Purchased a car not disclosed it was a London Taxi...

JGB1955

We own a Ford Galaxy (63 plate).  My husband was a PHV owner/driver until 15 months ago.  The car has 260K miles on the clock - it's been MOT'd annually (from new) and serviced every 12K miles or so.  When your vehicle is your means of earning money, you don't cut corners.  If the OP is happy with the vehicle, I have no idea what he expects to get now.  What he probably DOES have is a well-maintained vehicle, at a price he was happy to pay.

hogspudding

2021BJ said:

hogspudding said:

noitsnotme said:

hogspudding said:

Sandtree said:

photome said:

neilmcl said:

photome said:

neilmcl said:

photome said:

neilmcl said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Hello all we purchased a used Mercedes from a reputable local garage back in Feb 2020 for £29500. We paid the market retail value for the car, we have just found out if was previous used as a Taxi for transport for London. The retailers advert didn't state it was an ex taxi, neither were we told at any point it was a taxi. I understand ex taxis are worth considerably less on the market than a standard used vehicle and feel we have been mislead and overcharged by quite a considerable amount.....

We are very happy with the car and have not approached the retailer as yet. I'm asking for your advice and thoughts on the best way to approach the garage regarding the matter and whether there any recourse.... TIA 

The garage was under no obligation to tell you it was a taxi.  As long as they didn't mislead you by telling you things about the car that were untrue, or withheld information you asked for, you have no comeback.  If you were happy to pay the price you paid and the advert was accurate, you weren't overcharged.  

It's entirely possible that in its previous guise as a TfL taxi, it's been looked after and maintained better than it would have been by a private owner.

Actually, not disclosing it was a taxi would be classed as misleading by omission.

I found this quote from an  article in 2019

Most dealers will probably not say anything – and in the UK there is  anyway.

have things changed or is the article wrong

Where does that article state there is "no legal requirement to inform the buyer" of material facts. The law hasn't changed, it's covered by The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as highlighted in that very article.

That sentence is from the article I found which then links to the article you read which states

Under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, dealers must not misrepresent goods or include false details in advertisements.
It doesnt specifically say that a seller has to disclose that the car was previously used as a taxi, of course if the OP asked any questions about previous owners or uses that would be different

I suggest you Google "misleading omissions".

If you are correct and the seller should have told the OP ,( of course the OP agrees with you) what does the OP do now after 12 months?

And how do they actually prove garage knew the vehicle was a licensed taxi "for" TFL? 

All they have said so far is they have deduced it was a taxi by the fact some MOTs were done 6 months apart. Given the other facts I would argue its more likely a minicab than a taxi and would really want to know how many were done 6 months apart... if its just on extra MOT there could be other explanations... I've done an early MOT on a car to sell it in the past as the buyer was offering above what I thought it was worth but would only do so with a full 12 months MOT left .

I have since checked with Motorcheck and Vehicle Ancestry, both have confirmed it was a taxi registered for TFL. These are checks the retailer should of carried out in their due diligence.

Presumably you could have also performed those checks prior to purchasing.  I guess hindsight is a wonderful thing, as they say 🤷‍♂️

No..... You trust the retailer. The CRA 2015 protects all consumers. When you buy range eggs from Tesco, you expect Tesco to ensure the egg is free range. If it wasn't free range what would you think or do ? 

If you buy a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and find out its actually PVC what would you do, how would you feel ? You'd justifiably ripped off......

Yeah, I may feel like that, but you've still not said what you want.  You've said you're happy with the car, but you're obviously not or you wouldn't have spent 7 pages arguing about it.

So what do you want the dealer to do about it?

Evening, my OP was asking you all for your thoughts..   

hogspudding

Sandtree said:

hogspudding said:

No..... You trust the retailer. The CRA 2015 protects all consumers. When you buy range eggs from Tesco, you expect Tesco to ensure the egg is free range. If it wasn't free range what would you think or do ? 

If you buy a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and find out its actually PVC what would you do, how would you feel ? You'd justifiably ripped off......

But you bought a Mercedes S class, or whatever it is, and you got a Mercedes S class.

A better analogy would be that you bought a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and assumed it was stuffed with goose feathers but a year down the line you discover its actually duck feathers. At no point did JL state what the filling was at all and nor did you ask but duck feathers are much cheaper than goose feathers so you want a refund.

All posts about taxis being cheaper state 3 reasons:
1) High Mileage
2) High levels of minor damage
3) Clocking

Issues one and two are silly because if the car has 50,000 miles on the clock you pay less than if its 20,000 irrespective of if those miles were done by a taxi driver or a travelling saleman etc.

