Sold a vehicle that I have been told in unroadworthy

Jenni_D

neilmcl said:

Anyone care to take bets that the OP will eventually cave in.

That's my wondering too ... why would the OP keep showing us the nonsense from the buyer unless they were thinking it had substance?

jimjames

Jenni_D said:

neilmcl said:

Anyone care to take bets that the OP will eventually cave in.

That's my wondering too ... why would the OP keep showing us the nonsense from the buyer unless they were thinking it had substance?

Or they are wanting reassurance from people that it can be safely ignored - which it can. It is quite amusing how many "this is the final one" letters they are sending which probably shows the desperation of the buyer that it's not going their way and the seller isn't caving in.

Jenni_D

But how many times do we need to tell the OP that the buyer is talking mince before the OP believes us? 🙄

Soot2006

jimjames said:

Jenni_D said:

neilmcl said:

Anyone care to take bets that the OP will eventually cave in.

That's my wondering too ... why would the OP keep showing us the nonsense from the buyer unless they were thinking it had substance?

Or they are wanting reassurance from people that it can be safely ignored - which it can. It is quite amusing how many "this is the final one" letters they are sending which probably shows the desperation of the buyer that it's not going their way and the seller isn't caving in.

^ Totally agree. It can be really intimidating to be in this situation for the first time.  This buyer is being insistent and I can understand the OP getting stressed out by these letters!

Arklight

There is so much misinformation on this thread it could be put into a book of terrible legal advice.

You do have obligations to your buyer in a private sale. The OP's description amounts to "Slow to start but a good runner." If this is not the case,  then the buyer is entitled to their money back or redress for the defects.

A close family friend currently doesn't own a shonky 4 x 4 she bought from a private sale, who probably got advice from this forum, precisely because she took them to court when it broke down on the way home from purchasing it. 

The court listened to all the "It was a private sale and it was fine on my driveway" nonsense from the seller, and then awarded her all her money back and her costs. She also sent many letters, like the OP is transcribing, in an attempt to be reasonable before she took them to court. 

caprikid1

Arklight said:

There is so much misinformation on this thread it could be put into a book of terrible legal advice.

You do have obligations to your buyer in a private sale. The OP's description amounts to "Slow to start but a good runner." If this is not the case,  then the buyer is entitled to their money back or redress for the defects.

A close family friend currently doesn't own a shonky 4 x 4 she bought from a private sale, who probably got advice from this forum, precisely because she took them to court when it broke down on the way home from purchasing it. 

The court listened to all the "It was a private sale and it was fine on my driveway" nonsense from the seller, and then awarded her all her money back and her costs. She also sent many letters, like the OP is transcribing, in an attempt to be reasonable before she took them to court. 

Without knowing the full story in your case or this case the advice been given is still IMHO correct,  people are too ready to expect Private Sale prices to include full retail Legal Protection. The courts do recognise the difference, if the seller has clearly lied about the state of a bodged up vehicle then yes there are cases where the seller has lost but they are not the norm.

There was a case where a seller on this forum sold a Vehicle (Galaxy ?) with a known dodgy gearbox (Buyer aware) and got sued a lost.

Also it is important to note that local courts are not always consistent in applying the law correctly and spurious local court outcomes I believe do not change the law or set precedent, often though the sellers do not wish to correct the situation at a higher court.

That said though if as a private seller you knowingly sell an unroadworthy vehicle or lie then you will leave yourself exposed.

Arklight

caprikid1 said:

Arklight said:

There is so much misinformation on this thread it could be put into a book of terrible legal advice.

You do have obligations to your buyer in a private sale. The OP's description amounts to "Slow to start but a good runner." If this is not the case,  then the buyer is entitled to their money back or redress for the defects.

A close family friend currently doesn't own a shonky 4 x 4 she bought from a private sale, who probably got advice from this forum, precisely because she took them to court when it broke down on the way home from purchasing it. 

The court listened to all the "It was a private sale and it was fine on my driveway" nonsense from the seller, and then awarded her all her money back and her costs. She also sent many letters, like the OP is transcribing, in an attempt to be reasonable before she took them to court. 

Without knowing the full story in your case or this case the advice been given is still IMHO correct,  people are too ready to expect Private Sale prices to include full retail Legal Protection. The courts do recognise the difference, if the seller has clearly lied about the state of a bodged up vehicle then yes there are cases where the seller has lost but they are not the norm.

There was a case where a seller on this forum sold a Vehicle (Galaxy ?) with a known dodgy gearbox (Buyer aware) and got sued a lost.

Also it is important to note that local courts are not always consistent in applying the law correctly and spurious local court outcomes I believe do not change the law or set precedent, often though the sellers do not wish to correct the situation at a higher court.

That said though if as a private seller you knowingly sell an unroadworthy vehicle or lie then you will leave yourself exposed.

The OP is anxious about being taken to court and is being given all sorts of (completely misleading) advice telling him that this will not happen, and he can ignore all the letters being sent and sleep like a baby.

A private contract of sale is still a contract. The only place a contract that has reached deadlock can ever be decided is in a court; that is what they are for. If the buyer challenges him in court, the OP will have to go to court. From what I have heard anecdotally, ignoring all the letters the buyer sent beforehand may not be viewed that kindly. (But who knows)

Of course, there's a difference in a private sale. That's why the eagerness for people to talk up their car's virtues in Autotrader, to attract the best price, needs to balanced against whether they actually intend to stand behind these claims if there is a problem post sale.

Sticking to a factual checklist of manufacturer specs, service history and MOT really protects the seller from anything like this, but that doesn't make your car stand out. All through this thread, I have thought this is a case of a seller advertising "Good runner" and the buyer receiving a car that is not.

caprikid1

""Good runner" and the buyer receiving a car that is not."

I must have missed something but I am not sure where the above was established but please highlight as the thread is quite long.

What I did see is a buyer not doing due diligence and then post sale putting the vehicle through another MOT.

1 Excessive play in both front link bars
2 One front wheel bearing excessive play
3 Rear brake discs warped
4 A couple of slight oil leaks
5 Any a few other cosmetic things.

The problem is most likely 1 & 2 are an MOT fail but are NOT binary and merely opinion as to what is excessive. You could submit the vehicle to 3 sites in one day and get a pass on from 2 or all of them.

Also it is the sort of defect that can be within tolerance one day and not a week later.

jimjames

caprikid1 said:

""Good runner" and the buyer receiving a car that is not."

Also it is the sort of defect that can be within tolerance one day and not a week later.

Absolutely. I bought a car a few weeks ago and it had a pre-MOT that highlighted a couple of issues before purchase. Bought the car and when I checked it had a broken coil spring in addition. Of course it could have broken since the checks were done but from the corrosion present on the crack it seems unlikely and more a case of being missed. There are many areas of the MOT as you've highlighted that are opinion rather than definitive pass/fail.

rca779

Any news?
I was following this thread with interest, but seems to have gone quiet