sierraman Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 17 minutes ago, RoverFolkUs said: None whatsoever personally, but consumer rights gives the same protection on a car whether it was £50k or £750. Someone went to Judge Rinder over a £400 Skoda that broke down. He cited consumer law etc and that it had to be fit for purpose (! - £400) and the trader was the crook 🤷♂️ Judge Rinder... Legal precedent right there! It turns on the expectations that one could have of such a car, a £750 Renault is 5% of its original purchase price and 20 years old, a reasonable person can be expected to have to carry out some repairs to that vehicle at their own cost. It’s likely as well if someone bought it and had issues and it successfully involved a claim against the trader the Limited company would be wound up and started again so you’d not see the £750 back. I don’t want it to sound like a licence for people to rip each other off but they really should remove this notion of buyer protection on a car below a certain price point. This is why it’s difficult to buy a cheap car because for the trader it’s not worth the agg. If you buy a £750 car and it packs up a fortnight later you should accept the limitations of a car such as that, if that’s not acceptable then it’s not for the buyer. I’m not having a go by the way I’m just stating an opinion of why it’s not always practicable to indemnify to purchaser on such a low value vehicle. horriblemercedes, cort1977, Yoss and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeEP Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 9 minutes ago, sierraman said: It turns on the expectations that one could have of such a car, a £750 Renault is 5% of its original purchase price and 20 years old, a reasonable person can be expected to have to carry out some repairs to that vehicle at their own cost. This is the key and is misunderstood by many, including on here it seems. What it is reasonable to expect from a 20 year old £750 car, and hence the protection to the buyer that the legislation provides, is rather different to that of a new/nearly new car costing tens of thousands. BorniteIdentity and horriblemercedes 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.E Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 £300 bASe 1.0 engine Polo, needs discs. https://www.gumtree.com/p/volkswagen/vw-polo/1431109502 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuvvum Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 3 hours ago, RoverFolkUs said: I wonder when traders will realize they can write whatever cack they want about "sold as seen" but it doesn't remove the buyer's 6 month consumer rights act protection If memory serves (it's been a while since I studied such things and the rules may have changed since then) selling as spares or repair effectively removes any protection for the buyer as you are no longer selling a vehicle, you are selling a collection of parts which happen to still be in the shape of a vehicle. Otherwise you could sell a rotten car for scrap and the buyer could take you to court when it subsequently failed an MOT on welding. tooSavvy and BeEP 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horriblemercedes Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 1 hour ago, RoverFolkUs said: None whatsoever personally, but consumer rights gives the same protection on a car whether it was £50k or £750. It really doesn't. There are two things at play - trading standards and consumer rights. Pick two similar models for convenience. A £50,000 brand new BMW 5-Series or a 20 year old 200k mile BMW 5-Series at £750. Trading standards - you can't advertise it falsely (lie about it). This is regardless of cost. No real court though would ever expect the £750 BMW to be of the same condition, to last as long or to need as little maintenance as the brand new £50k one. If you take it back to the dealer after three months and 6k miles with a failed automatic gearbox, the question in the claim would be, "is it reasonable to expect a £750 car that's 20 years old with 200k miles to have this fault in this timeframe?" It could also be questioned whether the trader knew about it and it's reasonable for him to claim that he didn't know about it and it must have developed in the time since he sold the car. If, however, that car had a gearbox failure two hours and 50 miles after the sale, the question would be a bit different. BeEP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sierraman Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 I think the law boils down on to what the intended use for the car was and what a reasonable person would expect. If you bought a £1000 Mondeo diesel to do 50,000 a year in and 3 months in the injectors went it could be argued that it wasn’t suitable for the purpose intended. I don’t know for me it’s just accepting personal responsibility for things, you can’t constantly expect the world to indemnify you against anything going tits up. oldcars, AnnoyingPentium, Yoss and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisItalSLX Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 4 hours ago, grogee said: DERV Slagacy £2495 Cov, but... "GEARBOX IS STUFFED" https://www.gumtree.com/p/cars-vans-motorbikes/2010-subaru-legacy-se-20-diesel-manual-estate-5dr-spares-or-repair/1427027219?utm_source=com.atomczak.notepat&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialbuttons&utm_content=app_android FTFY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverFolkUs Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 1 hour ago, sierraman said: Judge Rinder... Legal precedent right there! It turns on the expectations that one could have of such a car, a £750 Renault is 5% of its original purchase price and 20 years old, a reasonable person can be expected to have to carry out some repairs to that vehicle at their own cost. It’s likely as well if someone bought it and had issues and it successfully involved a claim against the trader the Limited company would be wound up and started again so you’d not see the £750 back. I don’t want it to sound like a licence for people to rip each other off but they really should remove this notion of buyer protection on a car below a certain price point. This is why it’s difficult to buy a cheap car because for the trader it’s not worth the agg. If you buy a £750 car and it packs up a fortnight later you should accept the limitations of a car such as that, if that’s not acceptable then it’s not for the buyer. I’m not having a go by the way I’m just stating an opinion of why it’s not always practicable to indemnify to purchaser on such a low value vehicle. I'm in full agreement with what you're saying and agree that it's absurd to think of there being any protection for 6 months for a £750 car. I know judge rinder is all for TV, was just an example that demonstrated the law being picked apart. 