Issue three is a matter of fraud and is irrespective of if it was a taxi or not. With modern cars like a Merc I don't even know how practical clocking them is, I know (wont say how) that with my Dad's old Ford Sierra just unplugging the speedo stopped the mileage but I doubt thats still the case given instrument panels tend to be digital and the service alerts are mileage driven. 

I can understand hire, police and company cars being less valuable because people thrash them. Its not their car, they dont deal with the maintenance and so don't respect them. If your driving an Uber Exec or Uber Lux you own the car, your passengers don't want a F1 experience from the back seat and if you want to get the bigger money through chauffer work then the car needs to be in great nick. 

You like the car, you didnt spot its status when buying it and the chances are if you own it for a few years nor will the person you sell it on to. 

Google taxi mileage blockers

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

Sandtree said:

hogspudding said:

No..... You trust the retailer. The CRA 2015 protects all consumers. When you buy range eggs from Tesco, you expect Tesco to ensure the egg is free range. If it wasn't free range what would you think or do ? 

If you buy a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and find out its actually PVC what would you do, how would you feel ? You'd justifiably ripped off......

But you bought a Mercedes S class, or whatever it is, and you got a Mercedes S class.

A better analogy would be that you bought a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and assumed it was stuffed with goose feathers but a year down the line you discover its actually duck feathers. At no point did JL state what the filling was at all and nor did you ask but duck feathers are much cheaper than goose feathers so you want a refund.

All posts about taxis being cheaper state 3 reasons:
1) High Mileage
2) High levels of minor damage
3) Clocking

Issues one and two are silly because if the car has 50,000 miles on the clock you pay less than if its 20,000 irrespective of if those miles were done by a taxi driver or a travelling saleman etc.

Issue three is a matter of fraud and is irrespective of if it was a taxi or not. With modern cars like a Merc I don't even know how practical clocking them is, I know (wont say how) that with my Dad's old Ford Sierra just unplugging the speedo stopped the mileage but I doubt thats still the case given instrument panels tend to be digital and the service alerts are mileage driven. 

I can understand hire, police and company cars being less valuable because people thrash them. Its not their car, they dont deal with the maintenance and so don't respect them. If your driving an Uber Exec or Uber Lux you own the car, your passengers don't want a F1 experience from the back seat and if you want to get the bigger money through chauffer work then the car needs to be in great nick. 

You like the car, you didnt spot its status when buying it and the chances are if you own it for a few years nor will the person you sell it on to. 

Google taxi mileage blockers

You've no evidence one was used. 

Anyway what did the dealer say?

hogspudding

NBLondon said:

photome said:

OP please update when you decide what you are going to do

Don't hold your breath...
If the OPs only question is "What would you do?" then there are plenty of answers...  If they are happy with the car (apparently) and were happy with the price when they bought it - the only thing to do is get on with driving the car.    As long as they disclose that it had previously been a PVH if they come to sell it on.

We are happy with the car, what we are not happy with is now that we have found out it was as taxi it isn't what we were told it was (two private owners). Its simple, ex taxis are worth less than a standard vehicle, they are less desirable and if I know it was a taxi I wouldn't of bought it. 

hogspudding

Manxman_in_exile said:

It's obvious why he's making a song and dance out of it.

His MOT tester has suggested it might have been a "taxi" in a previous life.  The OP has checked and it would appear it was a taxi.  The OP is totally happy with the car but is now wondering if he can get a partial refund for not being told the car had been a taxi when he bought it.  The OP never asked the dealer if the car had previously been a taxi because it had never occurred to him to do so as it didn't matter to him at the time.  The OP has decided that it does matter to him now and is kicking himself for never asking in the first place.

I agree in full, apart from the fact its the retailers responsibility the do their due diligence in researching the cars history so that they can make me fully aware as the consumer of any aspects / material facts which might effect my decision to purchase.

Manxman_in_exile

hogspudding said:

NBLondon said:

photome said:

OP please update when you decide what you are going to do

Don't hold your breath...
If the OPs only question is "What would you do?" then there are plenty of answers...  If they are happy with the car (apparently) and were happy with the price when they bought it - the only thing to do is get on with driving the car.    As long as they disclose that it had previously been a PVH if they come to sell it on.

... and if I know it was a taxi I wouldn't of bought it. 

So back to the question I asked several pages ago, and which you've avoided answering: If at the time of purchasing the car it would have been a deal breaker if you'd known it was a taxi, why didn't you ask the dealer if it had been one?

The fact you didn't ask (and you've certainly not indicated that you did ask) at the time tends to indicate that it wasn't really a factor in your decision to buy (or not to buy) the car, and you've only invented it after you've discovered it had been a taxi.

hogspudding

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Sandtree said:

hogspudding said:

No..... You trust the retailer. The CRA 2015 protects all consumers. When you buy range eggs from Tesco, you expect Tesco to ensure the egg is free range. If it wasn't free range what would you think or do ? 

