Taking Private Seller to SCC, help please!

[ellie1997]

This may be long, I'll try and keep it as concise as possible.

 

Ten days ago my son purchased a car on the basis of this advertisement:

 

3 door hatchback, petrol, manual. Excellent condition, 2 previous owners now owned by a lady owner has 6 months tax and 6 months mot has electric windows, air con, cd player and tape. In the 8 months I have owned it not a single thing has gone wrong, fantastic runner, expecting a baby is our reason for sale.

 

Within days it had lost 2 litres of oil despite covering less than 50 miles. We booked it into a local garage who confirmed that the head had been taken off the engine in an attempt to mask head gasket problems and that the car had recently been filled with sealant in various places to try and mask valve seal issues. The garage are willing to stand up in court and testify to this, we are also planning on gaining a separate independent report which will back up the first one.

 

Having spoken to the seller his attitude is "Tough, cars blow up, see you in court", unfortunately for him I believe this is where he will come unstuck as it would seem that 90% of the advertisement I quoted above is a fairy tale.

 

This is a copy of the letter we sent yesterday giving him 7 days, in 7 days time we plan on sending an LBA via recorded. I hped someone could perhaps help me with the wording of that?

 

Dear Mr ********

Re Volkswagen Polo 1.2 Registration ********

 

On the 16th April 2012 I purchased the above vehicle from yourself on the basis of your

advertisement in Autotrader, a copy of which is included with this letter. The advert states that:

 

“In the 8 Months I have owned it not a single thing has gone wrong”

“Fantastic Runner”

 

I was therefore surprised to learn having covered less than 150 miles in the vehicle that it needs repair to both the Head Gasket and Valve Stem Seals making the engine beyond

economical repair.

Having had the car inspected by a local independent garage they have confirmed

discrepancies between the description of the car in the advertisement and the actual

condition of the vehicle.

 

Obvious signs of recent removal of the engine head, shown by the mounts to the engine block being clean with no grease or oil consistent with other areas, indicating removal of the head in the last 4-6 weeks.

Recent tool marks around the head.

New gaskets fitted to Exhaust Manifold which are clean. The bolts are also clean of oil and grease. The gasket has been fitted within the last 4-6 weeks.

Air Filter Housing and Rocker Cover show green sealant.

Green sealant around spark plugs

Timing chain cover shows traces of new sealant.

Recent Sealant applied to sump.

Sealant on timing cover where it meets the sump.

 

The works identified are indicative of a temporary repair aimed at masking a larger problem.

We have detailed photographs showing the above areas some of which I have included.

 

Some research into the history of the car also proves that the above statements cannot be true for the following reason:

 

Your advertisement claims “In the 8 months I have owned it” yet the title changed to the Vehicle in March and the owner in October 2011 at the last MOT was also not you. 8 months have not elapsed.

 

Advertisement states “now owned by a lady owner,” also not the case.

 

The car has more than 2, or even 3 previous owners.

 

I have included a copy of your autotrader advertisement.

 

The Sale of Goods Act 1979, which applies to retail, trade and private sales, makes it an

implied term of the contract that goods are accurately described and no way

misrepresented. Rights to this cannot by law be restricted with the statement ‘sold as seen’ or other.

 

On the basis that your description of the car is misrepresented, you are in breach of contract and I am rejecting the vehicle and request that you refund the total sum paid to you of £1650

 

I look forward to hearing from you in the next seven days to arrange the return of the vehicle and full refund.

 

Yours sincerely

 

We do have a piece of paper signed 'sold as seen', however, Trading Standards advises me that this does not restrict my rights regarding misdesription, and this advert is full of misdescription.

 

I'm awaiting a phone call today from a car dealer who sold this car in December 2011, he is willing to provide me with a copy of the invoice which proves the seller has not owned this car for 8 months.

 

Seller claims that the work must have been done before he purchased the car, trader is also willing to put pen to paper and confirm that the engine was not full of sealant when he sold it.

 

I have some excellent photos to illustrate which I will upload today.

