Is this a car dealer con?

Sad__Sam

By way of update, the dealer has commenced a money claim via small claims.

Says he sold the car for £7,000, hence wants £6,000 + ACE report cost & interest from me.  Refuses to supply the sales invoice due to data protection, no doubt a trade friend.

He has changed his attack, from Cat D, to mis-description.  “We asked if the vehicle had been involved in any accidents, to which Mr M*** answer was no. The reason we did, this was because his car was going through a plate transfer, and we could not HPI it for a few days”. The dealer arranged the plate to be removed!

Yet 5 days later the hpi came through on the old reg!  He had the trade in cars details for 14 days prior to exchange.

I can’t prove a conversation didn’t happen, and I guess he can’t either.

 

He has reports of the damage to the car. I don’t and have no knowledge of a prior accident.

He says he started advertising the car at £12,995, yet I have screenshots at £15,995

Trading standards says you shouldn’t advertise a car without a history check, he advertised it for sale 4-5-24 & says he did a history check 7-5-24.

States I tried to hide the car was a write-off!

 

Separately, but related, we noticed that the tyres of the car we purchased were cracked on the outer edges, once they were off the car, the inside of the tyre had the threads showing. Hence unroadworthy. Trading Standards and DVSA are involved.

And the oil light was on due to lack of oil, advertised as recently serviced.

 

I am defending his claim and counter-claiming for the unroadworthy nature of the car.

 

Does anyone have any advice I might use, need thanks.

Mutton_Geoff

You're a private seller, if the damage was done prior to your ownership then it's perfectly reasonable to assume you knew nothing about it. Not everybody carries out HPI checks.

Your statement was made in good faith, you are private seller, they are trade and therefore supposed to be the expert. Nothing to worry about.

Herzlos

He's the expert and still needs to do his due diligence. I don't believe he had no way to HPI it before taking it in as an exchange. Especially if he'd known about it for 2 weeks.

I'm assuming he can provide an unredacted sales invoices to a judge, but in any case he can redact the sellers information. Presumably he also has an entry in his business accounts for it because I can't see a trader dealing with cars at that value staying under the £85k VAT threshold.

Sadly it looks like you're going to need to go and defend it, which would suck. Have you given the old car to someone like the AA for a full inspection in case there are other issues?

Sad__Sam

Mutton_Geoff – I don’t know the seriousness of the accident prior to my ownership.

The argument I forwarded to the dealer, was that surely CAT D signifies that any accident must have been minor/cosmetic, or no accident stolen recovered, or keyed?

His argument was that write off is serious accident.

 

Trading standards seems to cover me in that I can only cover that which I know, as in during my ownership. Unfair terms in contracts. However, in a court your at the mercy of a Judge!!  A senile old git with an axe to grind either way!  Just hassle you don't need.

 

Herzlos

His due diligence, is what confuses me. I believe he MUST do a provenance check to ensure a trade in is legally the buyers to sell, not owned by a finance company.  Makes no sense that he wouldn’t do his checks & my belief there is a deeper con here.

Others similar - £17,950. Ours was the Premier, spec above, with a full Lexus main dealer service history. Why sell it for £7,000?

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202405300216032?fromSavedAds=true&advertising-location=at_cars&sort=relevance&postcode=WA2%208xs

Before court I intend to have the car serviced to check for any other issues via his misdescriptions, plus see if Trading Standards will give me any feedback.

ciderboy2009

Sad__Sam said:

However, in a court your at the mercy of a Judge!!  A senile old git with an axe to grind either way!  Just hassle you don't need.

You might want to do some research on County Courts - most County Court District Judges are fairly young ex-solicitors and will do everything they can to assist and guide you during the hearing.

Going into the hearing with an attitude like that is only likely to antagonise them.

motorguy

You didnt try to hide it.  You didnt know.

Thats all you need to say.

You are not an expert.  He is the expert.  He should have done whatever checks he needed to before completing the deal.

