Sold Car Privately - Buyer Unhappy - Wants to return - Help

Joe_Horner

You may not want to contact her, but you should.

The mechanic for item 1 is to be one agreed by both of you. That means you're perfectly entitled to reject the suggestion of "her" mechanic, because there's a clear possibility of bias, but should bend over backwards to suggest impartial alternatives. I'd suggest a main dealer for the brand concerned - impartiality at least nominally assured.

Items 6 is saying that, having got that report, the court isn't going to be interested in competing" expert statements from (say) her pet mechanic, or the place that did the MT for you. They want a single, unbiased, tech report by a garage you both agree on beforehand and don't try to argue with afterwards.

Make sure every effort you make to arrange the report is logged and verifiable (copies of letters, recorded delivery, logs of phone call times to her AND to any prospective "experts" etc)

When (as is likely) she refuses to play along / keeps insisting that you use "her" guy / isn't willing to pay her half of the inspection then she's failing to comply with the court's instructions and, if you can show that you really tried to arrange a reasonable inspection, it's likely the court will see her failure as unreasonable. The case is unlikely to go beyond that point.

If she does agree then the mechanic needs to know exactly what he's inspecting for - essentially, are the faults she's claiming:

(a) actually there in a meaningful sense (ie: serious enough to affect the car). You can always find some wear in suspension etc, but there's a world of difference between (say) a slightly worn joint and one that's an MOT failure / needs replacement urgently.

(b) likely (as in, more likely than not) to have been apparent to a normal driver x weeks / miles before she herself noticed them, or are they likely to be things that became apparent "suddenly" - or even would still only be apparent to an expert examiner. Again, a worn ball joint or a slightly soft suspension bush may not give any symptoms on the road but would be apparent to a mechanic with the car on a ramp. You could not reasonably be expected to have known about that sort of issue as a private seller.

The bottom line at this point is to do everything possible to show that you're abiding by the court's directions and keep your fingers crossed that the buyer plays awkward at the prospect of her pet mechanic being out of the loop.

Quentin

wackojackouk wrote: »

I would also question how is the car going to be inspected as it was at the point of sale when it was 3 months ago too......

It looks like some posts here have mislead you.

The court directions aren't asking you both to provide a report showing the car's condition at the point of sale!

Make sure you agree on an independent inspection (and maybe consider attending so you can ensure there is no interference from the other side)

When the case is thrown out be ready to ask the judge to order the other side to pay your expenses ( and costs incurred complying with #1)

Marktheshark

Basically what the court is saying is they wont allow the "mechanics report" as it was not mutually agreed.
The onus is now on the claimant to agree and commission agreeable independent inspection.
Sounds like it just got very awkward to her, sit back, she has to do the running and writing and see if they can comply.
If she can, you would need to change your defence to a "counter claim" and claim all losses caused by her actions.
You should also be prepared to appeal any decision at county court that goes against Caveat Emptor to a "real court" where the law can be used as a defence to claims.

fannyadams

read whole thread
OP could/would your mechanic (the one who had been maintaining the car and MOTing the car for the last however-long-you-had-it) be able to write something about the car?

And FWIW I think it is a case of caveat emptor and she is taking the !!!!.
alternatively you can ask AA/RAC to inspect the car at her premesis and give them her contact detals to arrange the inspection. they will then give you the report... However, she has had someone look at the car after she bought it and then another mechanic take it apart to make up the bill... so who knows what they (the mechanics) have done to the car as it is now not exactly as you sold it.
Good Luck and keep us informed... how was your holiday by the way?
FA
x

robbies_gal

if her mechanic has already messed about with it though how can any report be relied upon to say what the car was like when she bought it

Marktheshark

She does have to ask anyone to do anything, the claimant now has to contact the defendant and make arrangements on a mutually agreeable inspection.
If they can not do this the case will be struck out.

Sit back and let them do all the running about.

Joe_Horner

Marktheshark wrote: »

She does have to ask anyone to do anything, the claimant now has to contact the defendant and make arrangements on a mutually agreeable inspection.
If they can not do this the case will be struck out.

Sit back and let them do all the running about.

No, she doesn't have to do anything. BUT, the whole point of this sort of direction is that both parties are expected to act like adults and take an active role.

If she takes the "sit back and wait" approach rather than trying to settle the inspection pro-actively, then when the claimant says "I tried to arrange it but she ignored me" the judge may well strike the defence out and allow the claim.

For the small amount of effort needed to try and arrange something (making sure it's all verifiable) it's really not worth the risk of playing silly !!!!!!s just to make the other side do the work.

Incidentally, RAC / AA as an inspection option is a good suggestion. It's hard to question their independence. RAC probably better because AA use a lot of local garages and sods law says you'll end up with her pet mechanic through them

Marktheshark

Yes it is, the silly woman is trying to sue her for selling her a second hand car which was sold caveat emptor.
Acting like an adult means standing up for yourself.
That means you make it as hard as possible for the Claimant in the hope they run out of steam.
This is not a "lets work together" happy clappy issue, it is one person trying to sue another and ruining credit histories and dragging them to court.

Make the stupid woman do the work, she is the claimant , the defendant can not arrange anything, she no longer has the car, the claimant can sort the independent inspection and get the defendant to agree in writing.

If she can not, then she wont be able to complete the claim.

When someone tries to sue which can lead life changing repercussions, there is no "lets work together"
It is war !
If she can not load her canons, thats tough for her.

BeenThroughItAll

Marktheshark wrote: »

Yes it is, the silly woman is trying to sue her for selling her a second hand car which was sold caveat emptor.
Acting like an adult means standing up for yourself.
That means you make it as hard as possible for the Claimant in the hope they run out of steam.
This is not a "lets work together" happy clappy issue, it is one person trying to sue another and ruining credit histories and dragging them to court.

Make the stupid woman do the work, she is the claimant , the defendant can not arrange anything, she no longer has the car, the claimant can sort the independent inspection and get the defendant to agree in writing.

If she can not, then she wont be able to complete the claim.

When someone tries to sue which can lead life changing repercussions, there is no "lets work together"
It is war !
If she can not load her canons, thats tough for her.

Do not do this.


This is not constructive advice. Being an adult, especially in case of a court claim, is not about being bloody-minded and awkward. It is about demonstrating that YOU have done all YOU can to comply with the Court's instructions, and if the other party chooses not to, that is their problem.


Trying to make their life difficult could impact upon the effectiveness of the OP's defence and skew the outcome unfavourably.

Joe_Horner

Marktheshark wrote: »

Yes it is, the silly woman is trying to sue her for selling her a second hand car which was sold caveat emptor.
Acting like an adult means standing up for yourself.
That means you make it as hard as possible for the Claimant in the hope they run out of steam.
This is not a "lets work together" happy clappy issue, it is one person trying to sue another and ruining credit histories and dragging them to court.

Make the stupid woman do the work, she is the claimant , the defendant can not arrange anything, she no longer has the car, the claimant can sort the independent inspection and get the defendant to agree in writing.

If she can not, then she wont be able to complete the claim.

When someone tries to sue which can lead life changing repercussions, there is no "lets work together"
It is war !
If she can not load her canons, thats tough for her.

You clearly didn't understand the direction from the judge that the parties shall "jointly" arrange all this.

In other words, regardless of how much you might like to go all Perry Mason on her arrse, the judge concerned wants them to cooperate and talk like adults in getting this information, after which he'll rule on the basis of what's discovered.

He's already expressed an opinion that it should be possible to mediate the outcome. The defendant making it "as hard as possible", as you suggest, will just make it clear in is mind which party is preventing that preferred outcome. And that is likely to go bad for the OP.