 

Many thanks for any help you can give us! This is my sons first car, he's devastated and now the car is sat in the garage unused while son is having to pay insurance on it

 

Best wishes

Jane

[ellie1997]

This is the link to the album showing a few photos we have of sealant, evidence of recent tool scratches around the head, sealant around the head, clean bolts where the head meets the engine, new gaskets etc

 

http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y111/pulliptears/Poloevidence/?albumview=slideshow

 

Mechanic will give us a written testimony that the above works will have taken place within the last 4-6 weeks, evident from the lack of grease or oil coving the works. As the car has covered less than 150 miles since purchase he is willing to state that these problems were not as a result of fair wear and tear and were there when purchased which negates the statement "fantastic runner" and means that the statement "In the 8 Months I have owned it not a single thing has gone wrong" cannot possibly be truthful.

[reallymadwoman]

I think you have a good case against the seller (are you sure it is a private seller?) and what you have written makes your point perfectly. I hope it has the desired effect.

 

Having said that, have you thought this all the way through? If it goes to court and if you win, how are you going to get the money? I don't know how much is involved but what if the other party either doesn't pay at all or convinces the court he can only pay £10 a month? I'm not trying to put you off but having been in a similar situation myself (won the case but had trouble getting them to pay) you need to be aware of what could happen. My case eventually turned out ok but for a while we were pretty sure we'd not only lost the original money but also the court fees.

[ellie1997]

As I am certain that this seller will not hold his hands up and admit to any of this I am now trying to prepare papers for court, I apologise for writing all this down in one shot but there are things I wanted to know while they are fresh in my head.

 

On purchasing the car we knew it needed 2 new front tyres so son purchased these, along with tracking at a cost of £100. Can this be claimed back as the work was done before the major problems became apparent?

Insurance is still running on the vehicle, and at £200 a month is expensive. Can this be reclaimed along with the final cost of cancelling the insurance should we win and the car be returned?

Can we claim storage charge for the vehicle and if so at what cost per week?

Can we reclaim the court fees of £100?

Can we reclaim the cost of the second vehicle inspection we need to have completed?

 

We were happy to just get back the £1650 initially and write off the additional costs, however, I want to start preparations now for filing court papers so if I know what I am allowed to claim and what I'm not I can sort out some costings etc.

 

Thank you

[ellie1997]

I think you have a good case against the seller (are you sure it is a private seller?) and what you have written makes your point perfectly. I hope it has the desired effect.

 

Having said that, have you thought this all the way through? If it goes to court and if you win, how are you going to get the money? I don't know how much is involved but what if the other party either doesn't pay at all or convinces the court he can only pay £10 a month? I'm not trying to put you off but having been in a similar situation myself (won the case but had trouble getting them to pay) you need to be aware of what could happen. My case eventually turned out ok but for a while we were pretty sure we'd not only lost the original money but also the court fees.

 

Hi,

The cost involved is £1650 at present, the seller lives with his parents so we hoped that they would bail him out if it came to it (big house,reasonably affluent area etc).

 

I don't think the guy is a trader, I've been digging and can't find any evidence yet. He was unemployed for a few months and we believe he probably purchased the car cheaply to fix and make a few quid on, I think he's fairly green around the ears from the wording of his ad as I'd be surprised if a trader would use the statement "In the 8 Months I have owned it not a single thing has gone wrong"

 

We know he is working now and was bragging about his £300 a week joinery job so hopefully not all will be lost if we win. I'd had this conversation with my husband last night and we came to the conclusion it was our only option to take him to court, to fix would be £700 - £800 and a new engine which son cannot afford, and in present condition the car is scrap value. I'm willing to throw £200 at it in the hope we do get somewhere. I was going to ask if he didn't pay could we employ a bailiff to seize goods? He has a reasonably new van on the drive he purchased for work.

 

I'm glad your case worked out well! Can I ask how long it took to resolve?

[mjjc8486]

Hi,

 

My understanding of this, is that should you win at court, (and soundsl ike you have a good case,) you would get court fees back, and probably the 2nd report yes.

 

I am unsure on the tyres costing, you say you knew it needed new tyres, perhaps one of the other Caggers would know this.

 

With regards to the insurance, I assume the vehicle is currently not being used, if this is the case, you could suspend the policy to a basic policy to keep your NCB etc and pay a lot less, alternatively, if you have no NCB, you could cancel the policy until this is sorted and declare the car SORN. That way, you could get your tax back etc as well, as long as the vehicle is somewhere off road, - clearly, if it is kept on the road, then unfortunately, you would need to keep tax and insurance current etc.

 

I hope this helps, I am just unsure on if you could claim for the tyres????

