Buyer is alleging that a sold vehicle had an accident.

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

I'm intrigued that a car that has been driven for several months without the seller being aware of any issues is now so accident damaged that it is unroadworthy.

neilmcl

IanMSpencer wrote: »

I'm intrigued that a car that has been driven for several months without the seller being aware of any issues is now so accident damaged that it is unroadworthy.

There's probably thousands of motorists on our roads driving around in unroadworthy cars, no real surprise there.

What I'd be more intrigued in is just how they will be able to prove that, if the car is indeed unroadworthy, it was unroadworthy at the time of sale.

gravemind

One more thing I noticed on the sales receipt I provided him. The sales reciept template was downloaded from a website and has a box for Valid Mot. Since the car was under three years old the checkbox for valid MOT is marked as (x) while checkboxes for other things are marked Checked (correct mark).

Retrogamer

neilmcl wrote: »

There's probably thousands of motorists on our roads driving around in unroadworthy cars, no real surprise there.

What I'd be more intrigued in is just how they will be able to prove that, if the car is indeed unroadworthy, it was unroadworthy at the time of sale.

As already mentioned it wouldn't matter.
It's a criminal offense to sell an roadworthy car, but common sense dictates if a card is sold as spares or repairs then the police wouldn't prosecute for it.

As it's a criminal offense and rarely used, it's very unlikely to have any bearing oan civil dispute.

Foxy-Stoat_3

gravemind wrote: »

One more thing I noticed on the sales receipt I provided him. The sales reciept template was downloaded from a website and has a box for Valid Mot. Since the car was under three years old the checkbox for valid MOT is marked as (x) while checkboxes for other things are marked Checked (correct mark).

.....and.....

gravemind

An X on a Mot gives me a point as it shows I pointed out to the buyer about lack of Mot. Since the Buyer wants to play this game I can say that the Buyer was not interested in the roadworthyness of the vehicle at the point at the time of sale.

bod1467

Retrogamer wrote: »

As already mentioned it wouldn't matter.
It's a criminal offense to sell an roadworthy car, but common sense dictates if a card is sold as spares or repairs then the police wouldn't prosecute for it.

As it's a criminal offense and rarely used, it's very unlikely to have any bearing oan civil dispute.

Please not this discussion again! :eek:

OP - you could always refer the buyer to Arkell v Pressdram

Foxy-Stoat_3

gravemind wrote: »

An X on a Mot gives me a point as it shows I pointed out to the buyer about lack of Mot. Since the Buyer wants to play this game I can say that the Buyer was not interested in the roadworthyness of the vehicle at the point at the time of sale.

A reasonable person is expected to know that a car of less than 3 years does not require an MOT.

Doesn't matter at this stage though as you have not received court papers. I suggest you park this until you do.

Keep us updated though.

gravemind

General Information:

Body style: Hatchback

Engine type: diesel

Transmission: manual

Engine number: Obscured

Vehicle identification number: xxxxxxxxxx

Mileage readings:

Start of inspection: 23264 miles

End of inspection: 23264 miles

Lighting: Good

Weather: Good

Ramp available: No

Assistance available: No

Service history: No service history seen

Assignment Brief / Background Info:

Customer bought the vehicle last week and has since noticed that the front wheels aremisaligned. He has taken the vehicle to two garages who both said they think the vehicle is not roadworthy.

The customer would like the engineer to inspect the front axle and suspension and report accordingly.

Observations:

On arrival at the pre-arranged inspection address, the engineer made himself known to the client, who in turn escorted the engineer to the vehicle, which was parked, off road, outside his home address.

01: - Damage and bare metal edge right rear wing/rear bumper.

02: - Door gaps on right side all different.

03: - Damage right & left front door hinges.

04: - Locking wheel nut missing from Right front wheel (no wheel stud at all).

05: - Right front wing poorly fitting and aligned, in contact with bonnet, also bowed

06: - Bonnet poorly aligned.

07: - Left front wing poorly aligned

08: - Damage to right inner wing

09: - Damage right front chassis leg.

10: - Front panel poorly aligned, in the worn position.

11: - Front bumper poorly aligned

12: - Broken wiring clips front.

13: - Engine sub frame twisted/distorted at right side.

14: - Adverse tyre wear, consistent with incorrect castor/camber angles.

14: - Right front wheel back, incorrect castor/camber and wheel base.

15: - Front end not square to vehicle

16: - Incorrect panel gaps down left side.

17: - Illegal number plate on front bumper

18: - The horn wasn't working.

Conclusion / Opinion:

It is the engineer’s opinion, based on evidence written, reported and observed during the examination of the vehicle 'Body & Mechanical' components as presented, mindful that no dismantling has been undertaken. The evidence is, the identified vehicle’s bodywork and paintwork has undergone repairs and refurbishment in the past. This has included the apparent replacement of some body panels and trims, with the repair and repainting of other body panels. In general this work has been carried out to a very poor standard and in the opinion of the engineer will almost certainly deteriorate if left as is. That said, the completed repairs themselves will need remedial attention incomplete in the near future, which will require remedial work and could prove costly.