If you buy a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and find out its actually PVC what would you do, how would you feel ? You'd justifiably ripped off......

But you bought a Mercedes S class, or whatever it is, and you got a Mercedes S class.

A better analogy would be that you bought a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and assumed it was stuffed with goose feathers but a year down the line you discover its actually duck feathers. At no point did JL state what the filling was at all and nor did you ask but duck feathers are much cheaper than goose feathers so you want a refund.

All posts about taxis being cheaper state 3 reasons:
1) High Mileage
2) High levels of minor damage
3) Clocking

Issues one and two are silly because if the car has 50,000 miles on the clock you pay less than if its 20,000 irrespective of if those miles were done by a taxi driver or a travelling saleman etc.

Issue three is a matter of fraud and is irrespective of if it was a taxi or not. With modern cars like a Merc I don't even know how practical clocking them is, I know (wont say how) that with my Dad's old Ford Sierra just unplugging the speedo stopped the mileage but I doubt thats still the case given instrument panels tend to be digital and the service alerts are mileage driven. 

I can understand hire, police and company cars being less valuable because people thrash them. Its not their car, they dont deal with the maintenance and so don't respect them. If your driving an Uber Exec or Uber Lux you own the car, your passengers don't want a F1 experience from the back seat and if you want to get the bigger money through chauffer work then the car needs to be in great nick. 

You like the car, you didnt spot its status when buying it and the chances are if you own it for a few years nor will the person you sell it on to. 

Google taxi mileage blockers

You've no evidence one was used. 

Anyway what did the dealer say?

At what point did I say it was used ? 

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Sandtree said:

hogspudding said:

No..... You trust the retailer. The CRA 2015 protects all consumers. When you buy range eggs from Tesco, you expect Tesco to ensure the egg is free range. If it wasn't free range what would you think or do ? 

If you buy a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and find out its actually PVC what would you do, how would you feel ? You'd justifiably ripped off......

But you bought a Mercedes S class, or whatever it is, and you got a Mercedes S class.

A better analogy would be that you bought a 5k leather sofa from John Lewis and assumed it was stuffed with goose feathers but a year down the line you discover its actually duck feathers. At no point did JL state what the filling was at all and nor did you ask but duck feathers are much cheaper than goose feathers so you want a refund.

All posts about taxis being cheaper state 3 reasons:
1) High Mileage
2) High levels of minor damage
3) Clocking

Issues one and two are silly because if the car has 50,000 miles on the clock you pay less than if its 20,000 irrespective of if those miles were done by a taxi driver or a travelling saleman etc.

Issue three is a matter of fraud and is irrespective of if it was a taxi or not. With modern cars like a Merc I don't even know how practical clocking them is, I know (wont say how) that with my Dad's old Ford Sierra just unplugging the speedo stopped the mileage but I doubt thats still the case given instrument panels tend to be digital and the service alerts are mileage driven. 

I can understand hire, police and company cars being less valuable because people thrash them. Its not their car, they dont deal with the maintenance and so don't respect them. If your driving an Uber Exec or Uber Lux you own the car, your passengers don't want a F1 experience from the back seat and if you want to get the bigger money through chauffer work then the car needs to be in great nick. 

You like the car, you didnt spot its status when buying it and the chances are if you own it for a few years nor will the person you sell it on to. 

Google taxi mileage blockers

You've no evidence one was used. 

Anyway what did the dealer say?

At what point did I say it was used ? 

Why mention it then?

Surely the numerous most add up with the mileage shown on the car. That will be the amount on mots and mileage you have decided to avoid, along with the question did you ask if it had been a taxi.

You fail to comprehend the dealer may not have been dishonest by saying two private owners. Instead you are relying on your £2.99 vehicle check that claims it could be worth 20% less than you paid. 

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

It's obvious why he's making a song and dance out of it.

His MOT tester has suggested it might have been a "taxi" in a previous life.  The OP has checked and it would appear it was a taxi.  The OP is totally happy with the car but is now wondering if he can get a partial refund for not being told the car had been a taxi when he bought it.  The OP never asked the dealer if the car had previously been a taxi because it had never occurred to him to do so as it didn't matter to him at the time.  The OP has decided that it does matter to him now and is kicking himself for never asking in the first place.

I agree in full, apart from the fact its the retailers responsibility the do their due diligence in researching the cars history so that they can make me fully aware as the consumer of any aspects / material facts which might effect my decision to purchase.

When spending 30 grand on a car you'd expect the buyer to do some too.

Are you gonna not to avoid the question about speaking to the dealer today?