it on, you'd get around 20% less than comparable cars.

Would I buy Cat D? Yes.

yep, and I'd happily buy cat c/d too but stick any car into autotrader search and I'll pretty much guarantee that you'll find a 20% variation in the price of essentially identical cars. Where it is, how badly the seller needs the money etc etc will all affect asking price.

In the OPs case I'd say it's not about price, it's about not being told something they are entitled to be told

Brooker_Dave

Hammyman wrote: »

Here's another way to look at it.

TBH, Cat D is pretty much not even worth bothering about. Sure ideally it wouldn't be Cat D but Cat D is applied for all kinds of pathetic reasons, most of them being financial related - even because the vehicle wasn't recovered within 6 months and the insurers paid out. I've seen Cat D just because a car needed a set of locks or the alloys were nicked but a replacement set of original alloys and tyres from the manufacturer cost more than 50% of the value of the car.. I've seen Cat D applied just because a car needed a bolt on wing. Most Cat D have had nothing happen to them that impacts on the safety of the vehicle whatsoever.

It was a 3 year old Mercedes, they'd not have written it off for trivial damage.

That said it was still a cheap car, but who knows how good the repair was.

lancebond

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

It was a 3 year old Mercedes, they'd not have written it off for trivial damage.

That said it was still a cheap car, but who knows how good the repair was.

It's had a new steering wheel due to airbag deployment (wheel £500 airbag £1000ish at MB prices... And the repair was done at a mb dealer)

New doors, passenger air bag, side airbags...

My guesstimate is the car was worth around 13,500 when crashed so to cat d it, the repairs only had to hit around 6 grand... Using a mb main dealer that doesn't take that much.


Still, I'm asking for a refund asap