Taking a private seller to small claims over not as described.

[DaveDotNet]

Hi All.

Basically looking for advice.

I bought a car back in November for 12.5K and have had to spend 3K plus another 2k+ is required on getting the car as described in the listing and road worthy. It was listed as a cat N but stated it had been repaired.

The guy listed on auto trader as completely standard and drives without faults.

I bought the car but quickly noticed a few things were not right so took it for an inspection at a Audi specialist a few days later.

The following is the result:

ISSUES FOUND THAT ARE OR MAY BE MOT FAILURES:
REAR BRAKE PADS WORN VIRTUALLY DOWN TO THE METAL AND ADVISE IMMEDIATE REPLACEMENT.
N/S/R BRAKE ALSO BINDING SLIGHTLY. N/S/R TYRE ON WEAR LIMITS.
N/S/F UPPER SUSPENSION ARM BUSHES TORN.
O/S/F UPPER SUSPENSION ARM BUSHES TORN AND INCORRECT AND LOOSE NUTS AND BOLTS FITTED.
N/S/F OUTER DRIVE SHAFT GAITER SPLIT.
BOTH FRONT SUSPENSION LOWER REAR ARM BUSHES SPLIT / SOFT.
EXHAUST CLAMPS LEAKING.
FRONT PROP SHAFT JOINT CLIP MISSING.
PLAY IN STEERING RACK KNUCKLE TO COLUMN. (ADV)

ISSUES NOTED THAT WERE LIKELY CAUSED BY AN ACCIDENT OR POOR WORKMANSHIP FOLLOWING AN ACCIDENT:
AMAGE TO O/S OF GEARBOX AND SEVERE PLAY IN FLANGE.
O/S/F LOWER FRONT SUSPENSION ARM BENT.
N/S/F DRIVE SHAFT BENT. AUTO BOX COOLER PIPES BENT / KINKED, NOT ROUTED CORRECTLY AND BRACKET MISSING.
N/S/F ABS WIRING BADLY REPAIRED. POWER STEERING CABLES INCORRECTLY ROUTED.
O/S/F SIDE UNDERBODY TRIM LOOSE.
UNDERTRAY TWISTED AND BADLY FITTED WITH SELF TAPPING SCREWS.
UBFRAME POSSIBLY TWISTED.
N/S/F LOWER BODY MOULDING PARTIALLY DETACHED.
BRAKE VACUUM PIPE THROUGH BAULKHEAD LOOSE / MISSING GROMMET.
REDUNDANT MULTIPLUG POSSIBLY DUE TO INCORRECT FRONT END BEING FITTED.
UPPER FRONT PANEL TRIM DOESN'T MATE CORRECTLY TO BUMPER. (ADV)

O/S/R TYRE WORN TO 2MM.
SMELLS VERY RICH WHEN RUNNING.
COOLANT LEVEL LOW.
N/S/F TYRE CRACKING ON TREAD AND SIDEWALL.
NGINE SUMP LEAKING OIL.
AFTERMARKET CATALYTIC CONVERTERS FITTED.

I took it to another garage for a second opinion and the results were similar.

The upshot of this is I have currently spent around 3k on:
The subframe is fine it needed 8 new arms costing around 1.2K
Replacement driveshaft.
New PCV due to burning oil.
Injector clean

I then took the car for an emissions test and I smell fuel and fumes while driving it. It failed. I found out that the car had a map on it hiding the fact the catalytic converters were toast (along with being aftermarket so definitely not standard as stated) so have stopped all work and sought legal advice. Which I am looking at taking the guy to small claims.

I have sent my letter and the guy is denying all responsibility.

Do you think I have a good base for a claim? I have evidence in the form of invoices, estimates, conversations with my garage. Original Auto trader listing. I can get a statement from the garage too.

Thanks
David

[jaguarsuk]

The original listing, the faults listed by both garages and the cost to rectify the issues will be your evidence.

Your claim is for damages pursuant to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 s.11 'Goods to be as described.'

Was the letter you sent to the seller headed 'Letter Before Action' or in it did you tell them the consequence of refusing to pay or ignoring would result in a claim?

[islandgirl]

Was this purchased from a private individual or a garage? Edit - apologies just read the title! I would think it is very difficult to take a privite individual to court in these circumstances but I am not an expert in these matters and Jaguarsuk appears to think there is a chance and I hope this is the case. The defence would be that it does "drive without faults" (as it it goes along the road OK - the fact that there are 100s of issues does not affect that at this time). I will follow this with interest as I always believed it was Buyer Beware totally in a private sale. Apologies for not reading the title

[jaguarsuk]

Was this purchased from a private individual or a garage? Edit - apologies just read the title! I would think it is very difficult to take a privite individual to court in these circumstances but I am not an expert in these matters and Jaguarsuk appears to think there is a chance and I hope this is the case. The defence would be that it does "drive without faults" (as it it goes along the road OK - the fact that there are 100s of issues does not affect that at this time). I will follow this with interest as I always believed it was Buyer Beware totally in a private sale. Apologies for not reading the title

The same laws apply to private and corporate sellers, however the chances of recovering the money against a private seller are harder because the bailiffs/HCEO can only make peaceful entry to their home to seize assets.

That is unless they are selling multiple vehicles then there maybe vehicles to seize.

[DaveDotNet]

The original listing, the faults listed by both garages and the cost to rectify the issues will be your evidence.

Your claim is for damages pursuant to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 s.11 'Goods to be as described.'