1 hour ago, BeEP said: This is the key and is misunderstood by many, including on here it seems. What it is reasonable to expect from a 20 year old £750 car, and hence the protection to the buyer that the legislation provides, is rather different to that of a new/nearly new car costing tens of thousands. The problem is that there is no set definition of what is considered fit for purpose or satisfactory quality. I'm not misunderstanding anything. There is simply no set standards depending on age/mileage, it's all down to opinion. Which is where the liability as a dealer comes into play here 34 minutes ago, wuvvum said: If memory serves (it's been a while since I studied such things and the rules may have changed since then) selling as spares or repair effectively removes any protection for the buyer as you are no longer selling a vehicle, you are selling a collection of parts which happen to still be in the shape of a vehicle. Otherwise you could sell a rotten car for scrap and the buyer could take you to court when it subsequently failed an MOT on welding. If a car is sold by a trader to a member of the public as a restoration for spares/repairs and it is transported away, there are indeed no comebacks accepted, because the car's "satisfactory quality" is a restoration project (beit a full on weldathon or a simple non runner) If the trader allows the buyer to test drive it on public road and/or drive it away, it is assumed that the car is being sold as fit for purpose (to drive on a public road and meet the appropriate laws for doing so) and as such can't be considered faulty/spares+repairs. 27 minutes ago, horriblemercedes said: It really doesn't. There are two things at play - trading standards and consumer rights. Pick two similar models for convenience. A £50,000 brand new BMW 5-Series or a 20 year old 200k mile BMW 5-Series at £750. Trading standards - you can't advertise it falsely (lie about it). This is regardless of cost. No real court though would ever expect the £750 BMW to be of the same condition, to last as long or to need as little maintenance as the brand new £50k one. If you take it back to the dealer after three months and 6k miles with a failed automatic gearbox, the question in the claim would be, "is it reasonable to expect a £750 car that's 20 years old with 200k miles to have this fault in this timeframe?" It could also be questioned whether the trader knew about it and it's reasonable for him to claim that he didn't know about it and it must have developed in the time since he sold the car. If, however, that car had a gearbox failure two hours and 50 miles after the sale, the question would be a bit different. The issue here is that within 6 months, the onus is on the dealer to prove the fault wasn't underlying. How is that possible? It's not. I'm not saying any of this is right, but it's how it is. The dealer will always be seen as the bad guy in court, so that won't do any favours The issue is that you can't simply write "spares/repairs" to negate your responsibilities but still sell the car as perfectly working. You either sell it as a good runner or indeed spares/repairs. Who would pay £750 for an end of life Scenic? It's either working (at the moment) for £750 or scrap for £250. 26 minutes ago, sierraman said: I think the law boils down on to what the intended use for the car was and what a reasonable person would expect. If you bought a £1000 Mondeo diesel to do 50,000 a year in and 3 months in the injectors went it could be argued that it wasn’t suitable for the purpose intended. I don’t know for me it’s just accepting personal responsibility for things, you can’t constantly expect the world to indemnify you against anything going tits up. In essence, if it's literally scrap, taken away on a trailer etc then there are no obligations because it's satisfactory quality will be a car that exists but is otherwise scrap. It's not possible to sell a car as perfectly working but negate consumer protection with the term "spares/repairs". Its one or the either. I will repeat, I realize how utterly absurd it is, and I fully agree with what everyone is saying. But I'm just pointing out the basic consumer law which is completely ridiculous that gives people protection for 6 months on a £750 car. If the car is spares/repairs, they need to list down the fault(s) that give it that definition. It is completely meaningless to say spares/repairs if no faults are mentioned because there's nothing actually wrong with the car. Even more prudent, I don't know why anyone would go through the hassle of selling cars in that price bracket to the public and putting themselves on the hook from the wooly laws. Unless of course they're operating a shady LTD company outfit as you describe sierraman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J W Pepper Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/325161202829?hash=item4bb51e348d:g:OKcAAOSw48diY8G6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J W Pepper Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265657124050?hash=item3dda6604d2:g:dWEAAOSwY1hiYt6J Inside is not to my taste, too modern for my liking Yoss and inconsistant 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J W Pepper Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/234522625241?hash=item369aa344d9:g:o08AAOSw5YRiZCZP oldcars and AnnoyingPentium 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J W Pepper Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202204255004854?lat-long=53.6810755%2C -2.6887185&advertising-location=at_cars&model=Bora&page=2&make=Volkswagen&include-delivery-option=on&sort=relevance 48K Miles AnnoyingPentium 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillmanImp Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/411798170776714/?ref=facebook_story_share I remember seeing a red one of these driving towards me in Rustington in the 1980s. Got all excited about the Aston Martin in the distance but then realised it wasn't as far away as I thought. MorrisItalSLX and SteersWithThrottle 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillmanImp Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 