Car needs new engine 1 day after i bought it!

Flyboy152

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Well frankly I don't think you've got a leg to stand on against the company. Considering you've been the driver of it for so long their version of sold as seen puts them in a very strong position.

I'd be surprised that a broken conrod warrants a new engine though.. it should theoretically be possible to replace it UNLESS the broken parts have damaged something else. Either way it should still be possible to rebuild it for less than a new engine at the quoted price.

Alternatively hit ebay and various scrap yards, you'll get a replacement engine a lot cheaper than that.

What does the law say about "sold as seen?"

Flyboy152

colino wrote: »

I don't see how you can win in this to be honest. Presumeably the car has been serviced properly and had no faults to speak of (you wouldn't have bought it otherwise), the car wasn't re-inspected by them or you pre-sale and your bargain has gone sour. Hindsight is always 20/20, but warranty was offered and declined so why should they pick up the tab for a spontaneous though spectacular failure?
Are you sure it wasn't running low on oil or you missed it overheating? Throwing a rod is very rare nowadays.

What does the law say about a business selling goods to a consumer regarding their obligations within the first six months?

Flyboy152

LandyAndy wrote: »

Oh, sorry.:o

Guess you'll have to ask a lawyer then.

I tend to agree that it is not a sale in the motor trade and so safeguards applicable there do not apply here.

It was purchased from a lease company, therefore it was sold by a business to a consumer, it doesn't matter what line of business thew company is in, they are still subject to the same laws as any other business. That said, a company that leases cars, seems to me that they are in the motor trade.

Flyboy152

JQ. wrote: »

So you agree that an estate agent offloading a car they own does not form a transaction under the sale of goods act, as they're not in the business of selling cars.

Take that a stage further - if a catering firm I regularly use sold me a secondhand cooker (one that the catering firm had used in their commercial kitchens for the last 4 years), would that be subject to the sale of goods act? Personally I think not, because the catering firm is not in the business of selling cookers, they are just offloading an asset of the company.

I don't see car lease companies any differently - the cars are assets held by the company, they are not in the business of buying and selling them. The buying and selling of them are completely incidental to the business of the company, in the same way that the buying and selling of cookers is incidental to the business of a catering firm.

Also you say that leasing companies are selling to the general public, do you have a link to such operations where I am able to buy direct from a lease company? I know some used to do it several years ago, but I thought they'd all stopped now. Possibly for exactly this reason.

I think you are getting your analogies mixed up. A car leasing company sells cars all day every day, otherwise they would be stuck with loads of cars and a very full car park.

Flyboy152

TrickyWicky wrote: »

It does if the op hasn't been maintaining it as stated in the hire/lease contract. A place where I worked used to hire a fleet of vans. To avoid issues like this the hire company would come have them in and do the servicing themselves every 6 months.

The contract the OP had with the lease company, in relation to the lease of the vehicle and the contract for the actual sale of the vehicle to the OP, are two distinctly different legal entities.

Flyboy152

JQ. wrote: »

Do you have a link to the legislation that a person or company that sells more than 3 of the same items in a year is considered a trader. Can't say it sounds like a good business plan - buy a brand new car and then sell it for circa 60% less 4 years later.

I would imagine the general principal of car trading is that you sell them for more than you buy them for.

I bought my ex-company car off the lease company about 10 years ago and I would never have considered that I got any kind of protection because the price I paid was effectively the trade price. They did however offer a 12 month RAC warranty which I gratefully accepted. Got a complete bargain, sold it 18 months later for my than I paid.

I'd be interested to know the outcome of this - OP, get some legal advice and let us know what they say.

You seem to be forgetting the profits made from the actual lease of the vehicle.

TrickyWicky

Flyboy152 wrote: »

The contract the OP had with the lease company, in relation to the lease of the vehicle and the contract for the actual sale of the vehicle to the OP, are two distinctly different legal entities.

Maybe so, however its not going to be a secret that the op has had the car for the last 4 years and was possibly responsible for the maintenance of it. The company may well use this in their defence and even counter claim that the op failed to maintain it. Weird things happen in legal spats.

Also.. you really need to use the multiquote buttons

Wig

JQ. wrote: »

Do you have a link to the legislation that a person or company that sells more than 3 of the same items in a year is considered a trader.

No, I can't, in the same way I can't show you legislation that defines what "uses" means in the RTA 1988.

Hotspur

JQ. wrote: »

Do you have a link to the legislation that a person or company that sells more than 3 of the same items in a year is considered a trader. Can't say it sounds like a good business plan - buy a brand new car and then sell it for circa 60% less 4 years later

There isn't any legislation but there is case law which has stated that in certain circumstances. I can't quote the case references but one was to do with a postman who repaired and sold a few cars and it was deemed that he was in trade or business of selling cars. There is no doubt in my mind that a lease company would be in trade or business of selling cars. Of course, only a court can decide . . .

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Hotspur wrote: »

There isn't any legislation but there is case law which has stated that in certain circumstances. I can't quote the case references but one was to do with a postman who repaired and sold a few cars and it was deemed that he was in trade or business of selling cars. There is no doubt in my mind that a lease company would be in trade or business of selling cars. Of course, only a court can decide . . .

the case you refure to is of a private individual making some cash for repairs and sale of vehicles, he was not a buisiness selling to the public, he thought he was above the law because he was working as a postman and paying his tax, and thought he was immune from soga and HMRC as he thought his turn over of vehicles wasnt sufficiant enough to be classed as a trader, he was wrong.

any vat registered buisiness selling to the public, second hand goods or brand new goods, no matter what the product is , is bound by the sales of goods act.

a cournershop selling a car through the buisiness name is still bound by soga.

the lease company sold the car through the buisiness name and is bound by soga.