Help Please.( Been Had )

thefredster

This was the advert for a car that we have just purchased.


2005 55 Reg Mazda MX-5 2.0i 2dr ConvertibleOne lady owner, Full Mazda service history, Always garaged, Remote central locking, Alarm and Immobiliser, Electric windows, Electric mirrors, CD player, Driver and passenger airbags, Wind deflector, Tax/MOT October 2012, Immaculate condition, Very reluctant sale.£5,999

The V5 document has just come back from DVLA and it says that there were three previous owners.We were told by the wifes husband that she had owned the car from new,also the MOT was not present and would be sent on to us as the garage had forgotten to leave it in the car.When the MOT arrived it was issued with advisory warnings regarding front and rear discs.They are both pitted and need replacing at considerable cost,hardly immaculate then.Do I have any form of redress I can take or have I been shafted.Any help would be appreciated.:(

custardy

private or trade sale?
its a 7 year old car
did you expect it to require no work ever?
V5 should have been checked pre purchase

McKneff

I/m presuming private sale as you said 'reluctant sale'

No comeback if private, 7 year old cars need work somethimes, tyres also, they have a habit of wearing out, its the driving that does them in.

Re the MOT, the seller would probably not have been aware of the advisorys if they had been left in the car

You should have done more research.

All you can do is suck it up Im afraid and get a quote from a couple of small independant garages.

colino

If your not happy, and that is a copy of the ad., go back and get your money back. The advisories are irrelevant, immaculate tends to reflect appearance anyway, but a driveway dealer or privateer is not allowed to misrepresent, and by saying one owner instead of three= liar.

Tilt

Do you have anything in writing to say that she owned the car from new? It dosn't exactly stipulate it in the advert that you have posted. I would agree that the seller has 'pulled the wool over eyes' by the sound of it. Never heard of anyone picking their car up after an MOT without the certificate. Unfortunately, the SOGA only applies to purchases from a trader. There is usually only 2 avenues to persue with a private seller which is if the car is theirs to sell or they have made false representations about the car. It seems that the latter may apply but you would need to prove it.

Another thing is to make sure that they were in fact private sellers by checking that their info marries up with the V5 and that they aren't selling other cars.

Edit; I also just spotted the 'one lady owner' bit. Changes things considerably. Yes, you can pursue for miss-advertising. I assume you have a copy of the AD?

victor2

Bit late for you, but you should have checked those things before parting with the money, not just take the sellers word for it. It doesn't sound like it was mis-advertised. "Immaculate" is wide open to interpretation.
Just got to put it down to experience unfortunately.

Edit:
Missed the one owner bit. Might have something you could fight there.

bryanb

colino wrote: »

by saying one owner instead of three= liar.

It said one lady owner. The other 2 could have been men.

Tilt

bryanb wrote: »

It said one lady owner. The other 2 could have been men.

Yes you have a point but Personally I would be interested how a judge would see it.

Alias_Omega

I once owned a car from "new" though i was the 2nd owner on the V5.

MX5 Parts Prices

Front Disks - £80
Rear Disks - £43

Tilt

Alias_Omega wrote: »

I once owned a car from "new" though i was the 2nd owner on the V5.

MX5 Parts Prices

Front Disks - £80
Rear Disks - £43

I've owned about 12 new cars over the years and i've always been the only keeper on the V5.

Johnmcl7

You didn't buy this in Inverness did you? I saw an MX-5 which matches this description exactly including brake discs in poor condition which sold last week.

John