Tweet
Appeal successful small claims judgment - snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
With thanks to the forum for helpful information in compiling the case, I recently successfully secured a judgment against a used car dealer for misselling a vehicle. The vehicle also had a persistent engine fault light that appeared soon after purchase that wasn't deemed sufficient reason to reject on grounds of satisfactory quality, which I continue to dispute. Nevertheless, the dealer has been ordered to collect the car for a partial refund.
I'm open to be persuaded otherwise if I'm biting off more than I can chew given the successful order already achieved, however I'm strongly inclined to appeal the terms and conditions of the order made in my favour.
We're a single-car household and couldn't afford to buy another vehicle immediately after rejection, nor to tax/insure/maintain the rejected vehicle while we waited many months for court proceedings. We informed the dealer at point of rejection that we'd carry on using the car for essential use if they refused to accept rejection, we did so for some months, and subsequently picked up an old banger when we could a few months before the hearing. We then SORNed the (considerably nicer & pricier!) reject at a relative's secure address to minimise wear & tear. As such an allowance was made in the order in the form of a substantial deduction from the price originally paid.
The amount deducted was determined on the hoof by the judge without any reference to any external sources reflecting the true retail value of the car. Auto Trader suggests depreciation of at most a few £100 would be realistic (in fact, in many cases, the make/model/year with higher mileage sells for more than we paid!) however a four-figure sum was deducted for a few thousand miles extra, probably influenced by the defendant suggesting an incredible 50%+ depreciation (bearing in mind the car is a mass-market model, 5+ year old with 40k+ miles on the clock). It's my understanding that had rejection been correctly honoured, I'd have been entitled to a full refund at the time regardless of mileage / wear & tear, so I think a case can be made that only the "extra" miles after rejection should be considered anyway.
The wording of the order specifies that the car must be in the same condition it was purchased apart from the extra miles on the clock (again, since purchase) - which I confirmed during the hearing was true to the best of my knowledge - however there's no allowance whatsoever in the written order for wear & tear. Clearly it's physically impossible for a car to travel many thousands of miles and remain in pristine showroom condition. This sounds like splitting hairs but the defendants are already demanding to inspect the vehicle before complying with the court order and collecting it, and from bitter experience they will not act reasonably in the process.
Finally it was accepted during the hearing that events in the defendant's sworn statements had not occurred. Lockdown conditions at point of sale meant that a test drive / inspection they claimed I'd conducted before purchase simply could not have happened lawfully (for context, the car was bought sight unseen and delivered). I'd gleefully see this investigated as contempt of court, but at very least feel that their input on an appropriate settlement should have been disregarded given their evident dishonesty during the process, not given benefit of the doubt.
In summary I'd like to achieve the following through an appeal:
1. The amount to be refunded should reflect the car's fair retail value, and the usage deduction accordingly much reduced or eliminated entirely
2. The order should explicitly specify wear & tear commensurate with the mileage to avoid any further disputes at point of collection
3. Recognition of the defendant's malfeasance reflected in the judge's discretionary order to award interest on the claim - which was wholly denied in the final judgment as it stands without explanation other than that I'd had "benefit" of the car, so awarding interest would be inappropriate
I've got Form N164 filled and ready to file (currently well within the permitted timeframe) but would be keen to use the forum as a sounding board before I embark on another epic amateur legal battle!
I'm open to be persuaded otherwise if I'm biting off more than I can chew given the successful order already achieved, however I'm strongly inclined to appeal the terms and conditions of the order made in my favour.
We're a single-car household and couldn't afford to buy another vehicle immediately after rejection, nor to tax/insure/maintain the rejected vehicle while we waited many months for court proceedings. We informed the dealer at point of rejection that we'd carry on using the car for essential use if they refused to accept rejection, we did so for some months, and subsequently picked up an old banger when we could a few months before the hearing. We then SORNed the (considerably nicer & pricier!) reject at a relative's secure address to minimise wear & tear. As such an allowance was made in the order in the form of a substantial deduction from the price originally paid.
The amount deducted was determined on the hoof by the judge without any reference to any external sources reflecting the true retail value of the car. Auto Trader suggests depreciation of at most a few £100 would be realistic (in fact, in many cases, the make/model/year with higher mileage sells for more than we paid!) however a four-figure sum was deducted for a few thousand miles extra, probably influenced by the defendant suggesting an incredible 50%+ depreciation (bearing in mind the car is a mass-market model, 5+ year old with 40k+ miles on the clock). It's my understanding that had rejection been correctly honoured, I'd have been entitled to a full refund at the time regardless of mileage / wear & tear, so I think a case can be made that only the "extra" miles after rejection should be considered anyway.
The wording of the order specifies that the car must be in the same condition it was purchased apart from the extra miles on the clock (again, since purchase) - which I confirmed during the hearing was true to the best of my knowledge - however there's no allowance whatsoever in the written order for wear & tear. Clearly it's physically impossible for a car to travel many thousands of miles and remain in pristine showroom condition. This sounds like splitting hairs but the defendants are already demanding to inspect the vehicle before complying with the court order and collecting it, and from bitter experience they will not act reasonably in the process.
Finally it was accepted during the hearing that events in the defendant's sworn statements had not occurred. Lockdown conditions at point of sale meant that a test drive / inspection they claimed I'd conducted before purchase simply could not have happened lawfully (for context, the car was bought sight unseen and delivered). I'd gleefully see this investigated as contempt of court, but at very least feel that their input on an appropriate settlement should have been disregarded given their evident dishonesty during the process, not given benefit of the doubt.
In summary I'd like to achieve the following through an appeal:
1. The amount to be refunded should reflect the car's fair retail value, and the usage deduction accordingly much reduced or eliminated entirely
2. The order should explicitly specify wear & tear commensurate with the mileage to avoid any further disputes at point of collection
3. Recognition of the defendant's malfeasance reflected in the judge's discretionary order to award interest on the claim - which was wholly denied in the final judgment as it stands without explanation other than that I'd had "benefit" of the car, so awarding interest would be inappropriate
I've got Form N164 filled and ready to file (currently well within the permitted timeframe) but would be keen to use the forum as a sounding board before I embark on another epic amateur legal battle!
