pulling out of a car buy

TradePro

pompeyred wrote: »

then you can also claim YOUR costs from him.

And those costs would be?

londonTiger

The law doesn;'t care about "standard practice", if the car was advertised with having a new MOT and did not have one at the time the buyer went to purchase then the buyer can pull out.

Tigerprint

If you have changed your mind, then walk away, the deposit covers the cost of an MOT (at about £50) & the dealer wouldn't have MOT'd it without your deposit. I guess you would have been annoyed if you had put down a deposit & then the dealer decided to sell to somebody else.... works both ways

pompeyred

TradePro wrote: »

And those costs would be?

The costs in recovering the money the big bad trader has kept from him with no right to do so.

My arguments aren't now and never have been with those in the trade that act properly, it's against those who believe they are above the law and treat the car sales market space as something they can deal within as they please.

There are too many examples of people not getting what they thought they would and the trader being in a better position than they should. If said trader had spent money on removing it from the forecourt and lost out on a potential sale then more fool them for not tightening up the pre-sales administrative process.

And for the record.... the trader would be within their rights to take a deposit from customer A and then sell it to customer B in this scenario so long as they returned the deposit. That's the benefit of contractual negotiation and that it having to have purpose for both parties - there is olbligation on both buyer and seller. For the sake of a few pounds in purhcasing a decent contract template it makes me wonder why these small independents don't bother.

OddballJamie

pompeyred wrote: »

The costs in recovering the money the big bad trader has kept from him with no right to do so.

My arguments aren't now and never have been with those in the trade that act properly, it's against those who believe they are above the law and treat the car sales market space as something they can deal within as they please.

There are too many examples of people not getting what they thought they would and the trader being in a better position than they should. If said trader had spent money on removing it from the forecourt and lost out on a potential sale then more fool them for not tightening up the pre-sales administrative process.

And for the record.... the trader would be within their rights to take a deposit from customer A and then sell it to customer B in this scenario so long as they returned the deposit. That's the benefit of contractual negotiation and that it having to have purpose for both parties - there is olbligation on both buyer and seller. For the sake of a few pounds in purhcasing a decent contract template it makes me wonder why these small independents don't bother.

From the sound of it the trader who the OP is dealing with had a contract of sorts that the OP signed.

Also there's been no mention that the trader wont give the deposit back, from the OP. They have just asked whether they can get it back.

Personally I really see no issue with it failing an MOT and the dealer rectifying it. I'd rather that, than he gets a 'mate' to MOT it and it passes fine.

Just another case of buyers remorse.