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

neilmcl

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 no legal requirement to inform the buyer 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.

Aylesbury_Duck

hogspudding said:

neilmcl said:

Yes, this should've been disclosed but I'd doubt it's "worth considerably less" because of it. What outcome do you want?

You've owned the car for a year now, how did you "just find out" it was a taxi?

Apparently ex taxis on average have a value of 20% less on the market, they are less desirable just like cars which have been written off, stolen and recovered or even ex Police cars. Its recently been MOT'd and tester said it was a taxi because it had been MOT'd every 6 months

Playing devil's advocate (because you'll likely face such rebuttals from the garage), did you not check the service and MOT record of the car before buying it?  It's certainly something I'd be checking before shelling out £30k on a car.    The MOT history can be seen instantly online and free of charge, here: https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history

hogspudding

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 no legal requirement anyway.

have things changed or is the article wrong

It's a material aspect of the car which would effect a consumers decision to purchase, therefore the seller as a retailer has an obligation to advise the consumer.....

NBLondon

Presumably - you mean it was formerly used as a minicab and registered as a Private Hire vehicle with TFL.  It wasn't owned by TFL - it was licensed by them.

Why is an ex-taxi worth less on the market?  Because it may well have had a hard life, high mileage, repeated cleaning etc.  Was the price a fair one for the model, condition, mileage?  Have you got a good service history?   Being a Mercedes, it may well have done a lot of airport runs and business contract work which won't be as bad as "collect drunks from the kebab shop" work.   As Aylesbury_Duck says - it may even have had better servicing and care than a similar one owned by J Bloggs Esq.   

Sandtree

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.....

How have you found out that its an ex taxi a year later? Were they the owner immediately prior to you or further back in the chain?

TFL don't own any taxis as far as I know, they license the vehicles for both taxis and minicabs in London but most are owned by the drivers (or the finance company).  I don't ever recall seeing a Mercedes taxi in London other than possibly a V-class because of all the rules on disabled access requirements etc... for minicabs they are moderately common. If TFL themselves owned it then it sounds more likely to have been a company car or a company limo than a taxi.

I'm afraid I am in the if you dont ask they dont have to tell you camp on this one. If the immediate previous owner wasnt the taxi then they may not even have known (after all, took you a year which hasnt had much else going on)

photome

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 no legal requirement to inform the buyer 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

photome

hogspudding 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 no legal requirement anyway.

have things changed or is the article wrong

It's a material aspect of the car which would effect a consumers decision to purchase, therefore the seller as a retailer has an obligation to advise the consumer.....

I am probably wrong . I often am and Neil says they should have told you, but where does it say that in law rather than just an obligation

regardless what do you want the seller to do now?

hogspudding

NBLondon said:

Presumably - you mean it was formerly used as a minicab and registered as a Private Hire vehicle with TFL.  It wasn't owned by TFL - it was licensed by them.

Why is an ex-taxi worth less on the market?  Because it may well have had a hard life, high mileage, repeated cleaning etc.  Was the price a fair one for the model, condition, mileage?  Have you got a good service history?   Being a Mercedes, it may well have done a lot of airport runs and business contract work which won't be as bad as "collect drunks from the kebab shop" work.   As Aylesbury_Duck says - it may even have had better servicing and care than a similar one owned by J Bloggs Esq.   

Please take your time to read my post correctly, I haven't said it was owned by TFL. 

IvanOpinion

hogspudding said:

Apparently ex taxis on average have a value of 20% less on the market, they are less desirable just like cars which have been written off, stolen and recovered or even ex Police cars. Its recently been MOT'd and tester said it was a taxi because it had been MOT'd every 6 months

Why?  To me the mileage would be the biggest issue.  You would expect a car with high mileage for the year to have been used as a business vehicle or a taxi. If the mileage was normal then the past is not that relevant.

The one advantage of taxis is that they spend more time with the engine warm - which can actually reduce wear and tear.  They may even be better maintained than the average car.

Sandtree

hogspudding said:

 Its recently been MOT'd and tester said it was a taxi because it had been MOT'd every 6 months

The twice a year rule applies to both taxis and minicabs 

I'm a little surprised that ex-taxis are valued less, obviously mileage is included in the valuation and particularly exec style cars are likely not to have just done short trips. They are often driver owned and so not the same sorts of issues as ex-hire cars or police cars which tend to get thrashed because the driver doesnt own it or have interest in its long term health.

Its more likely this was a minicab rather than a taxi and not sure if you think the same depreciation exists or if its unique to taxis