 

Keep us updated.

[ellie1997]

Hi,

 

My understanding of this, is that should you win at court, (and soundsl ike you have a good case,) you would get court fees back, and probably the 2nd report yes.

 

I am unsure on the tyres costing, you say you knew it needed new tyres, perhaps one of the other Caggers would know this.

 

With regards to the insurance, I assume the vehicle is currently not being used, if this is the case, you could suspend the policy to a basic policy to keep your NCB etc and pay a lot less, alternatively, if you have no NCB, you could cancel the policy until this is sorted and declare the car SORN. That way, you could get your tax back etc as well, as long as the vehicle is somewhere off road, - clearly, if it is kept on the road, then unfortunately, you would need to keep tax and insurance current etc.

 

I hope this helps, I am just unsure on if you could claim for the tyres????

 

Keep us updated.

 

Thank you, the insurance advice is something I hadn't considered. The car is garaged and is not being used now it has been rejected. My son did take legal cover on his insurance so perhaps thats something we could use?

 

At this stage we would be happy with a full refund, but as I dont think it will be forthcoming I want to find out what we can and can't claim back. Kicking ourselves really as we should have seen this. Text messages from the seller are further incriminating and he claims to have owned the car for 7 months in them, yet this cannot possibly be correct.

 

The V5 arrived in the post moments ago and "now owned by a lady owner" is completely untrue as the previous keeper is named 'Tom'. It also lists 4 previous keepers not the 2 he claims in the ad.

 

Another interesting point is the previous keeper 'Tom' is not the 'David' we purchased the car from and is a completely different address. I am attempting to track down Tom and may pay him a visit tonight as he is reasonably local to me to find out why he sold the car and who to. I have a feeling the lack of keeper change to the seller possibly indicates he is a trader....

 

With the benefit of hindsight there were many red flags we should have noted, believe me we are kicking ourselves thoroughly now.

Will keep you informed.

Thanks

[assisted blonde]

If the van is for work then baliffs would be unable to take it as tools of his trade.

[Bang!]

I don't see you losing the case - but I think you will be sending in bailiffs to annoy the parents into paying.

 

However, before running up more costs and time, its likely you will win upon his failure to defend - so wasting resources presently serves little purpose (other than self satisfaction).

[ellie1997]

My husband has taken to calling me Miss Marple lol. I've had a constructive day to say the least....

 

Telephoned Autotrader who run the advertisement. It seems when cars are advertised via their site they log the registration numbers, helpfully they emailed me a copy of the advertisement for the registration number of my sons car:

 

2003 03 Reg Volkswagen Polo 1.2 S 55 3dr [AC] Hatchback3 Door Hatchback, Blue, Petrol, Manual, Passenger airbag, Front electric windows, Radio/Cd Player, Rear wiper, ABS, Folding rear seats.cheap to fuel excellent condition owned by a lady owner looked after well. 7 months m.o.t tax till end of march 2012.£2,000Tel:

 

But wait I hear you say! That ad is different. Correct, it is, so I called Autotrader back who tell me that the second advertisement, the one on which basis we purchased the car, was listed fraudulently using an incorrect registration number for the car, and incorrect enough for it not to be a key press error. Autotrader tell me this is how Traders masquerading as private sellers often operate... Unfortunately for my [EDIT] he used a photo of my sons car showing clearly the correct registration number.

 

I then decided to pay 'Tom', the 'lady' owner a visit. Tom wasn't in, but I did speak to his Mother who knew nothing of this car she claimed. Tom, she tells me is a mechanic (lightbulb moment!) and is away at the moment. I tell her that Tom needs to contact me as this is now fraud unfortunately and as his name is on the log book he's in just as deep as the seller. Mother then strangely says "Well, you buy cars sold as seen dont you?". I point out that 'sold as seen' cannot override my rights and in this case its misdescription. I show her the evidence. She looks worried.

 

I arrive home to several emails from a good friend of mine who weirdly knows the seller, he has found dozens of Facebook photographs of Seller and Tom together in all sorts of social situations. Tom and seller are good friends it seems, looks like they have a little bit of dodgy trading going on doesn't it?

 

The final, wonderful bit of icing on the cake was a text message seller sent this morning stating:

 

You decided to buy off a Private Trader instead of a dealership and thats the risk you run

 

So, big round of applause to the best comedy double act Stone, Staffordshire has to offer. The evidence of fraud has mounted to such an extent that the local Police are nipping in later for a chat about it.