Was the letter you sent to the seller headed 'Letter Before Action' or in it did you tell them the consequence of refusing to pay or ignoring would result in a claim?

Yeah it was. I spoke to citizens advice and they advised me on how to write the letter. I've sent evidence to him along with the letter and stated I plan on pursuing court action. I think it is worth doing anyway due to the amount of money involved.

The guy is also a director of a separate company, not relating to car sales so I doubt he wants a county court judgment against him relating to not paying.

[des8]

jaguarsuk as this was a private seller (and not a dealer pretending to be a private individual)how does Consumers Rights Act 2015 (CRA) apply?

Part 1
Sec 1 (1) states "This Part applies where there is an agreement between a trader and a consumer ......."

Sec 3 (1) states "This Chapter applies to a contract for a trader to supply goods to a consumer"

Please correct me if i am wrong but I thought the OP's protection would come from the Misrepresentation Act 1967

[DaveDotNet]

jaguarsuk as this was a private seller (and not a dealer pretending to be a private individual)how does Consumers Rights Act 2015 (CRA) apply?

Part 1
Sec 1 (1) states "This Part applies where there is an agreement between a trader and a consumer ......."

Sec 3 (1) states "This Chapter applies to a contract for a trader to supply goods to a consumer"

Please correct me if i am wrong but I thought the OP's protection would come from the Misrepresentation Act 1967

I was told by citizens advice it would be consumer rights act 2015:

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 does not apply to private sellers, and a buyer's rights are significantly reduced when a sale is carried out between two individuals. The law does state, however, that:

• the seller must have the right to sell the item in question (meaning they are the owner, or have permission from the owner to sell the item)

• the goods must match their description and the photograph used

Did you buy it from a private seller?

When you buy from an individual (as opposed to a retailer), the Consumer Rights Act says that the goods you get must be as they were described to you by the seller.

There's no obligation on the seller to disclose any faults, but misrepresenting goods isn't allowed.

[des8]

I was told by citizens advice it would be consumer rights act 2015:

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 does not apply to private sellers, and a buyer's rights are significantly reduced when a sale is carried out between two individuals. The law does state, however, that:

• the seller must have the right to sell the item in question (meaning they are the owner, or have permission from the owner to sell the item)

• the goods must match their description and the photograph used

Did you buy it from a private seller?

When you buy from an individual (as opposed to a retailer), the Consumer Rights Act says that the goods you get must be as they were described to you by the seller.

There's no obligation on the seller to disclose any faults, but misrepresenting goods isn't allowed.

Can you tell me what part ,chapter section and sub section of CRA 2015 says "that the goods you get must be as they were described to you by the seller.

[islandgirl]

I think that was my point. If he said it drives Ok and you were able to drive the car, you may struggle to get a refund. If he said "the car has no faults and is in excellent condition" that would be another story. I really hope this works out well for the OP and will be following with interest

[DaveDotNet]

I think that was my point. If he said it drives Ok and you were able to drive the car, you may struggle to get a refund. If he said "the car has no faults and is in excellent condition" that would be another story. I really hope this works out well for the OP and will be following with interest

The part i'm also going for is that he says the car was completely standard when it was not.

Broken aftermarket catalytic converters and ECU flash hiding this mainly.

The following is his wording:
"Audi A5 Black Edition, with fully stamped audi service history. The car drive without fault & is totally standard. The interior is in perfect condition, with no wear. Aircon is ice cold & all electrics are fully operational, with no warning lights showing on the dash. The alloy wheels have been professionally refurbished, with receipts to prove and are in as new condition. Externally the car is above average with only minor marks. Any inspection or trail is welcome. Test drives with proof of insurance only. I may consider a part exchange."

• UK Public General Acts
• 2015 c. 15
• PART 1
• CHAPTER 2
• What statutory rights are...
• Section 11

11Goods to be as described
(1)Every contract to supply goods by description is to be treated as including a term that the goods will match the description.

[islandgirl]

OK I think completely standard is not an accurate description! Thank you for the detail.

[DaveDotNet]

https://www.theaa.com/car-buying/legal-rights

"The only legal terms that cover a private sale contract are:

• The seller must have the right to sell the car.
• The vehicle should match the description given by the seller.
• The car must be roadworthy – it is a criminal offence to sell an unroadworthy car and an MOT certificate from a test several months ago is no guarantee that the car is roadworthy today."

AA are not a legal firm but there must be something in the law to give them that impression.

[des8]

So the bits of CRA 2015 you quote in post 10 do not apply to private sales as is made clear in post 6.

Yes, the car must match the description, but your protection is from the Misrepresentation Act.
Also, although it is a criminal offence for anyone to supply an unroadworthy vehicle (sec 75 of Road Traffic Act 1988) that will not help much in a civil claim.

[jaguarsuk]

jaguarsuk as this was a private seller (and not a dealer pretending to be a private individual)how does Consumers Rights Act 2015 (CRA) apply?

Part 1
Sec 1 (1) states "This Part applies where there is an agreement between a trader and a consumer ......."

Sec 3 (1) states "This Chapter applies to a contract for a trader to supply goods to a consumer"

Please correct me if i am wrong but I thought the OP's protection would come from the Misrepresentation Act 1967

Apologies I was reading it as if he is a sole trader selling the car not a private individual.

If he's selling it as an individual in his name then des8 is correct.

[DaveDotNet]

Cheers for the advice guys. So I should still have a leg to stand on so to speak as the description imo is inaccurate. I was just given the wrong law by cit advice.