Sold a CAT D - customer wants to return it 2 .5 yrs later

[JA Trader 58]

3 minutes ago, RHA said:

UPDATE  The driver (I.e. not the person who was actually invoiced for the vehicle) has just landed with his wifes brother to the office to "sort this out".  A long conversation with lots of chat about him not knowing it was crashed (before changing that to denial to "doesn't matter if I did- it wasnt written on the invoice". and it had driven his children and his brother in laws children around and they "could have been killed" etc etc. (happy to ignore the MOT's and 60000 miles it had done without incident).   Upshot is he thinks if it hadn't been crashed he could have sold it for 3000 more than he paid for it (yes even 60000 miles later) but he's willing to accept 2000 less than he paid.  We have met him part way to that at more than fair value for the vehicle just to make it go away but he is not interested.  Had left it with him in writing to think about but he refused to even accept the piece of paper.  Has threatened to go to the media and "expose" me. 

Just another fun day at the office!!

 

Your Generous i wouldn't be paying him a penny especially as he dosent even own the car. Be interesting to see if his brother in law has in fact sold it to him ??? From a legal standpoint he wasn't your customer so his invoice dosent say SH*T. (I do however get the easy life aspect once took a mini back i really didn't want to just to close the door on it and move on)

Thanks for coming back with an update intrigued to see how this plays out.

[justlooking 48]

quoting 'doesnt matter as it wasnt written on the invoice' and 'exposing you to the media' sounds like he's caught wind of this thread, have it deleted ASAP

[David Ayers 171]

The only person you should be dealing with is your customer.

Not his wife’s uncles cats father in law.

Just the person named on the invoice.

I think he’s done you a favour not taking the paper with a written offer.

You need to contact the buyer directly.

[Arfur Dealy 823]

3 hours ago, RHA said:

UPDATE  The driver (I.e. not the person who was actually invoiced for the vehicle) has just landed with his wifes brother to the office to "sort this out".  A long conversation with lots of chat about him not knowing it was crashed (before changing that to denial to "doesn't matter if I did- it wasnt written on the invoice". and it had driven his children and his brother in laws children around and they "could have been killed" etc etc. (happy to ignore the MOT's and 60000 miles it had done without incident).   Upshot is he thinks if it hadn't been crashed he could have sold it for 3000 more than he paid for it (yes even 60000 miles later) but he's willing to accept 2000 less than he paid.  We have met him part way to that at more than fair value for the vehicle just to make it go away but he is not interested.  Had left it with him in writing to think about but he refused to even accept the piece of paper.  Has threatened to go to the media and "expose" me. 

Just another fun day at the office!!

 

If you sold the car responsibly, with the buyer being fully aware it was a right off, why the hell are you back tracking ? 

[Casper 272]

3 minutes ago, Arfur Dealy said:

If you sold the car responsibly, with the buyer being fully aware it was a right off, why the hell are you back tracking ? 

I think the mistake here was not having him sign a written invoice stating he was fully aware it was a write off and what that meant  as others have said .. but we all live and learn and all make mistakes no ones perfect 

Edited October 23, 2019 by Casper

[Arfur Dealy 823]

9 minutes ago, Casper said:

I think the mistake here was not having him sign a written invoice stating he was fully aware it was a write off and what that meant  as others have said .. but we all live and learn and all make mistakes no ones perfect 

If I had made the buyer fully aware, irrespective of an admin error I certainly would not be bending at all. This screams to me, the buyer was unaware..... 

Too add, I don't buy or sell write offs, but if I did the purchase receipt would have "WRITTEN OFF CAT S N C D- INSURANCE TOTAL LOSS" written all over it...... For the buyer to fully acknowledge and agree. 

Edited October 23, 2019 by Arfur Dealy

[Casper 272]

12 minutes ago, Arfur Dealy said:

If I had made the buyer fully aware, irrespective of an admin error I certainly would not be bending at all. This screams to me, the buyer was unaware.....

I would also be trying argue my case .. as he no doubt will and certainly dig my heels in although all you have to go on is both the buyer and sellers word so anyone could then say I made him fully aware and he could say no you didn't in saying that I think the seller would be looked favourably on as of the 60 k and 2 years the buyer has currently owned the car 

never really had much to with them myself in years but a company I worked for repaired and sold a lot  as well as an occasional px but as you say I would always write it on the invoice , as I stated earlier .