 

In the meantime I am hand delivering a letter to the seller again tonight containing all extra evidence gleaned today. Ball is in his court now, unless he wants to avoid a very messy court case and possible prosecution he needs to be refunding £1650 asap.

[ellie1997]

I'm planning on sending this, hand delivered this evening. Thoughts?

 

Dear Mr ******

Re Volkswagen Polo 1.2 Registration 000000000

 

Further to my hand delivered letter of 26th April 2012 I can confirm that I have

spoken to Name removed and Name removed of Autotrader’s Security Team to obtain an electronic copy of the advertisement. Imagine my surprise when, on searching the registration number of the car they found this advertisement from earlier in the year(copies of which are included):

 

2003 03 Reg Volkswagen Polo 1.2 S 55 3dr [AC] Hatchback3 Door Hatchback, Blue, Petrol, Manual, Passenger airbag, Front electric windows, Radio/Cd Player, Rear wiper, ABS, Folding rear seats.cheap to fuel excellent condition owned by a lady owner looked after well. 7 months m.o.t tax till end of march 2012.£2,000

Tel: 000000000000

 

Fortunately I had kept copies of your original advertisement, along with the

electronic reference number printed on it. With that Autotrader were able to

confirm that your second advertisement, the one on the basis of which we

purchased the car, was listed using a different registration number to the actual

vehicle. This is additionally strange as the advertisement clearly shows the vehicle we purchased and the correct registration number. Autotrader tell me this practice is often used by Traders masquerading as Private Sellers. Full copies of the

advertisements, and all other advertisements linked to yourself have now been

requested via the Data Protection act through Trading Standards.

 

Having received the V5 in the post this morning it is also interesting to note that there are 4 previous keepers of this vehicle, not 2 as claimed in the advertisement. I have paid a visit to Mr Tom , the listed previous keeper of the vehicle this

afternoon, he is, his mother assures me, certainly not female. Mr Tom is however a mechanic and from the Facebook photographs I have obtained of the two of you together in several social situations a rather good friend of yours. Somewhat

interesting then that the vehicle has undergone extensive mechanical works in the last few months then is it not?

 

Furthermore, I am in possession of a text message from yourself which states:

You decided to buy off a Private Trader instead of a dealership and thats the risk you run

 

Trader? But Mr ******, you claim to be a private seller in your advertisements.

 

I put it to you Mr ****** that you and Mr Tom purchased this vehicle with the intentions of repairing and reselling, however, the repair made to the vehicle failed somewhat prematurely. I also put it to you that you and Mr Tom are motor

traders.

 

Having spoken to my local Police Force this evening I have obtained a crime

reference number of:00000000 in regards to the fraudulent sale of this vehicle.

 

I request once again that the full amount of £1650 be refunded to me on return of the vehicle and the matter will not then be taken further.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2012 by ellie1997

[ellie1997]

Additionally, as I now believe 'Tom' and Seller are a partnership is it worth copying Tom in on all correspondence as it is Tom's name on the V5?

[Ganymede]

I admire your investigatory skills but unless you can prove that the person that sold you the car is a business rather than a private individual then you may be on a sticky wicket.

 

To answer a few other questions:

 

1) No you can't claim storage as it hasn't cost you anything and you've suffered no loss.

 

2) No you can't claim for the new tires you put on.

 

3) If you get a judgment then no the bailiffs cannot levy on a work van. Also I doubt if he lives with his parents he'll have any assets.

 

Also what is this 'misdescription' you keep referring to? Not so sure you have the terminology right there which you would need to correct before issuing proceedings.

 

Its a small claims track case at the end of the day so there will be no costs (usually) to pay even if you lose.

[Bang!]

I expect you probably have done so already - but did you do a search on the phone number to see if it had been used for adverts selling any other cars too?

 

Ad trader used to limit the number of car sales through each phone number to two or three a year, asking Autotrader about this might prove interesting too.

 

Even just chancing they do it often and suggesting you are contacting HMR&C regarding their being de facto car dealers might kick them a bit further in the direction you want.

[ellie1997]

Hi Ganymede (hows titan btw? )

 

I can't prove it sadly, I can prove he deliberately disguised the registration number for the second autotrader ad, which Autotrader will confirm is standard practice for a trader. TS are obtaining full records from AT for me.

