Scammed by car seller

fivetide

Lady_n wrote: »

I bought it on the 5th ... And I got the slip he give me says his name and address but this could be wrong I am told.... It's not just a months tax he sold me that car on the basis of 6 months tax ... Which s the 121 pound.

You should definitely chase up the logbook with the DVLA and explain why.

I assume, he's kept the main bit with his name on as he is meant to post that off. He may not have done this.

Once you get the V5 back, it should have his full name and address on.

That said, if this was a private sale, please say you bought it from his house and checked the address on the V5 matched with the place you were at.... If it was a petrol station or something, I'd be a bit more concerned it might be a full on con in some way.

facade

This is what I think you are telling us:

You bought the car on the 5th, of August I take it, and it was sold to you with 6 months tax that ran from 1st August?

The seller bought 6 months tax (1st August to 31 Jan) with a rubber cheque? (At a Post Office or DVLA local office if he could find one still open, it had to be face to face or he couldn't have got the disc)

The DVLA are chasing you for 6 months tax (1st August to 31st Jan)?

Pay it, you are the vehicle keeper, you bought an untaxed car. (Either suck it up (life's tough, then you die), small claims the person you bought the car off, or send the boys round his house)

Just think of it as paying £121 more for a car with no tax disc, because that is what you did.

If they are asking for 6 months tax from BEFORE you owned it (February to July) then that is different and you can dispute it, but still need to buy a current tax disc.

arcon5

DUTR wrote: »

You mean you offered the asking price?
My Mum had 10 of us, so I couldn't agree that expecting loses cells, and of course ya need a man to make babies, so I'm pushing the mitigating circumstances to one side.

Check with autotrader as if the car was advertised with valid VED then it should include it, I know adverts in the paper the publisher is or was jointly liable. Not sure why the DVLA is not chasing the previous keepr though.

Really? Not sure that's ever been the case. The paper would be merely an advertising platform where buyers and sellers meet - same as eBay.

DUTR

arcon5 wrote: »

Really? Not sure that's ever been the case. The paper would be merely an advertising platform where buyers and sellers meet - same as eBay.

If it is not, it used to be the case, hence why there are still advertising editors.

mgdavid

DUTR wrote: »

If it is not, it used to be the case, hence why there are still advertising editors.

really?
nah!

fivetide

DUTR wrote: »

If it is not, it used to be the case, hence why there are still advertising editors.

Time was everything stopped with the editor in chief. I know because I was a journo about ten years ago and our editor had to print an apology about an advert that cause offence.

Not sure it would help the OP but essentially you are correct.