self declared idiot seeks redress

m0bov

1 year old with warranty and your trying to fix it yourself???

AdrianC

m0bov wrote: »

1 year old with warranty and your trying to fix it yourself???

Badly-repaired collision damage will not be covered by any warranty.

wgl2014

AdrianC wrote: »

HPI won't show anything relating to any collision unless the insurance wrote the car off, which is unlikely for relatively minor damage on a near-new car.


What's far more likely is that the previous owner never claimed, and just got it kicked straight as cheaply as possible.

Agreed but for the sake of a few quid I would still check to be certain.

waamo

Many solicitors offer a free half hour to see if you have a case. Why not see if there is one near you?

You can look one up here https://www.lawworks.org.uk/legal-advice-individuals/find-legal-advice-clinic-near-you

debtdebt

Many solicitors won!!!8217;t want to touch this Case with a barge pole.

waamo

debtdebt wrote: »

Many solicitors won!!!8217;t want to touch this Case with a barge pole.

Indeed but it doesn't hurt to get a professional opinion.

Nobbie1967

Get a quote to put the car back into 'excellent' condition and assuming this is below £10k, pursue through small claims tract. Try googling the seller's number to see if they have other cars for sale which would indicate they were a trader which would give you more options for redress.

walwyn1978

How much did you pay? Book value, well below book value? If the second he could argue that the cheap price reflected the issues with the car.

akathatman

Thank you to everyone for their constructive comments.
The damage was identified as being quite extensive, the suspension strut had been forced through the inner wing, an alloy engine mount split in two, shut lines on the body panels out of true, adaptive cruise control components missing from behind the frontt bumper. The repair shop thought it likely that the the chassis would be found to be deformed after performing a geometry test, booked in for next week.

So I'm overjoyed that today the Seller has agreed to take the car back or pay for repairs. It looks now as though he bought it for himself, discovered the damage and was trying to dump it on someone else and recover his investment relying on the "sold as seen'' get out clause to avoid redress. Had he not used the word excellent I wouldn't have had sufficient grounds to make a case as the Seller is only required to be accurate in descriptions. The Consumer Protection help line were very helpful in providing a template letter to send to the Seller and Citizens Advice extremely kind. For anyone else who finds themselves in this situation the advice I've been given at this point suggests that people buying from private Sellers do have a right to redress under the mis-selling clause in the Consumer Goods Act and faults which could not be discovered without partially dismantling an item (in this case removing a wheel) shouldn't allow the Seller to invoke Sold as Seen as it would be deemed unreasonable. Equally a Seller is under no obligation to make any faults known to the buyer unless directly questioned. It would seem that verbal evasions are permitted.

This area of conflict seems to touch a nerve with certain people and it's obvious that some legitimate sellers on the forum have suffered from unscrupulous buyers trying to pull a fast one, they have my sympathy too.

Arklight

That!!!8217;s good news OP. I think I would want the refund. If it only had one owner I don!!!8217;t really understand how the seller acquired it pre-damaged. Wasn!!!8217;t he the only owner?

You do have to be careful how you word things in private sales. Even throwaway terms like, !!!8220;Good runner!!!8221; can get you into trouble.