Ebay Sale

John1282

AdrianC wrote: »

My point is not about the wording of the advert. My point is about the legality of you selling an unroadworthy car without ensuring it was not driven away. The Road Traffic Act does not apply to broken vases.

You cannot claim compensation for an inability to continue to do something that was unlawful anyway.

But legally it could of be driven away in the days before the mot expired if the buyer had arranged tax & insurance. I had not hidden any facts, or tried to claim the vehicle was in any way shape or form in better condition that it was.

AdrianC

John1282 wrote: »

But legally it could of be driven away in the days before the mot expired if the buyer had arranged tax & insurance.

For the 734th time, NOT IF IT WAS UNROADWORTHY.

And it wasn't roadworthy - not with excessively worn suspension, and emissions above the MOT limit...

forgotmyname

John1282 wrote: »

I hear what you are saying, but if i advertise a vase on ebay and say it it broken and in pieces, and someone buys it, they can't then complain that it is broken as it was presented as advertised. The car was fully described warts and all, and I put my number on the add inviting people to call me before they placed an offer if they had any questions. When the chap bought the car, as far as I am concerned he bought having read the advert in full and being fully aware of the faults. Legally, if he had insured and taxed it he could have driven it away, or as previously stated he could have booked a transporter. If I had not stated things in the advert, or made claims that were untrue, your argument would be valid but the car was accurately described, the same way many cars similar to this are sold each day.

Have you ever sold anything on ebay before? Check the ebay threads on here. Happens a lot. A seller lists a faulty item and someone buys it thinking they can fix it cheaply. When they cannot they simply open a dispite and return it.

We only have your word that the vehicle was exactly as described. The potential buyer will have a different story. How can you prove you were right and they were wrong? You have already said it failed an MOT and that would go a BIG way towards convincing someone that your story is the one not to be that accurate.

If i pickup your phone and make a hoax threat are you liable and will you be going to prison for it? Dont be silly.
So a shared ebay account is the same. Whether he knew or not makes no difference they can just say it wasnt them.
Can you prove the person your taking to court actually made the offer?

John1282

AdrianC wrote: »

For the 734th time, NOT IF IT WAS UNROADWORTHY.

And it wasn't roadworthy - not with excessively worn suspension, and emissions above the MOT limit...

And for the 834565th time, IF I had misled the buyer and not fully disclosed the state of the vehicle (ie... not told them about the mot test fail),but instead said the car was fine and dandy then yes I would be breaking the law.

But because I fully detailed the car, and that the car had an existing mot, and what the failure sheet stated, the buyer then had the choice whether to drive the car or have it transported. If I chose to drive the car I too took the decision as too whether I felt it was road worthy. The definition of road worthyness is a difficult one, your section 75 states brakes, steering, gears tyres, construction... none of these were listed on the mot sheet.

AdrianC

No, sorry. Look at that legislation.

(6)A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section in respect of the supply or alteration of a motor vehicle or trailer if he proves—
...
(b)that he had reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle or trailer would not be used on a road in Great Britain, or would not be so used until it had been put into a condition in which it might lawfully be so used

If you let him drive it away, YOU are guilty of an offence.

Herzlos

John1282 wrote: »

And for the 834565th time, IF I had misled the buyer and not fully disclosed the state of the vehicle (ie... not told them about the mot test fail),but instead said the car was fine and dandy then yes I would be breaking the law.

Nope. The roadworthy state of the vehicle has nothing to do with how it was described. It wasn't roadworthy (or it wouldn't have failed the MOT - I bet the garage told you it was "safe enough to drive" which isn't the same thing), and even though you stated that it still doesn't absolve your responsibility.

That it needs £300 in parts and £700 in labour to pass the MOT reinforces that; if you were confidence the car was good, you'd have done the work and sold it for £1000+ more with a fresh MOT.

If you were selling it as spares and repairs to be trailered away (like you're implying), then it having an MOT or not is irrelevant. You'd still be liable if they decided to drive it away.


Back onto topic a bit - you can prove losses, but you've got pretty low odds of seeing any money back from this. I'd just give up and stop wasting time/money on it.

I've had buyers commit to something and then go silent, it just happens, no point wasting any more effort on it.

John1282

What measure is applied to deem a car unroad worthy? Whilst the car failed an early mot it was still covered by the existing mot. The cars brakes, steering, gears, tyres & construction were not in doubt and did not fail. The bulk cost of the repairs were for replacing and welding the outer sills, which do not form part of the sturcture of the car, however as they cover the inner sills they are technically classed as an mot failure. I didn't get the work done myself as the cost of the repairs would have been around £1000, the car would then have expected to sell for around £2500. I sold it eventually for £950 so if I'd have had the repairs done, then kept it taxed and insured as it was parked on the street, I wouldn't have made much more out of it but it would have elongated the process.

I originally put this post up to simply see if anyone else had gone through with a legal challenge against a wayward ebay buyer. I have no doubts or reservations about how the car was sold despite trolls on here claiming to know about road traffic laws.

AndyMc.....

John1282 wrote: »

What measure is applied to deem a car unroad worthy? Whilst the car failed an early mot it was still covered by the existing mot. The cars brakes, steering, gears, tyres & construction were not in doubt and did not fail. The bulk cost of the repairs were for replacing and welding the outer sills, which do not form part of the sturcture of the car, however as they cover the inner sills they are technically classed as an mot failure. I didn't get the work done myself as the cost of the repairs would have been around £1000, the car would then have expected to sell for around £2500. I sold it eventually for £950 so if I'd have had the repairs done, then kept it taxed and insured as it was parked on the street, I wouldn't have made much more out of it but it would have elongated the process.

I originally put this post up to simply see if anyone else had gone through with a legal challenge against a wayward ebay buyer. I have no doubts or reservations about how the car was sold despite trolls on here claiming to know about road traffic laws.

I wouldn't waste anymore time or money pursuing the non payment.

AdrianC

John1282 wrote: »

The bulk cost of the repairs were for replacing and welding the outer sills, which do not form part of the sturcture of the car, however as they cover the inner sills they are technically classed as an mot failure.

<raises eyebrows>
Can you just let us know what car you're talking about, as having non-structural outer sills would be very, VERY unusual...? And, if they really WERE non-structural, then they should not have been a fail.

paddyandstumpy

This is turning into the driving under the red x's thread. OP is wrong but can't admit it or see the wood for the trees.

Good luck to the OP if he wants to throw more money after this. He won't succeed buts he's been warned as much.

OP, perhaps start a class action with the bloke who sold a fiver on eBay for £66k, that buyer never paid up either.