"sold" car to motor trade - cheque bounced

Car_54

Jazzking wrote: »

Hi all,

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I'm aware that as no money has exchanged that I am still the "owner" of the vehicle and rightfully *could* take it back, get the V5 transferred back into my name and then go through the hassle of trying to sell it again - notwithstanding the fact he is now stating it has a broken gearbox.

I'm pleased to see that the general consensus is that though there was an intention to pay, hence issuing the cheque and therefore the contract has been formed, is that correct and legally I could pursue this through the small claims? I issued no receipt as a private individual selling to a motor trader which, in hindsight I should have done (car sold as seen, no warranty provided or implied etc etc) but figured as a trader and the fact he signed and provided me with the yellow slip of the V5 that would suffice.

I've not followed this back up with the trader yet as I wanted to know where I stand, but if I go back now and he tries to give me the keys back do I just refuse?

Happy to go down the small claims route, the company is a limited company and the last companies house return shows they have funds so could get it back but it's a lot of hassle for a grand. Having said that, if I take back a car that now has a broken gearbox, I'd be lucky to get a few hundred quid for it.
What a mess.

You have a contract: although not in writing, the fact that you handed over a car in return for a cheque is evidence of its existence.

There is not "a lot of hassle" in raising a small County Court claim, I've done it. You simply fill in a form online and pay a small fee.

custardy

I would be wanting the payment agreed.
Im surprised so many want to get the car back/renegotiate.
Price was agreed and deal done.
Cash or court for me.

arcon5

Problem with court is it takes time and if they do this regularly they will easily get out of not paying.

Its not as simple as they haven't been paid so cars still yours either.

loskie

he may have broken the gearbox or swapped your good one for a duff one. As a trader the court will view him to be knowledgeable about so knew the risks with buying, as a layman you are not expected to know this. He is entirely in the wrong.

Jazzking

So, spoke to the garage again and he is telling me that I knew about the gearbox fault, which is why I sold it and that he's paid to have it diagnosed and it's clear there is a fault there.
When he found there was a fault he cancelled the cheque as he's got "enough headaches to deal with". Apparently tried to call me at the start of the week but I don't have any record of that.

Car is ready and waiting for me to pick up :rotfl:

Clearly I'm not keen on going to pick up a broken car that he decides he doesn't want to deal with after he drove it and it was fine and now apparently has a gearbox fault.

Do I need to send a letter before action or can I just put all the details into the money claim online?

Car_54

Jazzking wrote: »

Do I need to send a letter before action or can I just put all the details into the money claim online?

Yes. See https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/taking-legal-action/small-claims/going-to-court/taking-court-action/step-one-write-a-letter-before-action/

You can find sample letters online also.

custardy

Sold as seen guv'na

unholyangel

Jazzking wrote: »

I'm pleased to see that the general consensus is that though there was an intention to pay, hence issuing the cheque and therefore the contract has been formed, is that correct and legally I could pursue this through the small claims? I issued no receipt as a private individual selling to a motor trader which, in hindsight I should have done (car sold as seen, no warranty provided or implied etc etc) but figured as a trader and the fact he signed and provided me with the yellow slip of the V5 that would suffice.

Thats not really required. The default position of the law as a private seller is that there is no warranty etc, the only thing thats required is that they match their description and you can pass good title. Theres not really a point to providing such a statement when its the ordinary position of the law anyway.

As I said above, businesses are held to a different standard. They're expected to do due diligence and know the potential pitfalls. The time for him to have the car checked was before agreeing to buy it.