Buyer not happy - advice needed

Mistral001

AdrianC said:

Mistral001 said:

What exactly is the law on selling a vehicle that does not have genuine mileage.  The fact that the OP did not actually do the clocking surely does not change the fact that the mileage is not genuine.   If  the buyer can prove that the mileage is not genuine, never mind not as advertised, then that buyer might have a good case.

It's not illegal.

What is illegal is knowingly mis-representing it - or anything else.

And, in a private sale, that's going to have to be proven for the courts to be interested.

Is it a bit like selling a car that you did not know was stolen?

David713

Mistral001 said:

AdrianC said:

Mistral001 said:

What exactly is the law on selling a vehicle that does not have genuine mileage.  The fact that the OP did not actually do the clocking surely does not change the fact that the mileage is not genuine.   If  the buyer can prove that the mileage is not genuine, never mind not as advertised, then that buyer might have a good case.

It's not illegal.

What is illegal is knowingly mis-representing it - or anything else.

And, in a private sale, that's going to have to be proven for the courts to be interested.

Is it a bit like selling a car that you did not know was stolen?

That's slightly different because if you unknowingly sell a vehicle that had previously been stolen and which hadn't been returned to the owner ( which could be an insurance company), then you would never had obtained legal title to it, hence you had no right to sell it.
When this happens, the genuine owner had the right to reclaim the vehicle from whoever it was sold to but providing you had no knowledge of the theft, you can't be prosecuted for selling stolen goods.

Mistral001

I would have thought that the fact that the OP was ripped off by buying a clocked vehicle should be of no concern to the new owner. It seems to me that the OP, on this deal with the current buyer, has profited by advertising mileage that is not genuine.   Legal advice to stop this escalating is probably the way the OP should go.

jimjames

Mistral001 said:

I would have thought that the fact that the OP was ripped off by buying a clocked vehicle should be of no concern to the new owner.  It should however be of concern to the OP now that it has been discovered that the vehicle was clocked by the previous owner.   It seems to me that the OP, on this deal with the current buyer, has profited by advertising mileage that is not genuine.   Legal advice to stop this escalating is probably the way the OP should go.

The OP has advertised the mileage on the car. That mileage is consistent through MOTs and servicing since they've owned the car. I don't think they have any issues. The (former trader) buyer didn't do any checks themselves so has no leg to stand on.

Mistral001

AdrianC said:

Mistral001 said:

What exactly is the law on selling a vehicle that does not have genuine mileage.  The fact that the OP did not actually do the clocking surely does not change the fact that the mileage is not genuine.   If  the buyer can prove that the mileage is not genuine, never mind not as advertised, then that buyer might have a good case.

It's not illegal.

What is illegal is knowingly mis-representing it - or anything else.

And, in a private sale, that's going to have to be proven for the courts to be interested.

It may not be illegal with regard to the Criminal Law, but what about Civil Law? 

Nobbie1967

Mistral001 said:

AdrianC said:

Mistral001 said:

What exactly is the law on selling a vehicle that does not have genuine mileage.  The fact that the OP did not actually do the clocking surely does not change the fact that the mileage is not genuine.   If  the buyer can prove that the mileage is not genuine, never mind not as advertised, then that buyer might have a good case.

It's not illegal.

What is illegal is knowingly mis-representing it - or anything else.

And, in a private sale, that's going to have to be proven for the courts to be interested.

It may not be illegal with regard to the Criminal Law, but what about Civil Law? 

Seems a bit of a stretch to think any liability attaches to the OP who has apparently acted in good faith, particularly since the buyer had ample opportunity to discover this information before they bought it.

akira181

it's a private sale, sold as advertised and as seen.  No warranty, no guarantees, no refunds.  If a buyer want to save a few K by going private, it's the risk the buyer takes, not the seller.  It's on them to do all the necessary checks before they decide to take it and not after.  If the buyer wants a warranty or returns policy, he should be buying from a dealer and paying the premiums for said benefits.  Anyone used to buying second hand cars privately should know that's the trade off in order to save some money, especially an alleged "ex-car dealer".  For a vehicle that's been stated to have sat around for years barely moving, declining a test drive and expecting to make it a "considerable distance" home without issue suggests he knows nothing about cars but enjoys tooting his own horn.

It was listed to the best of your knowledge and was working as described when he drove off.  As soon as the deal is completed and the vehicle has left your sight, you have no legal responsibility anymore as you don't know what he may or may not have done to it.  E.g. If he complains of engine problems, you don't know if he decided to drive all the way home at 80mph in 1st gear or not.  Driving it with fuel potentially a decade old and not filling up asap has likely gummed up the injectors or made them worse at the very least.  

He can complain after the fact all he wants.  Ebay won't/can't do anything for a private listing as they are not liable, much like how Facebook and Gumtree marketplaces aren't liable for any private listings.  Ebay have Buyer Protection but that doesn't apply to vehicle sales and you need to pay via Ebay, not bank transfer. 

A solicitor will tell him he doesn't have a case.  He would need to prove that you knowingly misrepresented the vehicle or tried to hide issues you were aware of.  Things that you did not do nor can he prove otherwise.  A small claims court would not look favourably on an ex-trader complaining about checks done after the sale was completed imo.

You've done more than enough, I'd just ignore him.  He sounds like a chancer trying to take advantage.

Penelopa.Pitstop

If the mileage changed around conversion time, there's a chance engine was also changed or dash, hence different mileage reading.

Jumblebumble

Mistral001 said:

I would have thought that the fact that the OP was ripped off by buying a clocked vehicle should be of no concern to the new owner. It seems to me that the OP, on this deal with the current buyer, has profited by advertising mileage that is not genuine.   Legal advice to stop this escalating is probably the way the OP should go.

You do not know if the Mileage is genuine or not for reasons which I explained upthread.
The OP would be mad to be paying someone else to tell them exactly the same as they have been advised here .
Anything before a small claims court claim  is hot air.

Mutton_Geoff

TF03 said:

I am planning on replying with ...

As others have said, don't have any more communication. You are not doing yourself any favours just recite .. "every time I open my mouth, I put my foot in it"