 

TS advised me that the advert was misdescription, though they probably mean misrepresented:

 

legally, the seller must:

accurately describe the second hand car (for example, an advert must not say ‘one owner’, when the car has had several)

not misrepresent the second hand car (tell you something about the car which isn’t true – so, for example, if you ask whether the car has ever been in an accident, the owner must answer truthfully)

 

 

Read more: http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-goods/your-rights-buying-second-hand-cars/second-hand-cars-your-rights/#ixzz1tGIsFE4m

Consumer Champions Which?

Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial

 

I guess at this stage I just want to give the guy a scare and let him know that we are on to him in the hope that we dont have to go to court. Perhaps best left with the letter for now then, I just wanted to put the additional evidence that we didnt include in last nights letter to him really.

 

Would you send a copy of everything to 'Tom' as well?

[ellie1997]

I expect you probably have done so already - but did you do a search on the phone number to see if it had been used for adverts selling any other cars too?

 

Ad trader used to limit the number of car sales through each phone number to two or three a year, asking Autotrader about this might prove interesting too.

 

Even just chancing they do it often and suggesting you are contacting HMR&C regarding their being de facto car dealers might kick them a bit further in the direction you want.

 

I have a few phone numbers for them now, all of which have been passed to Autotrader but until TS contact them to obtain the info I cant do much, google searches dont come up with much and AT ads dont stay online for long to search.

 

I'm quite close to finding out which garage Tom works for, might be worth paying it a visit. Wonder if his boss knows he's selling dodgy motors on the side that have been bodged in his garage?

[Bang!]

Try here - I am unsure if it will work...

 

http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.autotrader.co.uk/

 

 

I tried to look - but for some reason its activating an "over 18 only" filter from my ISP. It must be some HOT motors!!! :D:D

[ellie1997]

LMAO, it will be those topless cars

 

Sadly doesnt reveal anything, but thank you.

[Ganymede]

Remember that the owner and registered keeper of the vehicle can be separate people...

[Surfer01]

Maybe you should become a detective? Outstanding work and research. A judge will be impressed. I think you are onto a winner with this case. I wonder what the "boss" at the garage will have to say as maybe Mr Tom is switching engines and charging customers for a recondition engine. Be careful as the boss may be in cahoots with Mr Tom.

[oddjobbob]

Oh deary me.....

 

The point being very seriuosly missed here is that when yuo buy a car from a private seller your rights are very very limited indeed.

 

Personally I think you've done a great job of tracknig the seller down etc., but what trading standards etc have told you applies to TRADE SALES only.

 

you might just get somewhere if the seller doesn't turn up at court or something but you really are on sticky ground.. and the other thing is that winning in court is NOT the same as getting paid.

 

Be careful....

[Surfer01]

Oh deary me.....

 

The point being very seriuosly missed here is that when yuo buy a car from a private seller your rights are very very limited indeed.

 

Personally I think you've done a great job of tracknig the seller down etc., but what trading standards etc have told you applies to TRADE SALES only.

 

you might just get somewhere if the seller doesn't turn up at court or something but you really are on sticky ground.. and the other thing is that winning in court is NOT the same as getting paid.

 

Be careful....

 

If a private seller misrepresents the item to you, it is an offence and you can take them to court and win!

[Bang!]

Not only was it a misrepresentation by the ad, the car itself was also a misrepresentation, as it had been faked up with the sole intention to deceive.

[ellie1997]

Ok, spoken to Action Fraud, fortunate that the Met Police have chosen now to crack down on Fraud really isn't it

 

We have a crime number and they are investigating, they are especially thrilled at the text where he says he's a trader, as will be HMRC who action fraud also work with. No more correspondence has been sent, nor will be sent now until the LBA next week which will be sent recorded to the seller only. LBA will not include our evidence, just the basic facts that we are taking him to court for misrepresentation of the vehicle.

Son has spoken to his insurance and spoke to a wonderful lady who, on hearing the story, waived the £40 cancellation fee for him. When we need to take it back either me or his Dad will insure it for him.

 

So, lets bring it on then! Will keep this updated.

[oddjobbob]

Oh good. In that case I'll return to this thread in a few months and we can all learn about how easy it is to take a private car seller to court, win the case and get your mnoey.

 

See you soon....