Please note that comment cannot be made as to the condition of the bodywork underneath the repaired and repainted areas and there is always the possibility that corrosion may appear in these repaired/repainted areas at the adjoining body seams and/or from trim fitting areas at a later date.

Having examined the identified vehicle, the engineer’s conclusion is that it is a dangerous and unroadworthy.

There are serious questions to be answered over the vehicles body and mechanical component alignment.

Furthermore there is a securing stud missing from the right front wheel, rendering it insecure.

In conclusion, the examined vehicle is not 'fit for purpose' and without further expensive repairs

is unlikely to be in the future either.

It is strongly advised that you contact the vendor and formally reject the vehicle and seek a return of your money.

I suggest this option, because to repair will be a lengthy and costly repair and unless done properly you will have continued problems with steering suspension, especially excessive tyre wear.

The examining engineer has not carried out a vehicle condition report with 'Experian', or similar form, so is unable to establish whether this vehicle has been written off or not.

You will need to satisfy yourself in this respect. The engineer can confirm, that the vehicle has been in a road traffic accident, sustaining a moderately sever impact to the front. This impact has compromised the structural integrity, which is still the case now.

Please note there are other images which will follow in a separate email.


That's the report by Dekra Engineer. The number plate is deemed illegal as three letters have become fainter in colour. But this was the same when I advertised the vehicle.

BeenThroughItAll

gravemind wrote: »

General Information:

Body style: Hatchback

Engine type: diesel

Transmission: manual

Engine number: Obscured

Vehicle identification number: xxxxxxxxxx

Mileage readings:

Start of inspection: 23264 miles

End of inspection: 23264 miles

Lighting: Good

Weather: Good

Ramp available: No

Assistance available: No

Service history: No service history seen

Assignment Brief / Background Info:

Customer bought the vehicle last week and has since noticed that the front wheels aremisaligned. He has taken the vehicle to two garages who both said they think the vehicle is not roadworthy.

The customer would like the engineer to inspect the front axle and suspension and report accordingly.

Observations:

On arrival at the pre-arranged inspection address, the engineer made himself known to the client, who in turn escorted the engineer to the vehicle, which was parked, off road, outside his home address.

01: - Damage and bare metal edge right rear wing/rear bumper.

02: - Door gaps on right side all different.

03: - Damage right & left front door hinges.

04: - Locking wheel nut missing from Right front wheel (no wheel stud at all).

05: - Right front wing poorly fitting and aligned, in contact with bonnet, also bowed

06: - Bonnet poorly aligned.

07: - Left front wing poorly aligned

08: - Damage to right inner wing

09: - Damage right front chassis leg.

10: - Front panel poorly aligned, in the worn position.

11: - Front bumper poorly aligned

12: - Broken wiring clips front.

13: - Engine sub frame twisted/distorted at right side.

14: - Adverse tyre wear, consistent with incorrect castor/camber angles.

14: - Right front wheel back, incorrect castor/camber and wheel base.

15: - Front end not square to vehicle

16: - Incorrect panel gaps down left side.

17: - Illegal number plate on front bumper

18: - The horn wasn't working.

Conclusion / Opinion:

It is the engineer’s opinion, based on evidence written, reported and observed during the examination of the vehicle 'Body & Mechanical' components as presented, mindful that no dismantling has been undertaken. The evidence is, the identified vehicle’s bodywork and paintwork has undergone repairs and refurbishment in the past. This has included the apparent replacement of some body panels and trims, with the repair and repainting of other body panels. In general this work has been carried out to a very poor standard and in the opinion of the engineer will almost certainly deteriorate if left as is. That said, the completed repairs themselves will need remedial attention incomplete in the near future, which will require remedial work and could prove costly.

Please note that comment cannot be made as to the condition of the bodywork underneath the repaired and repainted areas and there is always the possibility that corrosion may appear in these repaired/repainted areas at the adjoining body seams and/or from trim fitting areas at a later date.

Having examined the identified vehicle, the engineer’s conclusion is that it is a dangerous and unroadworthy.

There are serious questions to be answered over the vehicles body and mechanical component alignment.

Furthermore there is a securing stud missing from the right front wheel, rendering it insecure.

In conclusion, the examined vehicle is not 'fit for purpose' and without further expensive repairs

is unlikely to be in the future either.

It is strongly advised that you contact the vendor and formally reject the vehicle and seek a return of your money.

I suggest this option, because to repair will be a lengthy and costly repair and unless done properly you will have continued problems with steering suspension, especially excessive tyre wear.

The examining engineer has not carried out a vehicle condition report with 'Experian', or similar form, so is unable to establish whether this vehicle has been written off or not.

You will need to satisfy yourself in this respect. The engineer can confirm, that the vehicle has been in a road traffic accident, sustaining a moderately sever impact to the front. This impact has compromised the structural integrity, which is still the case now.

Please note there are other images which will follow in a separate email.

Who was the engineer and what are his credentials? Are they from a reputable inspection company or is this a self-styled 'engineer' from the buyer's mate's garage?


I could have written that report myself, as could many others on this forum.


Unless you're not being completely honest with us about the car you sold, I find it hard to believe even the most myopic car purchaser wouldn't have noticed many of those problems and walked away from the vehicle.