Sold a car, air con stopped working, buyer complaints

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

SOGA does not cover private sales UNLESS the buyer can show the seller has deliberately falsely advertised the vehicle.

Wrong.

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/second-hand/

"it must be as described in the advert"

It doesnt mention that the ad has to be deliberately falsified, merely not as described.

Theres a big difference.

HoagieKat

According to http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_problems_with_the_car_you_bought_e/the_car_you_bought_is_faulty.htm

a private seller, you can't argue it isn't of satisfactory quality. If the car turns out to be faulty, there is little you can do unless you can show that the seller did not give a correct description of the car.

Unless I had the ability to see into the future, I don't know how I could have predicted the AC failing? :mad:

mikey72

HoagieKat wrote: »

According to http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_problems_with_the_car_you_bought_e/the_car_you_bought_is_faulty.htm



Unless I had the ability to see into the future, I don't know how I could have predicted the AC failing? :mad:

I think a lot on here agree with you.

Tilt

pgilc1 wrote: »

Wrong.

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/second-hand/

No i'm not!

pgilc1 wrote: »

"it must be as described in the advert"

It doesnt mention that the ad has to be deliberately falsified, merely not as described.

Theres a big difference.

Maybe not the exact wording but there is also a difference between the car being not as described at the point of sale (which it apparently was) and a fault occurring afterwards.

The car has aircon which was working when the buyer drove away. Unlike a trade sale, the onus is on the buyer to show that the car was not as described in the advert. We also still don't know if the aircon is even being used correctly.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

i dissagree the buyer has no rights here at all, IF they have admitted it was working then it was as described at POINT OF SALE.

courts work on fairness in these situations and in all fairness the OP cant see into the future and predict the fault could have arisen to intercept the future failure of the aircon and had it repaired.

again SOGA is ioen to interpreation.

and the only recourse the buyer has is the "As described" and it was described at point of sale and aircon was working at point of sale, if it wasnt working but highlighted to the buyer presale again no recourse can be had by the buyer.

fivetide

pendulum wrote: »

Says who?
IIt is not my job to check either, it is the buyer's. Similarly, the sunroof didn't open or close smoothly - in other words, didn't work properly - but it's still a sunroof thus was advertised as having such.

.

Sure that isn't right. If the car has faults that you are aware of then you should make these known to the buyer otherwise you could well be in trouble as you are misrepresenting. Sure if someone pulled that stunt on you you'd be complaining like the OP's buyer.

In this case it seems the system was working going on what the OP has said and (apologies OP) assuming the OP hadn't just topped it up himself to make sure it worked and the use on the way home blew all the gas out of it then it seems the car was essentially as advertised.

5t.

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

No i'm not!



Maybe not the exact wording but there is also a difference between the car being not as described at the point of sale (which it apparently was) and a fault occurring afterwards.

The car has aircon which was working when the buyer drove away. Unlike a trade sale, the onus is on the buyer to show that the car was not as described in the advert. We also still don't know if the aircon is even being used correctly.

Your point

"SOGA does not cover private sales UNLESS the buyer can show the seller has deliberately falsely advertised the vehicle."

is WRONG.

Thats what i was correcting.

That statement is incorrect. The car must be as described - there is no onus on the buyer to prove the seller deliberately falsely advertised the vehicle.

Joe_Horner

For a private sale the rules boil down to:

The description must be substantially correct.
The seller does NOT have to mention faults, but must be truthful if specifically asked about them.

In this case, the description was essentially true - the car DOES have airconditioning fitted. Whether or not it's working doesn't alter that fact.

Notwithstanding the fact that it was evidently working when sold, even if it wasn't there would be no comeback unless either the seller claimed it was or the buyer specifically asked "does the aircon work?"

All this is by-the-by seeing as I'll almost guaranteed that the aircon is still working and the buyer knows that.

Nothing to do with a "sudden failure", nothing to do with "using it wrong", just a dishonest buyer trying to scam some money back on a non-existent problem!

motorguy

mikey72 wrote: »

He might. So, you're in a small claims court, the buyer may or not not have a report stating the aircon may or may not be defective, but could suggest it was gassed up just to make it work for a day or two. He had the car for a day, suggestions for the seller to use as a defence are it's working and the buyer is trying it on, the buyer bought a £5k car to strip for parts, or the buyer took it home, it was working, so he spent £40 on a can of gas anyway? Even within an independent report, how would you vote?

Maybe soon you'll agree with me that the SOGA is too vague and grey, since even to resolve a simple dispute like this one would take action in a small claims court?

pendulum

pgilc1 wrote: »

The Sale of Goods Act.

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/second-hand/

That is a rather shaky and contradictory interpretation of the Sale of Goods Act. They correctly state there is no right to quality or fitness for purpose and that the only requirement is that the item must be as described, but then suggest a person's future expectations of the goods and how long they've had them play a part in being able to reject the goods... strange.

Nobody seems to have proof read that article either... "Not if the fault only because apparent"...

I see that link as more of a blog post by someone that knows a little but not a lot. You're better off reading the real SOGA rather than iffy, summarised third party interpretations.

In the OP's case, the car was as described. Described as having aircon: Yes. Car has aircon: Yes.

fivetide wrote: »

Sure that isn't right. If the car has faults that you are aware of then you should make these known to the buyer

It's not a private sellers job to walk round the car and point out every little defect known. Instead, on a used car in a private sale, it's the buyers job to inspect the goods (or have them inspected professionally) and make an offer based on the condition of the vehicle at the time.

There is no requirement to disclose known defects. This is a myth.