I was gonna buy this as need a car for a couple of weeks from next week but my insurance policy says no, sorry its not a classic. https://www.carandclassic.com/car/C1443673 Rear quarter window might be a pain to replace but suppose a bit of perspex could do. Totally new one on me this. Not sure whether I've never seen one or just never noticed them before? Suspect the former, I don't think many will have been imported. AnnoyingPentium and garethj 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inconsistant Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 57 minutes ago, J W Pepper said: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265657124050?hash=item3dda6604d2:g:dWEAAOSwY1hiYt6J Inside is not to my taste, too modern for my liking That's disgusting. Red wine in champagne flutes? Nice caravan though. garethj 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupraNoodle Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 2 hours ago, D.E said: £300 bASe 1.0 engine Polo, needs discs. https://www.gumtree.com/p/volkswagen/vw-polo/1431109502 http://cdn.ecommercedns.uk/files/3/242183/2/13933662/image.jpg Who's taken that picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sierraman Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 5 minutes ago, inconsistant said: That's disgusting. Red wine in champagne flutes? Nice caravan though. I can almost smell the damp chipboard. 11001010 and SupraNoodle 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inconsistant Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 23 minutes ago, sierraman said: I can almost smell the damp chipboard. An oaky bouquet with a complex, earthy finish tooSavvy, Fat_Pirate and SupraNoodle 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillmanImp Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 Nice looking Volvo 340 for £1,100 hidden in brochures section. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/353850673356?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5338365712&toolid=20006&customid=EB49990142& AnnoyingPentium, Austat, Pat Earrings and 8 others 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaughant Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 This...... " If a car is sold by a trader to a member of the public as a restoration for spares/repairs and it is transported away, there are indeed no comebacks accepted, because the car's "satisfactory quality" is a restoration project (beit a full on weldathon or a simple non runner) If the trader allows the buyer to test drive it on public road and/or drive it away, it is assumed that the car is being sold as fit for purpose (to drive on a public road and meet the appropriate laws for doing so) and as such can't be considered faulty/spares+repairs. " ....... seems bang onto me in my experience. I used to do a lot of collection /delivery and every garage I collected a car from gave me a sheet to fill in worded thus and wouldn't let the car leave unless on a trailer. I seem to think salvage is a similar situation? RoverFolkUs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverFolkUs Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 27 minutes ago, vaughant said: I used to do a lot of collection /delivery and every garage I collected a car from gave me a sheet to fill in worded thus and wouldn't let the car leave unless on a trailer. I seem to think salvage is a similar situation? Yeah that's it. If it's not fit or purpose and sold as spares/repairs then it shouldn't be driven away. If it gets driven away then it must be fit for purpose and falls under the CRA protection. Salvage is a bit scary because there nothing stopping a member of the public buying a Cat S car from Copart and "repairing" it to their own standard. Whilst discouraged, I don't think Copart actually stop people driving their cars away. Obviously a lot of the time it doesn't work as the car is bent, not holding coolant etc but people still try! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnnoyingPentium Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 One for @Yoss...? 🤔 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185398600004 tooSavvy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 47 minutes ago, AnnoyingPentium said: One for @Yoss...? 🤔 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185398600004 Well I've put a watch on it. Let's see what happens after that 130 went for £5k. These normally go for considerably more than the saloons but this needs a lot of work. tooSavvy and AnnoyingPentium 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DVee8 Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/504726871375815 grogee and AnnoyingPentium 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.E Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 Rough C140 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/203925872104?hash=item2f7aeddde8:g:r-sAAOSwIVliaCq6 SteersWithThrottle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meggersdog Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 Here we come walking down the street get the funniest looks from everyone we meet https://www.historics.co.uk/buying/auctions/2022-05-21/cars/ref-105-1966-pontiac-gto-monkee-mobile-mp/ certainly not tat money but I'm sure some of you, like me, had a Corgi version as a child. HillmanImp, Yoss, SteersWithThrottle and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meggersdog Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.historics.co.uk/buying/auctions/2022-05-21/cars/ref-81-1981-ford-cortina-ghia-mk-v-2-litre-dl/ SteersWithThrottle, MorrisItalSLX, Shite Ron and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meggersdog Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 phwoar again https://www.historics.co.uk/buying/auctions/2022-05-21/cars/ref-147-1983-vauxhall-astra-mk-i-gte-jt/ grogee, MorrisItalSLX, SteersWithThrottle and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meggersdog Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 historics again https://www.historics.co.uk/buying/auctions/2022-05-21/cars/ref-145-1983-ford-fiesta-xr2-mk-i-jt/ SteersWithThrottle, MorrisItalSLX, Wibble and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.E Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 https://www.copart.co.uk/lot/40418962/clean-title-1979-morr-marina-l-whitburn BeEP, AxWomble, adw1977 and 8 others 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now