Edited October 23, 2019 by Casper

[have a word with the wife 299]

 

5 hours ago, RHA said:

Upshot is he thinks if it hadn't been crashed he could have sold it for 3000 more than he paid for it

and that is your evidence that he knew it was cat d, game... set... and match 

Edited October 23, 2019 by have a word with the wife

[trade vet 702]

This topic is getting rediculous.Hit lister,exported,60k,2 mot’s,vehicle sold on to third party,head gasket, etc,then entertaining a claim from 3rd party relating to the original buyers contract 2 years ago......I’m out !

[Tony911 79]

5 hours ago, RHA said:

UPDATE  The driver (I.e. not the person who was actually invoiced for the vehicle) has just landed with his wifes brother to the office to "sort this out".  A long conversation with lots of chat about him not knowing it was crashed (before changing that to denial to "doesn't matter if I did- it wasnt written on the invoice". and it had driven his children and his brother in laws children around and they "could have been killed" etc etc. (happy to ignore the MOT's and 60000 miles it had done without incident).   Upshot is he thinks if it hadn't been crashed he could have sold it for 3000 more than he paid for it (yes even 60000 miles later) but he's willing to accept 2000 less than he paid.  We have met him part way to that at more than fair value for the vehicle just to make it go away but he is not interested.  Had left it with him in writing to think about but he refused to even accept the piece of paper.  Has threatened to go to the media and "expose" me. 

Just another fun day at the office!!

 

Something doesn't add up here as why on earth have you offered him £2000 less then he paid 2 years ago and 60k later. There must be some more details here that you haven't told us about or you are just very generous!

[Arfur Dealy 823]

14 minutes ago, Tony911 said:

Something doesn't add up here as why on earth have you offered him £2000 less then he paid 2 years ago and 60k later. There must be some more details here that you haven't told us about or you are just very generous!

My thoughts exactly.... why ? 

[Tony911 79]

20 minutes ago, Arfur Dealy said:

My thoughts exactly.... why ? 

Will be great if rha could fill us in

[RHA 1]

2 hours ago, Tony911 said:

Something doesn't add up here as why on earth have you offered him £2000 less then he paid 2 years ago and 60k later. There must be some more details here that you haven't told us about or you are just very generous!

No i didn't offer him that!  That's what he is saying he would accept.

[BHM 994]

9 hours ago, trade vet said:

This topic is getting rediculous.Hit lister,exported,60k,2 mot’s,vehicle sold on to third party,head gasket, etc,then entertaining a claim from 3rd party relating to the original buyers contract 2 years ago......I’m out !

This one item is the get out of jail free card. Apparently the complainant is now the car’s owner. The seller has absolutely zero responsibility towards the current (different) owner.

Funnily enough many moons ago I sold a car to a neighbour (them old 2.0tdci Mondeos). For some reason only a few weeks later he sold it to another neighbour. Another 2 weeks later & the dreaded glow plug flashing light reared it’s head. Anyhow the new owner decided to knock on my front door waving an estimate for over £1500. It took me about 90 seconds to scatter this idiot. He then put pen to paper referring to Trading Standards. I responded in writing politely fucking him right off & copied-in Trading Standards. I heard absolutely nothing back. 

I will refer the OP back to one of my earlier posts - TELL THE BROTHER TO FUCK OFF. 

Give an ear to a whinger & they’ll talk into it. 

Edited October 24, 2019 by BHM

[Arfur Dealy 823]

4 minutes ago, BHM said:

Give an ear to a whinger & they’ll talk into it. 

Love it, that’s going on my office wall 

[Tony911 79]

9 hours ago, RHA said:

No i didn't offer him that!  That's what he is saying he would accept.

Ok but you have still offered him some sort of offer, anyway good luck

[Casper 272]

2 hours ago, tradex said:

This thread reminded me of a twat who brought 1500 quids worth of leggy px Focus complaining of clutch slip, that we had sold originally to the ruckers neighbour.

I guess the original owner just took it on the chin as an old car needing money n maintenance as we'd never heard from him, but this twat who bought the Focus from our customer tried to get us to 'honour our legal obligations' as it had started slipping, a few days before 6 months ownership had passed from when we sold it. 

