Can anyone offer an objective opinion on the following scenario?
Car seen on website. Top spec– and very low mileage. On phone, asked dealer to give me a rundown on car’s history. 7 years old; <6000 miles; two lady owners. No service history, but old MOTs to support mileage. Asked if it had had any bodywork repairs. It had a new bumper; he didn’t know why, but probably due to scratches etc. (elderly drivers).
A distance of nearly200 miles meant I couldn’t get there to view until next afternoon. Told him if paperwork, inspection and test drive all ok, I would offer him the asking price. Apparently other parties interested, Trader to hold the car for my inspection, but wanted a hefty deposit to confirm my interest was genuine.
On the strength of the advert and trader’s answers, I began to make plans for the journey. I bought my train ticket and then Googled the Company to get directions Then came the wake-up call. A blog site carried a number of dire warnings about this trader’s antics, including a history of selling damaged/ repairables without disclosing the status. An HPI check confirmed this was a Cat C write off. Asked trader why he hadn’t disclosed the CAT C status; his glib reply was that I hadn’t asked him to! Technically true, but I had asked him to tell me what he knew about the car. At best he had been economical with the truth; at worst, well I’d better not say anymore.
I informed him that I was not interested in buying a damaged / repaired vehicle. They can prove difficult to sell; and if involved in another Total Loss situation, insurers will only pay out a fraction of the cars notional book value. I asked for my goodwill deposit to be repaid. He refused, on the grounds that I had entered into a contract to buy. Absolute nonsense – I made it perfectly clear that I needed to inspect and drive before I could make an informed decision.
I feel totally vindicated in my decision not to proceed. If he knew about the bumper, he knew about the write off status. Failure to give a full and frank disclosure as to the extent of the damage must surely constitute Mis-representation by omission. Where do I go from here? Court? Any constructive advice much appreciated
Car seen on website. Top spec– and very low mileage. On phone, asked dealer to give me a rundown on car’s history. 7 years old; <6000 miles; two lady owners. No service history, but old MOTs to support mileage. Asked if it had had any bodywork repairs. It had a new bumper; he didn’t know why, but probably due to scratches etc. (elderly drivers).
A distance of nearly200 miles meant I couldn’t get there to view until next afternoon. Told him if paperwork, inspection and test drive all ok, I would offer him the asking price. Apparently other parties interested, Trader to hold the car for my inspection, but wanted a hefty deposit to confirm my interest was genuine.
On the strength of the advert and trader’s answers, I began to make plans for the journey. I bought my train ticket and then Googled the Company to get directions Then came the wake-up call. A blog site carried a number of dire warnings about this trader’s antics, including a history of selling damaged/ repairables without disclosing the status. An HPI check confirmed this was a Cat C write off. Asked trader why he hadn’t disclosed the CAT C status; his glib reply was that I hadn’t asked him to! Technically true, but I had asked him to tell me what he knew about the car. At best he had been economical with the truth; at worst, well I’d better not say anymore.
I informed him that I was not interested in buying a damaged / repaired vehicle. They can prove difficult to sell; and if involved in another Total Loss situation, insurers will only pay out a fraction of the cars notional book value. I asked for my goodwill deposit to be repaid. He refused, on the grounds that I had entered into a contract to buy. Absolute nonsense – I made it perfectly clear that I needed to inspect and drive before I could make an informed decision.
I feel totally vindicated in my decision not to proceed. If he knew about the bumper, he knew about the write off status. Failure to give a full and frank disclosure as to the extent of the damage must surely constitute Mis-representation by omission. Where do I go from here? Court? Any constructive advice much appreciated