I wouldnt be doing anything else and i wouldnt be engaging with him further.

ontheroad1970

Sad__Sam said:

Mutton_Geoff – I don’t know the seriousness of the accident prior to my ownership.

The argument I forwarded to the dealer, was that surely CAT D signifies that any accident must have been minor/cosmetic, or no accident stolen recovered, or keyed?

His argument was that write off is serious accident.

 

Trading standards seems to cover me in that I can only cover that which I know, as in during my ownership. Unfair terms in contracts. However, in a court your at the mercy of a Judge!!  A senile old git with an axe to grind either way!  Just hassle you don't need.

 

Herzlos

His due diligence, is what confuses me. I believe he MUST do a provenance check to ensure a trade in is legally the buyers to sell, not owned by a finance company.  Makes no sense that he wouldn’t do his checks & my belief there is a deeper con here.

Others similar - £17,950. Ours was the Premier, spec above, with a full Lexus main dealer service history. Why sell it for £7,000?

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202405300216032?fromSavedAds=true&advertising-location=at_cars&sort=relevance&postcode=WA2%208xs

Before court I intend to have the car serviced to check for any other issues via his misdescriptions, plus see if Trading Standards will give me any feedback.

With an attitude issue like that, you're doomed.  

prowla

Sad__Sam said:

Mutton_Geoff – I don’t know the seriousness of the accident prior to my ownership.

The argument I forwarded to the dealer, was that surely CAT D signifies that any accident must have been minor/cosmetic, or no accident stolen recovered, or keyed?

His argument was that write off is serious accident.

 

Trading standards seems to cover me in that I can only cover that which I know, as in during my ownership. Unfair terms in contracts. However, in a court your at the mercy of a Judge!!  A senile old git with an axe to grind either way!  Just hassle you don't need.

 

Herzlos

His due diligence, is what confuses me. I believe he MUST do a provenance check to ensure a trade in is legally the buyers to sell, not owned by a finance company.  Makes no sense that he wouldn’t do his checks & my belief there is a deeper con here.

Others similar - £17,950. Ours was the Premier, spec above, with a full Lexus main dealer service history. Why sell it for £7,000?

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202405300216032?fromSavedAds=true&advertising-location=at_cars&sort=relevance&postcode=WA2%208xs

Before court I intend to have the car serviced to check for any other issues via his misdescriptions, plus see if Trading Standards will give me any feedback.

A Cat D (now Category N?) is a car which has been written off because repairs are uneconomical; this page explains it:

https://www.webuyanycar.com/guides/selling-and-buying-cars/selling-a-cat-d-car/

There's a section titled "If you bought from a private seller" about half-way down the page which covers what the buyer can expect from a private seller; it states: "A private seller must reveal any issues that they are aware of when asked by a prospective buyer"; note that it states "issues they are aware of" and "when asked".

Further down the page there's a section titled "How to check if a car is a Cat D"; surely any dealer buying would be remiss not do that check.

Sad__Sam

Thank you prowla.
I mainly take three points from the webuyanycar review, 
1, The car must match their description.  The dealer is trying to say he asked me. He didn't, I guess its his word against mine, but my wife was with me.
2, Buying a car privately carries extra risk when it is a ‘Cat D’ write-off. Whilst trade dealers must disclose comprehensive information for every car they sell, private sellers only need to ensure the car is ‘as described’.  I'd imagine selling the car to a dealer falls under the same bracket.
3, ‘Cat D’ refers to a car that has been deemed beyond economical repair by an insurance provider.  I've seen the same on HPI and RAC write-up which would all seem to indemnify me that the car has not had "Serious Accident damage". As CAT A B or C are classified as serious. Is "Serious Accident Damage" to subjective? Or as per the dealers declaration,  a write-off proves "serious Accident Damage"?

Sad__Sam

Something I just thought of, an wondered if it made a difference.

The contract is between me and the dealer.
However the Lexus was owned/registered keeper was my wife.

Hence the dealer is asking me to indemnify him for a issue before my wife's ownership of the car, and from me who didn't own the car?  My wife is never mentioned in the contract or the dealers claim!