Hi Guys, In May 2012 I saw an advert for a kit car in an online classified website which caught my eye. The car was advertised as being off the road on SORN (no tax or mot) for 2 years but kept in good working order, been recently serviced (DIY) and it just needed 3 things to pass an MOT. I called the seller to enquire further and made him aware that I am quite far away and can't come to view the car so he will have to tell me the history of the car and I will be relying on what he tells me to make any decisions as well as requiring further photographs of it. He said thats absolutely fine and we went over the history of the car and why it has been off the road for 2 years and his reasons for selling it. Everything in our correspondence sounded legit and reasonable. The facts about the car as he presented them; Car was built in 2000 and had been MOT'd upto 2009 when it was taken off the road to do some modifications. then he started a family and the modifications were started but not finished and now he doesn't have time for it. It has been looked after while off the road and various bits of maintenance have been done as well as the engine being started regularly and warmed up. He stated 3 specific things which needed to be done for the car to be ready for an MOT test all relatively minor. He stated he is an engineer and its been excellently looked after - I believed him. I decided to buy the car and organise it to be picked up and delivered to me. I telephoned him and stated that I am happy to offer him the asking price on the basis of everything he has told me and his answers to all my questions. I paid him a deposit while I organised for the car to be picked up and delivered to me. I then paid the balance the night before the car was due to be transported and the seller stated he would hand all documentation for the car and some spares to the transporter driver to give to me. When I got the car; 1. There were only 2 MOT certificates from 2000 & 2001 - I was told it was MOT'd upto and including 2009. 2. The 3 things which I was told are required for the MOT seemed as discussed. 3. On trying to start the car the battery was flat. 4. On trying to start the car with a fully charged battery it wouldn't. Further investigation revealed the fuel tank was bone dry and disconnected. The fuel line from the petrol tank to the main fuel supply line was missing. 5. The car has no horn fitted which is an MOT requirement. So that means there are 4 things required for the MOT. 6. Once I got the car started I found the water pump dribbles water (is on its way out) and water overflows from the radiator. 7. The fuel lines in the engine bay which connect the carburettors leak and dribble fuel which is unsafe and an MOT failure making the number of MOT points 5. 8. I cannot engage reverse gear. I contacted the seller; 1. Asking about the MOT's for 2002-2009 He said he thought there were all together and it must be the wife has filed them with the old registration document and if he finds time he will have a look for them. 2. Empty Petrol tank; He said he drained the petrol out prior to it being collected as he didn't know how long it would be standing for and all I need to do is reconnect the fuel line to the tank and fill it up. Following that email I sent him another stating I can't start the car and that the horn doesn't work and that I phoned VOSA and they stated they have no record of any MOT for this car since 2005 - when MOT's were computerised. After that email he stopped responding to me and doesn't answer the phone or respond to voicemails for 2 weeks I have been phoning him. My Issues are; 1. MOT history has been lied about. VOSA have no computer records of an MOT since 2005 where he told me the car passed MOT's upto 2009. 2. I still fail to see any reasoning why someone would drain the petrol out of the fuel tank. With the missing fuel tank connection it seems to me that this car has not been started for some time or he did not want me to be able to start the car straight away. Especially as the battery is also dead it contradicts his statement he started the car prior to it being collected. I haven't had his feedback on the points below as he is now ignoring me; 3. The leaking water pump & radiator is also a lie or cover up. If he had been starting the car regularly as he claimed then he would have known about the leaks. So he lied it had no leaks when I asked him. 4. The leaking engine bay fuel lines are another possible trigger why it was drained of fuel. 5. The missing horn & leaking fuel lines makes the number of MOT issues 5 not 3 as I was told. 6. I haven't yet investigated the reverse gear problem. Also the fact he has started ignoring me doesn't look good. So my problem is; 1. With how the car has turned out - I would not have offered him the asking amount - especially if the car hasn't bee MOT'd since 2002 and sitting in a garage for 9 years instead of the 2 years he told me. 2. I will have to spend an additional £150-£200 to rectify the issues I know about. If the gearbox turns out to be faulty and needs rebuilding/replacement that will be another £200-£300. In my last voicemail I did mention he has misrepresented the car to me and I will be taking the matter further. What are my 'realistic' available options now? Thanks.

On the 13th of October I ordered a watch from Amazon. They were running a promotion on their 'luxury' watches and the discount was such that I finally caved and placed my order despite delivery being listed as 'Usually dispatched within 2 to 5 weeks.' I'd been monitoring the watch for a while and it had been 2 to 5 weeks for as long as I can remember. 5 weeks was approaching and there was no sign of my watch, but I had every confidence in Amazon fulfilling my order. A few days ago the 'availability guide' changed to 'Temporarily Out of Stock'. It was at this point I thought, I know where this is going. It's only a matter of time... Anyway, it happened. Yesterday morning I got the email cancelling my order and inviting me to purchase from other suppliers (at significantly higher prices) and the 'availability guide' has changed to 'Sign up to be notified when this item becomes available'. I think Amazon had no intention of providing the watch at the advertised (sale) price. They probably had no stock, but still took orders knowing that when it does finally come back in stock they can sell it at the usual, higher price. They were just using the promo to increase traffic, with no intention of fulfilling orders. The bottom line is I feel Amazon should provide the goods at the agreed sale price and I'm willing to wait for them to get hold of it. Is this reasonable? Is there anything I can do to facilitate this outcome? Or should I just forget about it? I'm really annoyed and feel like I've been robbed. I think my browser is fubar. Is the formatting in my post working? I'll have to check it at home and correct if necessary. Sorry.