Buyer beware? advice please

[Guest Breadvan72]

He who alleges must prove.

 

What is a business?  Activity that is incidental to the pursuit of a hobby or recreation is, I would argue, not carrying on a business. 

 

See Customs and Excise Commissioners v Lord Fisher [1981] STC 236 and see also Sassi v HMRC [2009] UKFTT 280 (TC).  In IRC v Marine Steam Turbine [1920] KB 193, the Court took the view that the word “business†was used in the sense of “an active occupation or profession continuously carried onâ€Â.   

 

 In Scarth v Amin [2008] EWHC 2886 QB, Tugendhat and Clarke JJ said of “business†at 36-37:-

 

We note that the word “business†can have a broad meaning.    The Oxford English Dictionary gives the following meanings:

 

“III 11.a … a person's official duty …; function occupation… 12.a A person's official or professional duties as a whole; stated occupation, profession, or trade…â€Â

 

There are the following definitions given in other legal contexts:

 

i) “Business†is a wider term than “tradeâ€Â, and not synonymous with it, and means almost anything which is an occupation as distinguished from a pleasure. However the term must be construed according to its context: 47 Halsbury's Laws: 4th Ed [2001 Edition] para 6. See Rolls v Miller [1884] 27 Ch D 71 (“The word [“businessâ€Â] means almost anything which is an occupation as distinguished from a pleasure - anything which is an occupation or duty which requires attention is a business†per Lindley, LJ).

 

ii) In the Sale of Goods Act 1979 Ã¢â‚¬Å“business†is defined as including the activities of any government department or local or public authority: section 61 (1) . A similar definition appears in section 14 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 .

 

iii) Under the Landlord & Tenant Act 1954 section 23 (2) Ã¢â‚¬Å“business†includes a trade, profession or employment, and includes any activity carried on by a body of persons whether corporate or incorporate. Whether an activity which is carried on by an individual tenant is a trade profession or employment so as to attract the statutory protection is a question of degree to be decided in the light of all the circumstances existing: Halsbury's Laws 4th Ed [Reissue] Vol 27 (1) para 565.

[Cavcraft]

I want to see what happens in Motoscarth Vs Admin when Autoshite finally sue Lacquer Peel for defecation of character after he buys a non-veg oil friendly car.

[ukrainespacemonkey]

Sent off the suggested response around lunchtime today. This is his reply. I fully expect further replies to include facts and statistics about how many lives airbags have saved since their introduction into cars. Whats more, he still insists he's happy with the car!

 

Michael.

 

 

 

 

 

Dear ukrainespacemonkey,

Ok Michael thanks for the reply. Although I am surprised you did not know I certainly cant prove it now and apart from that I like and am happy with the car (plus it would be a pity to spoil what was a pleasant transaction). In all my years of buying s/h cars I would never even think of going back to any private seller or causing a fuss for a fault and just put it right - you expect some faults on a S/H car but not no airbags. So what I will do is take it for an MOT and see what happens. If it passes with no comment then fair enough I will accept you sold in good faith and did not know. If not and I want to take it further then I will probably report the MOT stn to the VOSA standards. Dont forget YOU could have had a crash and be killed because of them! Seat belts and airbags are now an MOT requirement and one of the biggest reasons for reduction in car related accident death and injuries so I don't think you can say non working ones dont make the car unsafe. 
BTW Please see the attached link for things that should NOT pass a MOT. and what citezens advice says about buying a falsly described car.
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/car-servicing-repair/mot-changes-2012.html.
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_problems_with_the_car_you_bought_e/consumer_the_vehicle_you_bought_doesnt_match_its_description_e/the_vehicle_you_bought_doesnt_match_its_description.htm
Regards
Graham
 

- pls2meetyou

[Split_Pin]

I think that sounds like a mild retraction of previous pish dealt by your buyer. Pretty sure that will be that as far as you are concerned.

[Guest Breadvan72]

I interpret that as under equipped and over confident reconnaissance forces beating a hasty retreat after finding the position strongly defended and taking casualties.  I think the attack will now be called off, but if he comes back at you, let me know.  

[Guest Breadvan72]

If you want to reply, you can say -

 

Thank you for your email.   I do not accept that the car was misdescribed.  I have taken advice from an experienced lawyer and am assured that I have no liability to you.  I take it that this matter is now concluded.

[Micrashed]

 

 

Dear ukrainespacemonkey,

 

 citezens advice says about buying a falsly described car.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_problems_with_the_car_you_bought_e/consumer_the_vehicle_you_bought_doesnt_match_its_description_e/the_vehicle_you_bought_doesnt_match_its_description.htm

Regards

Graham

 

- pls2meetyou

 

As far as I can see you did not falsely describe the car - OK, the advert lacked detail that I would put in if I were to sell the MicraShed, but you didnt say "airbags all good" or similar.

 

That said you didnt say "Airbags all missing" which if they were could possibly be taken as omission, though as you say - its gone through two MOT tests that you know of like that.

 

But I reiterate what I said earlier about how it is possible to have an airbag steering wheel / glove box / side curtain / seat curtain deploy without it being noticeable as the carriers are damaged when they deploy - or why would anyone go through the trouble of removing the bag and explosive charge before replacing the undamaged carrier if they were removing the airbag set???

