Puma Gen E order issues with Hartwells / ALD Automative - advice on verbal contract in UK

shakeitGB

jimjames said:

shakeitGB said:

user1977 said:

A good case for what? Can we see the contract?

A good case to prove wrong do-ing by the garage. 

That might be the case but what exactly does it gain you?

Hopefully they will honour the price

shakeitGB

user1977 said:

shakeitGB said:

user1977 said:

A good case for what? Can we see the contract?

A good case to prove wrong do-ing by the garage. 

From a legal pov there is no contract as mentioned in my post. Maybe worth a re-read?

Yes, I spotted that you said "order forms were signed". What did they say?

There is no verbiage on terms in relation to honouring any pricing. Its like it purposefully vague. 

I know there is an escalation open to ALD, so hopefully that comes through good. 

User1977 - has similar happened to you before?

Mildly_Miffed

shakeitGB said:

jimjames said:

shakeitGB said:

user1977 said:

A good case for what? Can we see the contract?

A good case to prove wrong do-ing by the garage. 

That might be the case but what exactly does it gain you?

Hopefully they will honour the price

They won't.

The original offer was subject to availability. There was too much demand for the availability. You were one of the ones that missed out.

paul_c123

shakeitGB said:

I think I have a good case as I can demonstrate all my communications to them. 

A contract does not need to be written - it can be verbal. Is it fair to say that you formed a very basic/limited verbal contract, then no paperwork showed up so there is no written contract, not that it automatically supersedes and extinguishes a verbal contract unless both parties expressly agree it does.

So, it comes down to - do you have recordings of the conversation?* Otherwise a verbal contract degrades to a "he said she said" situation, where the dealer will undoubtedly clam up and/or lie (they're good at that).

The other problem you've had is you've suffered no losses - only an unfulfilled promise. You would have to prove quantifiable losses. And if you took out a lease at the higher price, it would be difficult to demonstrate that because it would be interpreted as "new business" not a continuation of the telephone deal; and at some point you would sign to the no doubt more restrictive terms and higher price. There would need to be a flaw in that contract to incur a loss on that one.

* Someone else more knowledgeable may be able to confirm/deny that unless you informed them it was being recorded at the time, it may be inadmissible. 

Car_54

paul_c123 said:

shakeitGB said:

I think I have a good case as I can demonstrate all my communications to them. 

A contract does not need to be written - it can be verbal. 

All contracts are verbal. Some are also oral.

letom

paul_c123 said:

shakeitGB said:

I think I have a good case as I can demonstrate all my communications to them. 

A contract does not need to be written - it can be verbal. Is it fair to say that you formed a very basic/limited verbal contract, then no paperwork showed up so there is no written contract, not that it automatically supersedes and extinguishes a verbal contract unless both parties expressly agree it does.

So, it comes down to - do you have recordings of the conversation?* Otherwise a verbal contract degrades to a "he said she said" situation, where the dealer will undoubtedly clam up and/or lie (they're good at that).

The other problem you've had is you've suffered no losses - only an unfulfilled promise. You would have to prove quantifiable losses. And if you took out a lease at the higher price, it would be difficult to demonstrate that because it would be interpreted as "new business" not a continuation of the telephone deal; and at some point you would sign to the no doubt more restrictive terms and higher price. There would need to be a flaw in that contract to incur a loss on that one.

* Someone else more knowledgeable may be able to confirm/deny that unless you informed them it was being recorded at the time, it may be inadmissible. 

For a verbal contract to form various things still need to have happened such as an:
- offer made by the dealer (which happened, though clearly subject to conditions),
- offer accepted by the OP (which happened),
- capacity to enter into the contract (debatable as it's not the dealer that provides the finance itself)
- consideration (ie money) to have exchanged (did not happen),
- meeting of minds where both parties would reasonably have assumed that a contract was formed at this point (did not happen, the fact this requires financing means no reasonable person would believe by simply accepting an offer would mean they would receive finance - the OP would need to argue that at the point they spoke to the sales person they believed all conditions had been met and the car was ready to be delivered, try argue that with a straight face)

matt_drummer

letom said:

For a verbal contract to form various things still need to have happened such as an:
- offer made by the dealer (which happened, though clearly subject to conditions),
- offer accepted by the OP (which happened),
- capacity to enter into the contract (debatable as it's not the dealer that provides the finance itself)
- consideration (ie money) to have exchanged (did not happen),
- meeting of minds where both parties would reasonably have assumed that a contract was formed at this point (did not happen, the fact this requires financing means no reasonable person would believe by simply accepting an offer would mean they would receive finance - the OP would need to argue that at the point they spoke to the sales person they believed all conditions had been met and the car was ready to be delivered, try argue that with a straight face)

You have this the wrong way around.

The customer makes the offer to purchase and the seller decides whether to accept or not.

The advert by the seller is called an invitation to treat, basically an invitation to make an offer that can be accepted or not.

This is a fundamental part of contract law and exists to prevent mistakes in things like pricing of goods on a shelf automatically committing a seller to a sale they would not otherwise agree to.

paul_c123

letom said:

paul_c123 said:

shakeitGB said:

I think I have a good case as I can demonstrate all my communications to them. 

A contract does not need to be written - it can be verbal. Is it fair to say that you formed a very basic/limited verbal contract, then no paperwork showed up so there is no written contract, not that it automatically supersedes and extinguishes a verbal contract unless both parties expressly agree it does.

So, it comes down to - do you have recordings of the conversation?* Otherwise a verbal contract degrades to a "he said she said" situation, where the dealer will undoubtedly clam up and/or lie (they're good at that).

The other problem you've had is you've suffered no losses - only an unfulfilled promise. You would have to prove quantifiable losses. And if you took out a lease at the higher price, it would be difficult to demonstrate that because it would be interpreted as "new business" not a continuation of the telephone deal; and at some point you would sign to the no doubt more restrictive terms and higher price. There would need to be a flaw in that contract to incur a loss on that one.

* Someone else more knowledgeable may be able to confirm/deny that unless you informed them it was being recorded at the time, it may be inadmissible. 

- consideration (ie money) to have exchanged (did not happen),

Consideration can be a promise, doesn't necessarily need to be an actual exchange of money. Given the obvious potential vagueness in a verbal contract, OP really needs to consider, if there's no recording its really not worth pursuing further. And if there is, quantify some losses.

matt_drummer

There is no contract here

A contract is generally not formed before consideration has been exchanged, as consideration is a fundamental requirement for a contract to be legally binding. For a contract to exist, there must be an offer, acceptance, and an exchange of something of value (consideration) from each party. Without this exchange, the promise is considered gratuitous and unenforceable, though some exceptions like promissory estoppel may apply in specific situations. 

user1977

The consideration can be undertaking an obligation to pay in the future, you don’t need to actually pay anything at the point of concluding the contract. Otherwise all the “buy now, pay later” deals etc wouldn’t be contracts.