Private car seller misrepresented car

Gmrides

Purchased a used Mini Cooper from a private car seller who in his eBay advert specified "NO oil leaks"

2 days later I took it to an official Mini repair centre for a free health check where they discovered that the car had two major oil leaks, one from the engine and one from a power assisted steering pipe.

I contacted the seller to request that he either take the car back or pay towards the cost of oil leak repairs, both of which he declined. I suggested that he was in breach of the 1967 Misrepresentation Act and that I would be taking him to small claims court for a resolution, which I'll be initiating soon. My case appears strong as I have copies of the eBay advert which I'll be using as evidence.

I'd quite like to keep the car once repaired but am not sure if having the car repaired before the court case (where I'd then be claiming back the cost of repairs plus court fees) would harm my case or not. Could anyone please shed some light on this?

Many thanks

Hasbeen

Gmrides wrote: »

Purchased a used Mini Cooper from a private car seller who in his eBay advert specified "NO oil leaks"

2 days later I took it to an official Mini repair centre for a free health check where they discovered that the car had two major oil leaks, one from the engine and one from a power assisted steering pipe.

I contacted the seller to request that he either take the car back or pay towards the cost of oil leak repairs, both of which he declined. I suggested that he was in breach of the 1967 Misrepresentation Act and that I would be taking him to small claims court for a resolution, which I'll be initiating soon. My case appears strong as I have copies of the eBay advert which I'll be using as evidence.

I'd quite like to keep the car once repaired but am not sure if having the car repaired before the court case (where I'd then be claiming back the cost of repairs plus court fees) would harm my case or not. Could anyone please shed some light on this?

Many thanks

And the purpose of your campaign is? LOL. Seriously you might get more responses posting in the motoring section?:) I would not repair until court case?

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967

Gmrides

Purpose is justice.

I believe the Misrepresentation Act applies here.

foxy-stoat

Good luck and do report back with results.

I believe the act would apply if you bought an Austin Mini and he advertised it as a BMW Mini. The issue you will have is would a reasonable person know this had an oil leak or 2 - you didnt know when you looked at it with a view to buying it - the seller (if private) may not of known.

Norman_Castle

Hasbeen wrote: »

And the purpose of your campaign is? LOL. Seriously you might get more responses posting in the motoring section?:) I would not repair until court case?

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967

Should be in the consumer rights section.

pogofish

Gmrides wrote: »

Purpose is justice.

I believe the Misrepresentation Act applies here.

But what MSE campaign does this relate to..?

tacpot12

Information in the link below suggests that if you continue to use the car, or have it repaired, you will have affirmed the contract and cannot expect a court to make an order to unwind it.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967


In light of this, you are best to stop using the car, and get the claim in asap.

Geodark

Gmrides wrote: »

Purchased a used Mini Cooper from a private car seller who in his eBay advert specified "NO oil leaks"

2 days later I took it to an official Mini repair centre for a free health check where they discovered that the car had two major oil leaks, one from the engine and one from a power assisted steering pipe.

I contacted the seller to request that he either take the car back or pay towards the cost of oil leak repairs, both of which he declined. I suggested that he was in breach of the 1967 Misrepresentation Act and that I would be taking him to small claims court for a resolution, which I'll be initiating soon. My case appears strong as I have copies of the eBay advert which I'll be using as evidence.

I'd quite like to keep the car once repaired but am not sure if having the car repaired before the court case (where I'd then be claiming back the cost of repairs plus court fees) would harm my case or not. Could anyone please shed some light on this?

Many thanks

what exactly do you want? Do you want the difference? it would be hard to prove they knew unless it was dripping or down as and advisory

Gavin83

Gmrides wrote: »

Purchased a used Mini Cooper from a private car seller who in his eBay advert specified "NO oil leaks"

2 days later I took it to an official Mini repair centre for a free health check where they discovered that the car had two major oil leaks, one from the engine and one from a power assisted steering pipe.

I contacted the seller to request that he either take the car back or pay towards the cost of oil leak repairs, both of which he declined. I suggested that he was in breach of the 1967 Misrepresentation Act and that I would be taking him to small claims court for a resolution, which I'll be initiating soon. My case appears strong as I have copies of the eBay advert which I'll be using as evidence.

I'd quite like to keep the car once repaired but am not sure if having the car repaired before the court case (where I'd then be claiming back the cost of repairs plus court fees) would harm my case or not. Could anyone please shed some light on this?

Many thanks

OP are these cars prone to oil leaks?

If he's specifically advertised it as having no oil leaks and it does then you've got a strong case here. I too would suggest not using the car from now on and I certainly wouldn't get it repaired before the court case.

DoaM

Geodark wrote: »

what exactly do you want? Do you want the difference? it would be hard to prove they knew unless it was dripping or down as and advisory

Indeed. Which is why it's important to determine if they were really a private seller, or actually a driveway dealer.

Business sellers have a greater duty of care and expectation of knowledge, so would be expected to know about such faults; private sellers must only have good title to the goods (in order to sell them), and the goods must match the description (which is a grey area if someone inspects the goods prior to purchase - most face-face sales fall into this category).

marcarm

Does the fact the seller said "NO OIL LEAKS" not make a difference?

If my seller said that, I would take it as meant that there are no oil leaks. They should not make that claim unless they were 100% certain.

The goods must correspond with the description, so a description that says no oil leaks must be accurate.

Just playing devils advocate here, I would be saying buyer beware if the description was vague, but I think the fact they put there were no leaks I think opens them up to be liable. If he couldn't PROVE the car had no leaks, then they should have left it off the description IMO

The problem is of course, proving when the oil started leaking.