Who do you think should pay?

swingaloo2

Thanks for all the replies. Just for clarity A is my nephew and B is my son. 
Son is now going to try to source one from a breakers.

wannabe_a_saver

swingaloo2 said:

Thanks for all the replies. Just for clarity A is my nephew and B is my son. 
Son is now going to try to source one from a breakers.

Ah, so we may not have had a fully impartial account!

burlingtonfl6

Tammykitty said:

If B has already taxed and insured the car, then he must be the registered owner now..so its his car to fix

I personally think A agreeing to sell the car at £3800 and then upping to £4000 as that was what the dealer offered him to trade it in, was mostly reasonable. The trade in value of a car is usually much lower than you would get in a private sale, so getting it for a trad in value was still a good deal for B

Some of us stand by our word though. 

daniel_owen_uk

Regardless of whether or not A should have driven the price up or not, it is their responsibility to hand over the vehicle in the agreed condition.

If I paid for a vehicle and the delivery company smashed it up on the way to my house, there is no way I would just accept the car in that condition because I had already paid for it!

"A" provides the vehicle in the condition it was in when B agreed to buy.  B pays the money to A that was agreed at that time.  It shouldn't be any more complicated than that.

NBLondon

Tammykitty said:

If B has already taxed and insured the car, then he must be the registered owner now..so its his car to fix

According to the first post; A broke the item after taking payment and before delivering the car.  So  A broke B's property.  Therefore If B has to fix it, he can sue A for the cost?  Happy Families eh?

Or A could do the decent thing and put it right even at the cost of the extra £200.

swingaloo2

wannabe_a_saver said:

swingaloo2 said:

Thanks for all the replies. Just for clarity A is my nephew and B is my son. 
Son is now going to try to source one from a breakers.

Ah, so we may not have had a fully impartial account!

Not sure why you would think that. I said in my opening post that it was a family dispute and I deliberatly did not say who was who to get opinions. I also said that I thought they should just go halves for the sake of family peace even though I do think B should pay and wanted to see if others thought the same. Impartiality doesnt come into it.

wannabe_a_saver

swingaloo2 said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

swingaloo2 said:

Thanks for all the replies. Just for clarity A is my nephew and B is my son. 
Son is now going to try to source one from a breakers.

Ah, so we may not have had a fully impartial account!

Not sure why you would think that. I said in my opening post that it was a family dispute and I deliberatly did not say who was who to get opinions. I also said that I thought they should just go halves for the sake of family peace even though I do think B should pay and wanted to see if others thought the same. Impartiality doesnt come into it.

Its not a criticism, just that parents can't hep but take their child's side, and adult kids usually only tell the parents the bit that makes them seem clearly in the right! 

If everything is as posted I stand by my original conclusion, but it seems that B has given up the car now, which is kind of a shame if it was a good deal. 

swingaloo2

wannabe_a_saver said:

swingaloo2 said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

swingaloo2 said:

Thanks for all the replies. Just for clarity A is my nephew and B is my son. 
Son is now going to try to source one from a breakers.

Ah, so we may not have had a fully impartial account!

Not sure why you would think that. I said in my opening post that it was a family dispute and I deliberatly did not say who was who to get opinions. I also said that I thought they should just go halves for the sake of family peace even though I do think B should pay and wanted to see if others thought the same. Impartiality doesnt come into it.

Its not a criticism, just that parents can't hep but take their child's side, and adult kids usually only tell the parents the bit that makes them seem clearly in the right! 

If everything is as posted I stand by my original conclusion, but it seems that B has given up the car now, which is kind of a shame if it was a good deal. 

Think I have confused the issue now as I have just posted that I think B should pay, I meant to say I think A should pay as he broke the part after B had agreed  to buy and also paid for it. 
 B agreed to buy and gave A the cash  on a Sunday but as A was not getting his new car till the following Thursday he did not hand over the vehicle till that day and continued to use it for work till he could pick up the new car. The part broke 2 days before he handed over the car.

justworriedabit

This post is exactly why we do not buy, sell to family or work for family. On both sides of our family, most are employed and a few run a business etc. We all try to avoid this kind of thing as if/when it goes belly up, you can't just walk away from the people as they are family and you will see them at events.

Tokmon

Tammykitty said:

If B has already taxed and insured the car, then he must be the registered owner now..so its his car to fix

I personally think A agreeing to sell the car at £3800 and then upping to £4000 as that was what the dealer offered him to trade it in, was mostly reasonable. The trade in value of a car is usually much lower than you would get in a private sale, so getting it for a trad in value was still a good deal for B

There is no such thing as a "registered owner".