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

photome

hogspudding said:

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

"I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?"
I shouldn't have to. I didn't buy the car privately, I bought it from a retailer. Therefore I am protected by the CRA 2015 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It's there responsibility to show due diligence and check the car history thoroughly and divulge such information 

I have asked a few times now. What do you want and what are you going to do ?as you are now so sure that you have the law behind you

k3lvc

"I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?"
I shouldn't have to. I didn't buy the car privately, I bought it from a retailer. Therefore I am protected by the CRA 2015 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It's there responsibility to show due diligence and check the car history thoroughly and divulge such information 

This is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la la la - I'm not listening'

Good luck in court with that attitude but I suspect you'll be sorely disappointed

k3lvc

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

For reference @hogspudding where was it purchased - MB dealer or some other 'dealer'. Did you ask to see the V5 before you purchased to see who the previous owner was ?

Much as you want to play 'misleading omissions' this isn't one that'll be on records accessible to a dealer unless it's been declared to them (and that you can prove it was declared to them)

On that basis you're deep into 'buyers remorse' territory and learning to ask the right questions next time - especially with certain types/models of cars

The V5 won't show the first of two keepers. 

Depends on when the change of keepers has been - if you get view of it before the transaction takes place it'll show at least the previous keeper - depending on the age of the car and the last change of keeper it may also show the one before.

If you wait until you receive the V5 in your name you've lost all that info

born_again

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 

OK. So in simple terms...

A taxi is usually worth less as they have higher mileage, just the same as a repmobile.
So....
How old was the car?
How many miles had it done?

williamgriffin

k3lvc said:

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

For reference @hogspudding where was it purchased - MB dealer or some other 'dealer'. Did you ask to see the V5 before you purchased to see who the previous owner was ?

Much as you want to play 'misleading omissions' this isn't one that'll be on records accessible to a dealer unless it's been declared to them (and that you can prove it was declared to them)

On that basis you're deep into 'buyers remorse' territory and learning to ask the right questions next time - especially with certain types/models of cars

The V5 won't show the first of two keepers. 

Depends on when the change of keepers has been - if you get view of it before the transaction takes place it'll show at least the previous keeper - depending on the age of the car and the last change of keeper it may also show the one before.

If you wait until you receive the V5 in your name you've lost all that info

OP says there were two keepers prior to him, the V5 won't have shown the first. 

born_again

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

For reference @hogspudding where was it purchased - MB dealer or some other 'dealer'. Did you ask to see the V5 before you purchased to see who the previous owner was ?

Much as you want to play 'misleading omissions' this isn't one that'll be on records accessible to a dealer unless it's been declared to them (and that you can prove it was declared to them)

On that basis you're deep into 'buyers remorse' territory and learning to ask the right questions next time - especially with certain types/models of cars

The V5 won't show the first of two keepers. 

Depends on when the change of keepers has been - if you get view of it before the transaction takes place it'll show at least the previous keeper - depending on the age of the car and the last change of keeper it may also show the one before.

If you wait until you receive the V5 in your name you've lost all that info

OP says there were two keepers prior to him, the V5 won't have shown the first. 

V5 does not show who the last keeper was anymore....

George_Michael

hogspudding said:

 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 

But you don't appear to be asking for thoughts and advice as it's perfectly clear that you have already made your mind up and are not in the least bit interested in anyone views that don't agree with what you wish to be told.

k3lvc

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

williamgriffin said:

k3lvc said:

For reference @hogspudding where was it purchased - MB dealer or some other 'dealer'. Did you ask to see the V5 before you purchased to see who the previous owner was ?

Much as you want to play 'misleading omissions' this isn't one that'll be on records accessible to a dealer unless it's been declared to them (and that you can prove it was declared to them)

On that basis you're deep into 'buyers remorse' territory and learning to ask the right questions next time - especially with certain types/models of cars

The V5 won't show the first of two keepers. 

Depends on when the change of keepers has been - if you get view of it before the transaction takes place it'll show at least the previous keeper - depending on the age of the car and the last change of keeper it may also show the one before.

If you wait until you receive the V5 in your name you've lost all that info

OP says there were two keepers prior to him, the V5 won't have shown the first. 

My motorbike purchased June '20 showed both 'current keeper' and 'previous keeper' on V5 whilst at the dealer. I had a pic of it (very non-GDPR compliant) until I'd contacted previous keeper and checked no issues pre-purchase

hogspudding

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

I read your post perfectly well, thanks, and there's no strop here, I'm not the one who's bought a £30k taxi and now has buyer's remorse.  There seems to be an emerging theme to your approach, which is to seize on the answer that you're happy with and ignore the questions and observations of others whose line of thought or questioning you don't like.  That's your prerogative but if you can't cope with a little challenge or questioning, how are you going to deal with the dealership if they contest your argument?  This might end up in court, so you will have to be a little more resilient than you've proved to be on here so far. 

What conclusion have I jumped to?  That you didn't check the service and MOT history?  So if my conclusion is wrong, what did you think when you saw the car had been MOT'd every six months?  Did you ask the dealer about that before purchase?

Again, what is your point ? Again, you are jumping to conclusions. I said in the OP we are really happy with the car, did you read that bit? Read it again and understand it.

You haven't actually posted anything relevant or pertinent, and  you certainly haven't added anything that was helpful. You seem to have a continued theme of the above.... 

williamgriffin

hogspudding said:

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

williamgriffin said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

hogspudding said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

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.

Your point is irrelevant, the retailer has a responsibility to state a material fact which would effect the decision of a consumer to purchase. 

That's a no, then...

If you know the answer you want, just say so.  Saves people offering their views and you getting stroppy with them if they challenge you.  If you can't withstand a simple question like that from an anonymous forum user, I fear for your ability to deal with a dealership's contentions.

Why are you jumping to conclusions and getting stroppy yourself, I am simply correcting you because you didn't read my post correctly. Getting an attitude chap isn't helpful. 

We were advised the car had had two private owners, we were also shown the digital service history. 

How old was the cat when you bought it? 

Two keepers both could easily have been private owners and both private hire drivers so that's not saying the dealer was dishonest. But two keepers in a short time and an mot every six months should have rung some alarm bells. 

I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?

"I will ask you again, did you ask it it had been a private hire vehicle?"
I shouldn't have to. I didn't buy the car privately, I bought it from a retailer. Therefore I am protected by the CRA 2015 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It's there responsibility to show due diligence and check the car history thoroughly and divulge such information 

So you didn't ask and didn't think a 6 month mot interval was worthy of further investigation.

So you won't be telling us how old it was when you bought it or how many mots it had.

It looks like you didn't show any due diligence when buying this car.