Yes I know I should have checked the paperwork before parting with the money. I trusted that 'service history' meant that the car had been looked after properly.It was a deliberate attempt to deceive and I fell for it. I just wondered if a court would agree that the description of the car with 'service history' was misleading. It should have been described accurately as a partial or incomplete service history in which case I wouldn't have bought it.

I bought a 2007 toyota prius last week in west London -the desciption in autotrader included 'service history'. When I examined all the paperwork at home I saw that the last time the car was serviced was at 40,000 miles. The car has 74,000 on the clock. I asked the dealer for my money back because the description was misleading. He refused because there was a service history but not a 'full service history'. Does anyone know if his defence would stand up in court? Thanks for any help