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

Sandtree

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. 

photome

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

NBLondon

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.

mattyprice4004

A year later? Nope. Did they have to tell you? Also no.
Sorry, but if you have such an aversion to taxis you should have asked - I wouldn't say it's something they need to tell you, and I can't see where the law does either.
You goofed, it's a life lesson, just ask next time. 

Robbo66

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

So you don't actually know it was used as a taxi, its just someones assumption. It could have been used for a chauffeur service, they have the same MOT requirements 

Gavin83

I haven't read the whole topic given it's 9 pages so I apologise if anything of these points have been covered but currently it appears the OP actually has no proof what so ever that it was used as a taxi or a commercial vehicle of any sort. Besides which I agree with some of the posters here, even if it was I don't believe the garage had an obligation to tell you, although given your lack of evidence I suspect they wouldn't have known anyway.

I also believe you want to keep the vehicle, you just want a partial refund. You can ask the garage but given I suspect you'll be asking for 20% back, which isn't far off £6k they'll almost certainly tell you where to go. You'll then need to decide what you wish to do at that point. Ultimately if they won't agree anything with you you'll need to take them to court and that's a big risk for you, I wouldn't fancy your chances at all.

Personally if you're happy with the car I'd just forget about it and carry on. You won't lose any money on this. 

born_again

hogspudding said:

born_again said:

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

It did in feb 2020

So, You answer a question not directed at you. I guess that you saw the old V5 at the dealers as V5 have not had the previous keepers name on since 2018.
https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/fleet-industry-news/2018/07/04/removal-of-previous-keeper-information-from-v5-could-lead-to-fraud.

Yet you fail to answer one directed at you on the Age & Mileage of the car when you bought it....
Which would help on the basis that the dealer may have failed on checks. If the person that sold it to them, said I bought it from a auction then just how far back do you expect a dealer to go?
Like others. I'm struggling to grasp exactly what you want out of your thread.
If you think the dealer broke the law, then take them to court, but given you say you are happy with the car what is that going to do other than cost you time money and effort all for nothing.

williamgriffin

Robbo66 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

So you don't actually know it was used as a taxi, its just someones assumption. It could have been used for a chauffeur service, they have the same MOT requirements 

A chauffeur service has the same mot requirement as a minicab because that's what it is a private hire vehicle. 

MattMattMattUK

williamgriffin said:

Robbo66 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

So you don't actually know it was used as a taxi, its just someones assumption. It could have been used for a chauffeur service, they have the same MOT requirements 

A chauffeur service has the same mot requirement as a minicab because that's what it is a private hire vehicle. 

Not necessarily, it is if it is an outsourced chauffer, however it is not a private hire vehicle if it is owned by the company, with the driver directly employed, exclusively for use of employees on company business. 

williamgriffin

MattMattMattUK said:

williamgriffin said:

Robbo66 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

So you don't actually know it was used as a taxi, its just someones assumption. It could have been used for a chauffeur service, they have the same MOT requirements 

A chauffeur service has the same mot requirement as a minicab because that's what it is a private hire vehicle. 

Not necessarily, it is if it is an outsourced chauffer, however it is not a private hire vehicle if it is owned by the company, with the driver directly employed, exclusively for use of employees on company business. 

What has ownership of the vehicle got to do with private hire testing?

What you have described is a company vehicle and wouldn't be subject to such testing.