Second hand car purchase problem

tinmice

I'll post the full add up tomorrow once I know what is wrong with the car, in case I'm barking up the wrong tree completely.

However, the gist of it is: 'new roof, very good history, drives well, few marks around the body, hence price' and highlights the short MOT. Other than that it is very generic, as I said I'll put the ad up once I know if something is wrong or not.

Seems to be some fairly contrasting opinions, regardless of whether or not anything is wrong, it seems like you shouldn't advertise something as 'drives well' and then add 'sold for scrap or spares' at the last possible second to a transaction.

AdrianC

Noise apart, does it drive well?

I've certainly had cars that drove well that were ripe for scrapping, though.

s_b

more likely the diff rather than gearbox
if trader gave you mot then he cant argue its spares or repairs as he has to rip this up prior to sale
he also has to see you are a trader eg motor trade policy if he is to deny you consumer rights
i personally would take car back if its making noises and going to cost a bomb to fix

bigjl

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

Three Jan 2016 registered posters, one after the other, in one thread.


Who'd have thought it.

Seems that has happened before.....

An 2000 MX5 for "around" a £1000 is always going to be a nail.

I wonder if the rear brakes are connected?

I await a link to the advert......

arcon5

motorguy wrote: »

Yes - quite damning against the seller. You CANNOT use terms like "sold as seen", "sold for spares spares or repairs", etc to try to evade your legal responsibilities - which seems to be what has happened here - unless of course you're saying the O/P is lying?

The O/P say the advert and description of the car, went and had a test drive, and only at the very last minute the seller stuck what they did on the invoice.

The fact that the seller was quite happy for the car to be driven away, not trailered also speaks volumes.

This is a massive no no in the eyes of any court.[/QUITE]
well haven't you completely missed the point! Being in brief the seller will likely claim to have sold a vehicle as spares which is perfectly legal.

motorguy

arcon5 wrote: »

well haven't you completely missed the point! Being in brief the seller will likely claim to have sold a vehicle as spares which is perfectly legal.

And you have missed mine and everbody elses - a seller cant use wording like "sold as seen" or "for spares and repairs" on an invoice for a car that they have clearly sold as a functioning car as a way of avoiding their responsibilities under the Consumer Act.

The O/P has a copy of the advert and clearly believes they were buying a functioning, running car.

Selling as spares is perfectly legal, yes. However not if one party is unaware that was the sales terms, and supported by the fact the buyer has a copy of the advert and happily drove the car away.

motorguy

bigjl wrote: »

Seems that has happened before.....

An 2000 MX5 for "around" a £1000 is always going to be a nail.

I wonder if the rear brakes are connected?

I await a link to the advert......

Seems like the going rate for one?

https://www.gumtree.com/search?search_category=all&q=2000+mx5&tq=%7B%22i%22%3A%222000+mx5%22%2C%22s%22%3A%222000+mx5%22%2C%22p%22%3A0%2C%22t%22%3A3%7D&search_location=BT617QT

motorguy

The correct way to have sold the car with a known and published fault would have been to declare it on the invoice - "it has been noted that this car has a gearbox fault which the buyer acknowledges and this will need to be investigated and resolved at the buyers expense". And get the buyer to initial that as well as sign the invoice.

"sold as spares or repairs" is not some global "get out of jail free" card for unscrupulous traders.

BeenThroughItAll

motorguy wrote: »

Seems like the going rate for one?

https://www.gumtree.com/search?search_category=all&q=2000+mx5&tq=%7B%22i%22%3A%222000+mx5%22%2C%22s%22%3A%222000+mx5%22%2C%22p%22%3A0%2C%22t%22%3A3%7D&search_location=BT617QT

I was going to say that. A grand for a 2000 MX5 isn't in 'complete knacker' territory by a long chalk. A shed of one will sell for £500-800 or less for parts. A really good one could be well over a grand.


If it's genuinely not rusty, then it's probably slightly underpriced; a rot-free 2000 model will be pretty sought after in some quarters, as it'd make an excellent track car, race car, or indeed just a very nice, back-to-basics Sunday toy - which could well mean the seller was well aware of a problem.


If the diff or gearbox are knackered, they're easy and not expensive to swap. I bought a 6 speed box and LSD as part of a conversion on a 1.8 Mk1 one my wife owned for less than £300.

motorguy

+1

I've had several MX5s that i bought for around £1000 or less.

Whilst none were perfect they certainly werent scrap either.

Best one was a 1989 Jap import Eunos 1.6. From the chassis number it was one of the first batch made of the first run in Japan in Sept 1989 for the japanese domestic market - subsequently imported to the UK. I gave £700 for that one. Needed a respray as the paint was flat and neglected but no rust and ran perfectly.