[retrogeezer]

Here's a response of mine to some 'new cars are much safer' fella on another site, feel free to send it to him to show how much less likely he is to be killed in a crash than walking down the road and falling over: 

 

Looking at this chart it looks like road deaths have dropped by around 1500-1800 since 1990 to just under 2000 deaths. Those 2000 deaths would include pedestrians/cyclists/motorcyclists (probably the highest of the lot)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Killed_on_British_Roads.png

There are 63 million people in the UK so that is a 0.00317 chance of being killed in a road accident, even less as a car driver. 
How much lower a risk do you think it is by driving a newer car?

There is also huge classic car ownership in the UK, do you think people shouldn't use their classics because of the risk when they are out in them? 

You are more likely to die from a DIY injury at home. Do you not do DIY because it's more risky than driving?

2293 people died in transport related accidents in 2011 (922 in cars) 3593 died because of a fall, so don't walk anywhere!

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/14/mortality-statistics-causes-death-england-wales-2009#zoomed-picture

In my opinion the 'safety' of cars is just a massive sales tool because that it what the car industry is, a profit making organistion, not a health and safety one.

[oldford]

 

Sent off the suggested response around lunchtime today. This is his reply. I fully expect further replies to include facts and statistics about how many lives airbags have saved since their introduction into cars. Whats more, he still insists he's happy with the car!

 

Michael.

 

 

 

 

 

Dear ukrainespacemonkey,

 

Ok Michael thanks for the reply. Although I am surprised you did not know I certainly cant prove it now and apart from that I like and am happy with the car (plus it would be a pity to spoil what was a pleasant transaction). In all my years of buying s/h cars I would never even think of going back to any private seller or causing a fuss for a fault and just put it right - you expect some faults on a S/H car but not no airbags. So what I will do is take it for an MOT and see what happens. If it passes with no comment then fair enough I will accept you sold in good faith and did not know. If not and I want to take it further then I will probably report the MOT stn to the VOSA standards. Dont forget YOU could have had a crash and be killed because of them! Seat belts and airbags are now an MOT requirement and one of the biggest reasons for reduction in car related accident death and injuries so I don't think you can say non working ones dont make the car unsafe. 

BTW Please see the attached link for things that should NOT pass a MOT. and what citezens advice says about buying a falsly described car.

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/car-servicing-repair/mot-changes-2012.html.

 

 

- pls2meetyou

 

That link's a bit out of date, how the tester has to test and what test standards are applied are all detailed here:

 

http://www.transportoffice.gov.uk/crt/doitonline/bl/mottestingmanualsandguides/mottestingmanualsandguides.htm

 

After 30 days from test, VOSA won't be interested in an appeal for SRS systems.

 

If he wanted a statistically safe car he should have bought a Cortina as you can bet last year that fewer people were involved in accidents involving Cortinas than there were in accidents involving Focusses.

[Tayne]

Statistically, a Horsey Horseless would have been a better bet.

[Pillock]

Nobody died whilst shagging a goat in 2013 so there's a suggestion what the buyer can do to stay safe

 

It does sound like he's backing down a bit though so you can chill.... Perhaps he's realised that it's not your fault and you didn't set out to con him.

[Morgan84]

VOSA will not take any action after 28 days for a mechanical defect so that will be a sorry, can't help you from VOSA - not that they don't want to, but what the present legislation states

 

If the airbag lamp doesn't illuminate to indicate a fault, then that is not a issue; only if the lamp remains illuminated to indicate a fault does this become a reason for rejection.

 

Having studied the photo's briefly of the car in the advert, there is nothing obvious to hint there are not any airbags fitted; what evidence has been given to prove this allegation ? Do we have a authentic qualified report stating this ?

 

Also the small print on the MOT certificate is worth reading.

 

If the car has passed previous MOT tests since its accident and repair, then you as a seller and also the buyer of the vehicle would have felt confident yourself of the vehicles condition; you are not a qualified motor engineer ( I don't think - if you are then appologies ) and therefore sold on good faith to the best of your knowledge and ability. You were honest about the vehicle being a CAT C and I believe have not misrepresented the vehicle when selling it.

[Bren]

I interpret that as under equipped and over confident reconnaissance forces beating a hasty retreat after finding the position strongly defended and taking casualties.  I think the attack will now be called off, but if he comes back at you, let me know.

 

Agree entirely. You responded by parking your tanks on his lawn.

 

Well done.

[Junkman]

Three people were killed by falling pianos in 2013.

Two of them were smokers.

It's hence twice as likely to be killed by a falling piano if you are a smoker, so stop smoking.

 

It's all bollox, if you ask me.

[Tayne]

Three people were killed by falling pianos in 2013.

Two of them worked on the Top Gear production team

 

It's all bollox, if you ask me.

EFA.

[Cavcraft]

'If it passes with no comment then fair enough I will accept you sold in good faith and did not know. If not and I want to take it further then I will probably report the MOT stn to the VOSA standards'

 

How are your drawing skills?

 

[Pete-M]

When belt pre tensioners have fired they tend to stick little red tongues out. They're about 6" closer to the seat than they'd normally be as well.

 

He's trying it on.

[cms206]

It's a car I've been loads of places in and the interior was complete. The glovebox didn't fit right, but there was no sign of burst airbags anywhere. I suspect chances.

[ukrainespacemonkey]

Cheers guys, 

 

I've decided to let him have the last word in a hope it will be the end of it. Cheers for all the amusing responses too, and now that I've finally signed up I might get round posting some actual filth on the board. 

 

Michael.

[Split_Pin]

Billy, that drawing is making me shed big chunks of MFA from laughing!