thats different as far as im concerned, if the buyer has a receipt from a trader saying spares and repairs and it was advertised as this then of course it would have no warrenty.

We are talking about you selling a car normally as a trader (advertised as a registered trader). You can put whatever you want on the receipt. sold as seen etc etc

In court they would win the case if you had sold it unfit for purpose.

Beleive me ive seen it happen, Which is why good traders will always offer to have the car looked at as long as it is a defect that was on the car at point of sale and not caused by the new owners over exuberance should we say...

 

ah, i knew there was something about 3 months, couldnt find the page anywhere, gave in. well i stand corrected.....sort of . I knew that the "sold as seen" was bollox! Just need to remember to write the correct thing on my receipts.

 

Ah,cheers m8.

 

No, you can't put what you want on a receipt. You cannot be seen to try and take away any consumer rights.

You can however get the buyer to sign a properly worded receipt, to say that they have checked over the car paying particular attention to tyres/engine/electrics etc and give them the opportunity to have it independantly checked.

Then you'd have alot of trouble proving the car was sold unfit for the purpose. Or in fact, the term is "of merchantable quality at the time of sale".

Also, the 3 months warranty [it's actually written as 6 months depending where you get your information from] on a USED car is not true, having been to court on it a couple of times []. The Sale of Goods act for used cars actually states a "reasonable amount of time" for any legal recourse on a used car and takes into account, mileage, age of car and price paid.

Not even the 2 different magistrates that I've met on this issue could tell me what a "reasonable amount of time" categorically equates to. Having gained legal advice from a solicitor rather than an internet forum, to date we've not been ruled against

Also with regards to giving a warranty to anyone, we use a 3rd party company and if someone agrees to buying a car without a warranty [eg. if they have a discount] then "warranty declined" is written across their receipt and signed by the customer. This does not take away their statutory rights, however in the eyes of the law they are no longer an innocent purchaser.

The problem lies with doing it properly in the first place then you won't have any problem down the line.

If you take the example of this guy with the BMW, as if I had sold it. Personally because not much time had passed, I would tell him to bring it back and give me the opportunity to fix it. HOWEVER, if he was an arsehole, I'd tell him to jog on, well within my rights. He tested the roof therefore the fault was not inherant. How do I know his 6 year old kid didn't spill something on the switch or he bypassed the overrides so he could put the roof down at motorway speeds?

The law is there to cover buyers and sellers. The fact that most people don't know their rights from their lefts just makes my job easier.

 

Properly something simple like the hand brake was'nt up or the boot was'nt closed.

Theres a hand full of sensors in the hood mechanism which tell the hood ecu where it is in it's movement, if one of these sensors go down the hood will stop at the faulty sensor, possible a sensor has gone?

Normally if you shut the hood by hand (see the manuel) the hood ecu reseats its self BUT im sure with bmw's once you close/open the hood manually it will need to go back to bm so thay can reset the hood ecu...check with bmw before hand!

 

But what would be covered by the three month warranty?surely no one can predict timing belt/headgasket failiure that would deem the engine possibly useless?I know clutches/brakes etc are wear and tear along with bearings,bushes,electrical items and so forth,so what do u actually have to cover?someone not checking g box oil could be deemed to have not kept with servicing requirements of any warranty so I just can't see where peeps are coming from?in
my experience buying and selling as all the other traders have said you WILL always have a comeback of some description but it's how you deal with it.I've had a few in the past as I do tend to deal with cheaper stuff and 99% of the time I've resolved it.

Some people are just cunts though,I sold a 95 astra sport estate to a woman before.the car was cat c and I advertised it as such,it was at least 30% cheaper than any other and was mechanically/cosmetically fine.I drove all the way to the Severn bridge to do the deal and she turned up with her son three hours late.my missus was
getting really irate as they do,she takes the car for a 40 minute test drive in the wrong direction.she loves the car,can't fault it pays up and job done,happy days.at least three weeks later she rings up,her other son a "vauxhall mechanic" had gone to change the timing belt and found accident damage repairs to the inner flitch,uhh yeah?and she wants her money back.tell her politely that I did advertise the car as damaged/repaired and was there anything actually wrong with the drive of it?she says no,car drives 100%,so I ask what the problem is and she has to understand that the money has now gone and that's that,sold as seen
no returns.

