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

Aylesbury_Duck

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I am also surprised that, if this was an important factor for the OP and, given the type of vehicle, the question was never asked prior to purchase.

Quite simply, because it was not at all important until the prospect of getting some money back occurred to OP.   He didn't even check the MOT history.  Now, it's crucial.

That's a really ignorant reply. The Retailer lied to me about the previous ownership and previous the use of the car, are you here to help or just to give your life some king of importance by trolling ?  

Did they lie?  I thought it was information they didn't disclose.  Or is the story shifting again?

P.S. I've never been called a King of Importance, so thank you 

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I am also surprised that, if this was an important factor for the OP and, given the type of vehicle, the question was never asked prior to purchase.

Quite simply, because it was not at all important until the prospect of getting some money back occurred to OP.   He didn't even check the MOT history.  Now, it's crucial.

That's a really ignorant reply. The Retailer lied to me about the previous ownership and previous the use of the car, are you here to help or just to give your life some king of importance by trolling ?  

No, you've no evidence the dealer lied. Your were told it was owned by two private keepers. The fact that one was a private hire driver could not be established simply by knowing their name. 

photome

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I am also surprised that, if this was an important factor for the OP and, given the type of vehicle, the question was never asked prior to purchase.

Quite simply, because it was not at all important until the prospect of getting some money back occurred to OP.   He didn't even check the MOT history.  Now, it's crucial.

That's a really ignorant reply. The Retailer lied to me about the previous ownership and previous the use of the car, are you here to help or just to give your life some king of importance by trolling ?  

But they didn’t lie, you still haven’t said what you want and you are still being selective in what questions  you answer

Spank

Can't bd bothered to go through 13 pages, so you might have answered tjhs already, but have you spoken to the garage and asked what they will do?

williamgriffin

Spank said:

Can't bd bothered to go through 13 pages, so you might have answered tjhs already, but have you spoken to the garage and asked what they will do?

I don't recall the op saying they had. 

sheramber

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 

You've been given the advice and thoughts of the people on this thread.
Unfortunately, it is not the advice and thoughts you wanted to hear.

hogspudding

Are you all taxi drivers ? 
I was given the information I needed very early on in this post, the car was clearly misrepresented under the 

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

The vehicle sold to me with a blatant "misleading omission" it was a TAXI, this should of been disclosed to me, it wasn't therefore it was fundamentally and clearly misdescribed. Thankfully the retailer has rightfully compensated me following the threat of legal action

FYI. It only costs a £185 to start a claim for 3k-5k and they were in a lose lose situation  

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

Are you all taxi drivers ? 
I was given the information I needed very early on in this post, the car was clearly misrepresented under the 

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

The vehicle sold to me with a blatant "misleading omission" it was a TAXI, this should of been disclosed to me, it wasn't therefore it was fundamentally and clearly misdescribed. Thankfully the retailer has rightfully compensated me following the threat of legal action

FYI. It only costs a £185 to start a claim for 3k-5k and they were in a lose lose situation  

Funny how it always works out. 

hogspudding

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Are you all taxi drivers ? 
I was given the information I needed very early on in this post, the car was clearly misrepresented under the 

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

The vehicle sold to me with a blatant "misleading omission" it was a TAXI, this should of been disclosed to me, it wasn't therefore it was fundamentally and clearly misdescribed. Thankfully the retailer has rightfully compensated me following the threat of legal action

FYI. It only costs a £185 to start a claim for 3k-5k and they were in a lose lose situation  

Funny how it always works out. 

What's funny ? 

ThumbRemote

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Are you all taxi drivers ? 
I was given the information I needed very early on in this post, the car was clearly misrepresented under the 

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

The vehicle sold to me with a blatant "misleading omission" it was a TAXI, this should of been disclosed to me, it wasn't therefore it was fundamentally and clearly misdescribed. Thankfully the retailer has rightfully compensated me following the threat of legal action

FYI. It only costs a £185 to start a claim for 3k-5k and they were in a lose lose situation  

Funny how it always works out. 

Given the OP was legally in the right, and has pointed to the relevant legislation, you would expect this one to work out.