Was a very short conversation as I remember 

Some people you do get them don't you ? I've run a few old cars about old pxs etc or cheap smokers from the auctions to keep my own car tidy picking up parts cars doing tip runs etc when they break or need a fortune spend on the, to keep the, going you throw them a way and buy another one that's the whole point  of cheap motoring . .not go crying to the dealer that sold it not even to you but too you neighbour you got to laugh at the brass neck of some of them .. 

Edited October 24, 2019 by Casper

[MattR 177]

20 hours ago, RHA said:

UPDATE  The driver (I.e. not the person who was actually invoiced for the vehicle) has just landed with his wifes brother to the office to "sort this out".  A long conversation with lots of chat about him not knowing it was crashed (before changing that to denial to "doesn't matter if I did- it wasnt written on the invoice". and it had driven his children and his brother in laws children around and they "could have been killed" etc etc. (happy to ignore the MOT's and 60000 miles it had done without incident).   Upshot is he thinks if it hadn't been crashed he could have sold it for 3000 more than he paid for it (yes even 60000 miles later) but he's willing to accept 2000 less than he paid.  We have met him part way to that at more than fair value for the vehicle just to make it go away but he is not interested.  Had left it with him in writing to think about but he refused to even accept the piece of paper.  Has threatened to go to the media and "expose" me. 

Just another fun day at the office!!

 

I'll say it again. Refuse to entertain any form of conversation with this individual unless via email or post. Make no offers and withdraw the one you have made. 

[DigitalAutos 3]

Beggar to differ with most opinions here but I think he's still liable. If he can't PROVE that the initial customer bought the car knowing full history, and this customer disputes that he did. The fact that he's now sold the car on changes nothing. Yes the now NEW owner can't chase him, the seller,  through the courts but he can claim against the original customer who sold him it. The original customer is now free to chase his losses through a 'mis-represented' car of the dealer. It's not the same a s a car getting a fault, it's a misrepresentation at the sale which will void it and if the first customer has suffered a loss he's free to chase it through the courts for many years

Good luck with this one, be interesting to see how it plays out.

[TangoVictor32 90]

Setting yourself for a double whammy.... Dealing with someone who you didnt sell to - he will get pay out and then the scanky milf will rinse you in court.

 

Like someone else said im done here.

And like someone someone else said there is more to it - why the F would you be offering deals?!

I told you many moons ago dont bother taking it or buying it back. You ignored that.

 

Clearly more to this. Cant give the whole info then dont expect advice. I will let the forum hounds pounce on you....

[MarkTVS 209]

2 hours ago, DigitalAutos said:

Beggar to differ with most opinions here but I think he's still liable. If he can't PROVE that the initial customer bought the car knowing full history, and this customer disputes that he did. The fact that he's now sold the car on changes nothing. Yes the now NEW owner can't chase him, the seller,  through the courts but he can claim against the original customer who sold him it. The original customer is now free to chase his losses through a 'mis-represented' car of the dealer. It's not the same a s a car getting a fault, it's a misrepresentation at the sale which will void it and if the first customer has suffered a loss he's free to chase it through the courts for many years

Good luck with this one, be interesting to see how it plays out.

Not sure that would work, a private punter can’t claim a private punter, there is no comeback in a private sale.

Also as far as I’m aware if a van is invoiced to a company there is no comeback as there is no rights for a business to business sale? Or so our local trading standards told a friend of mine who bought a recovery truck from a dealer.

[Casper 272]

2 minutes ago, MarkTVS said:

Not sure that would work, a private punter can’t claim a private punter, there is no comeback in a private sale.

Also as far as I’m aware if a van is invoiced to a company there is no comeback as there is no rights for a business to business sale? Or so our local trading standards told a friend of mine who bought a recovery truck from a dealer.

I know about the private buyer thing but didn't know about the business to business  Guess it does make sense about the business to business wonder how it would work if it was a business out with the motortrade though like say maybe an electrician or something ... buying from a business. 

[Arfur Dealy 823]

7 hours ago, Casper said:

I know about the private buyer thing but didn't know about the business to business  Guess it does make sense about the business to business wonder how it would work if it was a business out with the motortrade though like say maybe an electrician or something ... buying from a business. 

B2B is covered by the SOGA, the CRA covers the general consumer. 

[Casper 272]

3 hours ago, Arfur Dealy said:

B2B is covered by the SOGA, the CRA covers the general consumer. 

Thanks