Anyway long story and all that to keep the peace I make her other son who was a total nob a stupid offer to buy it back and they accept.she turns up in a shit box corsa rusty as fuck etc that nobend son has bought her,all apologetic etc clear to me she was talked into getting a different car as he couldn't take the astra in p/x as it was cat c.drove home sold it too a workmate who still has the car now 6 years or so on and has never had any bother whatsoever with it.some people eh?

 

tell him ok you will have the money back plus the 500 hundread he knock off you in exchange for the car see what he says then lol

 

And don't get me started on warranty companies,what a load of shite most of THEM are!!!!

 

I haven't read the second page, but regardless of warranties/SoG Act, it is a basic principal of law that a contract is only valid and binding where there has been full and frank disclosure. This is covered in statute by the misrepresentations act 1967 and fraud act 2006 IIRC.

Chris

 

The Trade Descriptions Act 1968 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which prevents manufacturers, retailers or service industry providers from misleading consumers as to what they are spending their money on.
This law empowers the judiciary to punish companies or individuals who make false claims about the products or services that they sell.
Applying a false trade description to goods is a strict liability offence: provided it is shown that the description was applied and was false, the accused has to prove certain defences in order to escape conviction.
Each product sold must be as described, of satisfactory quality, and fit for purpose as described refers to any advert or verbal description made by the trader. Satisfactory quality covers minor and cosmetic defects as well as substantial problems and means that products must last a reasonable time but does not give any rights if a fault was obvious or pointed out at point of sale. Fit for purpose covers not only the obvious purpose of an item but also any purpose queried by the customer and given assurances about by the trader.
False descriptions as to services require the more normal proof of mens rea (guilty intent).
The Act excludes matters relating to land and buildings, which are now dealt with under the provisions of the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991.
[edit]Future changes

The Act will be in conflict with the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, which has been adopted in the UK and will be implemented from April 2008.
As this is a maximum harmonisation directive, the Trade Descriptions Act will be heavily amended or possibly repealed. See DTI announcement
The relevant provisions are contained in the UK through Consumer Protection from Unfair Trade Regulations entry into force 26th May 2008; missing the EU deadline for implementation by 12th June 2007. The repeals and revocations for TDA 1968 are: Trade Descriptions Act 1968 c.29 Sections 1(1), 5 to 10, 13 to 15, 19(4)(b) and (c), 21(1) and (2), 22, 24(3), 32, 37, and 39(2).

 

|Some good responses on here

Im not saying im completely right but i know what im trying to say is kinda true lol.

Ive seen it many times, selling a car with them pointless warrenties is the key here. that gets traders out of all sorts of problems they can find themselves in

Still no word from the guy so i think it should be ok.

 

I'm sure you'll be fine,you know what it's like with a new car,fuse blows and you think the things ready for the scrapper!!I've seen the cars you've had from other threads on here and tbh they all look pretty mint,some of the m3's etc look awesome,I'm sure you wouldn't sell him a shitter deliberatley!!

As regards the warranty thing there's not really anything to claim on when you break them down as 90% of it turns out to be service related,which you can offer to do at a high price to put them off actually taking the warranty out in the first place!!!I think that's why a lot of traders stick to bread and butter stuff like ka's etc that don't really have any major mechanical issues.

 

hes going to come round with a posse!!!
he could watch you then target you when your on your own!!
seal your letterbox up and make sure you have a means of escape at night,
OR!
INVITE HIM ROUND FOR TEA AND COOKIES AND TALK IT OVER-

 

strange response

 

Probably the least strange response he's made on here!

 

He probably wasn't been a dickhead maybe he just phoned to say the roof was playing up to see if you knew what the problem was i think if i'd of bought a car and had a problem with it such as the roof i might phone the buyer not nessisarily to try get my money back but to see if he told me how to resolve the issue like check a certain fuse etc

 

just had 2 guys going over my car here for an hour drove it blah blah
couldnt fault it as it was 100% as described then left saying they had no money lolol

 

they dont need money, they'll be back for it later tonight!!

 

as u said he tested the roof and it was ine so its got nothing to do with u as its sold a seen

 

If you sell too many cars DVLA will class you as a trader. If your a trader and you reciept your cars as personal sale, you will get in big trouble if he shops you.