Car deal changed but dealer won't return deposit

arcon5

motorguy wrote: »

Ignore Arcon5s comment. Its nonsense.

That is your opinion.... nothing more.

facade

I would have thought that this was "innocent misrepresentation" on the part of the OP. Under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, Chapter 7 section 2(2) then the dealer is entitled to recompense for any loss he has suffered.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7

Whether preparing a car for sale is a loss, when he would have incurred those costs anyway when he sells it to someone else would be up to a court I suppose.

LM9

s_b wrote: »

i would suggest you ring trading standards in the morning who will put you through to citizens advice who will confirm the trader is in his rights to reject the deal and charge all reasonable expenses as the p/x was mis described

Surely there are no reasonable expenses incurred?

He would have had to make the car saleable anyway and any pre-emptive registering etc. are just plain stupid and so not reasonable.

Marktheshark

There was no misrepresentation's
The OP took a car, the dealer valued it, the dealer made a very basic mistake in his valuation by not running a standard check on the car.
A private individual is not the expert here, the dealer is and as running such a check would effect any valuation the diligence to do so is the dealers.

Most dealers can buy a basic check for £1.50

motorguy

s_b wrote: »

i would suggest you ring trading standards in the morning who will put you through to citizens advice who will confirm the trader is in his rights to reject the deal and charge all reasonable expenses as the p/x was mis described

I suggest YOU do.

The buyer didnt do his due diligence and now wants to change the terms of the deal.

The O/P is under no obligation whatsoever to accept the revised deal.

motorguy

arcon5 wrote: »

That is your opinion.... nothing more.

Its FACT.

What you put was wholly inaccurate.

If you sell me, as a trader a car which has a major fault or was a write off, and i subsequently find out, i have no recompense against you - in law i am deemed to be the expert and should have know.

If i as the dealer innocently sell that car on to a customer without ever knowing about the fault or history, and the customer subsequently finds out, then that customer as recompense against ME as the trader.

THATS FACT. You might think that sounds unfair but thats how the law views a motor trader - as an expect who should know.

Further, the O/P DIDNT misrepresent the car.

bod1467

s_b wrote: »

your advice is bad

Your understanding of the law is flawed .. the advice was correct.

burlington6

I think the op knew it was a cat d and thought he could pull a fast one.

Nobody is as dishonest as the great British public

motorguy

facade wrote: »

I would have thought that this was "innocent misrepresentation" on the part of the OP. Under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, Chapter 7 section 2(2) then the dealer is entitled to recompense for any loss he has suffered.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7

Whether preparing a car for sale is a loss, when he would have incurred those costs anyway when he sells it to someone else would be up to a court I suppose.

Doesnt apply.

Read this similar example, with a response from a barrister specialising in consumer law.

http://www.justanswer.com/uk-law/7ehxo-legal-trade-car-engine-fault-without.html#re.v/459/

When trading in... "If you are a private seller then you are entitled to sell a vehicle in any condition as long as you do not either make any false or misleading statement about its condition or sell on an unroadworthy car."

Joe_Horner

s_b wrote: »

your advice is bad

Care to explain why exactly?