purchased vehicle without warranty ?

venomousfrog

Del2005 wrote: »

It doesn't matter how old the car is, once bought from a dealer it has to be of merchantable quality and be safe. Writing sold as seen or no warranty on the receipt doesn't remove this.

They only issues they can get away with are writing on the receipt sold for parts or listing the issues on the receipt, if they don't have this on the receipt then they have no chance.

The fact that the car is 10 years old doesn't enter into it. The dealer sold it so they have to stand over it. They can't sell it and then say tough luck it's reached it's EOL if any issues arise. Otherwise we'd have to scrap all cars when they get to 10years or about 120,000 miles as that's the design live of the majority of cars. The majority of cars if serviced correctly will easily last 200k+ miles.

Also the OP traded a car plus €700.

OP,
One trick dodgy dealers use is that they change company names regularly, so I well believe the company you are trying to sue isn't there any more. You buy a car from a company in a yard and if you go back a few later you'll be buying from a different company even thought everything is the same. The joys of unscrupulous people abusing PLCs

@ Del2005. Thanks for the info . After i paid for the repairs to the car ( almost 600eur ) the car is still not functioning correctly , i was forced to scrap the car last week as it was unsafe to drive ( i have 2 young children and was terrified that the car was unsafe to travel in ) i have since purchased a small run around to get us from A-B.... Do u think because i got rid of the car that it will have an impact in the outcome of the court . car is no longer on the road now . thanks for ur help

MarkR

venomousfrog wrote: »

@ Del2005. Thanks for the info . After i paid for the repairs to the car ( almost 600eur ) the car is still not functioning correctly , i was forced to scrap the car last week as it was unsafe to drive ( i have 2 young children and was terrified that the car was unsafe to travel in ) i have since purchased a small run around to get us from A-B.... Do u think because i got rid of the car that it will have an impact in the outcome of the court . car is no longer on the road now . thanks for ur help

Tough one. The garage can no longer repair it, or take it back to give you a refund. Was it certified by someone as dangerous to drive?

Best hope is that that small claims court finds against him, but the onus is on the garage then to pay you. They can just "close" the business, rename it, and start again.

venomousfrog

at this stage i dont want a repair or replacement , i just want the 600eur its cost to fix ..... even though it couldnt be fixed by my mechanic .

Del2005

venomousfrog wrote: »

Del2005 wrote: »

It doesn't matter how old the car is, once bought from a dealer it has to be of merchantable quality and be safe. Writing sold as seen or no warranty on the receipt doesn't remove this.

They only issues they can get away with are writing on the receipt sold for parts or listing the issues on the receipt, if they don't have this on the receipt then they have no chance.

The fact that the car is 10 years old doesn't enter into it. The dealer sold it so they have to stand over it. They can't sell it and then say tough luck it's reached it's EOL if any issues arise. Otherwise we'd have to scrap all cars when they get to 10years or about 120,000 miles as that's the design live of the majority of cars. The majority of cars if serviced correctly will easily last 200k+ miles.

Also the OP traded a car plus €700.

OP,
One trick dodgy dealers use is that they change company names regularly, so I well believe the company you are trying to sue isn't there any more. You buy a car from a company in a yard and if you go back a few later you'll be buying from a different company even thought everything is the same. The joys of unscrupulous people abusing PLCs

@ Del2005. Thanks for the info . After i paid for the repairs to the car ( almost 600eur ) the car is still not functioning correctly , i was forced to scrap the car last week as it was unsafe to drive ( i have 2 young children and was terrified that the car was unsafe to travel in ) i have since purchased a small run around to get us from A-B.... Do u think because i got rid of the car that it will have an impact in the outcome of the court . car is no longer on the road now . thanks for ur help

TBH I've no idea. The garage may try and use it as an excuse, they can say that they would have taken it back and refunded you. Or you may be awarded a repair which you can insist be done elsewhere, so you may get some money to pay for repairs.

Don't mention that the car is gone unless directly asked

Unfortunately I think that no matter what happens your out of pocket.

venomousfrog

Just to let you guys now i will be in court on Monday 16th of july . i have all my paperwork and evidence and records of everything - so fingers crossed - thanks to all for your advice and lets hope the courts will judge in my favour - ill keep u informed next monday !

the_syco

venomousfrog wrote: »

car is no longer on the road now . thanks for ur help

Get it certified that said car is not suitable to drive/danger to yourself/others/etc.

=-=

Also check if a Garda can verify that the garage is there, so that if the SCC needs a reputable witness, they could ring the Garda.

Procrastastudy

If they don't show up and a finding is made in your favour you don't have to return the product.

venomousfrog

Hi everyone .

Went to court on the 16th of july and the court will now issue proceedings based on the evidence i showed . However today i received in the post a letter from the court , attached to the letter was a counter claim from the garage seeking 700eur for the cost of a gearbox on the car I traded in against the honda Accord .

I cant believe they are counter claiming for a gear box I paid for when we did the trade in ..... Any advice ? thanks

Procrastastudy

They're within their rights to do so - is this in the SmCC or the DC?

venomousfrog

Procrastastudy wrote: »

They're within their rights to do so - is this in the SmCC or the DC?

Yes , SMCC...... I understand they have rights to do so , but i paid the them 700eur for the gear box on the cari traded in ..... they offered me 1500eur for my car + 500 for the gear + 200 cash to settle the deal .

Procrastastudy

Do you have receipts to back that up? The other thing is - you're a private seller not bound by consumer statues in your dealings with him - he is a commercial seller - have evidence of that.

Quick look at what you've written says you paid €700 for the deal not the gear box - was the gear box in your car banjaxed?

foggy_lad

venomousfrog wrote: »

Hi everyone .

Went to court on the 16th of july and the court will now issue proceedings based on the evidence i showed . However today i received in the post a letter from the court , attached to the letter was a counter claim from the garage seeking 700eur for the cost of a gearbox on the car I traded in against the honda Accord .

I cant believe they are counter claiming for a gear box I paid for when we did the trade in ..... Any advice ? thanks

As long as you are a private individual and not a car trader he has no rights regarding anything he has bought from you much the same as selling something on adverts.ie or ebay it is "caveat emptor" so his counter-claim is just timewasting!

venomousfrog

ok here goes .... the 2002 honda accord was priced @ 2200 .... they offered me 1500 for my 2002 honda civc + 200 cash for the trade ..... they informed on test driving my honda civic that the gearbox was knackered , so they told me that if i cover the cost of a gear box repair ( they told me they could get it done for 500 ) that they would accept the vehicle , so i paid 700 euro ..... they are counter claiming for a gear box that i paid 500euro for so i could drive away in the honda accord . As far as i was concerned the gearbox was fine but i needed a bigger car as the civic was far 2 small for our family needs .... i agreed to pay the 500 + 200 + trade in my car for the new car ....

Procrastastudy

What evidence of that do you have - the oral agreement id fine but some written agreement would be great.

venomousfrog

i have the original sales invoice . its says '' trade in 2002 honda civic with geabox problem for 2002 honda accord - customer was offered a warranty @ 800eur reclined for trade price @ 700..... the warranty would of cost me 100eur extra , i declined the warranty

Procrastastudy

reclined?

Grand if its noted then the guy cant claim he wasn't aware of it. You've no duty anyway but at least he cant claim you're dishonest.

Zab

venomousfrog wrote: »

i have the original sales invoice . its says '' trade in 2002 honda civic with geabox problem for 2002 honda accord - customer was offered a warranty @ 800eur reclined for trade price @ 700..... the warranty would of cost me 100eur extra , i declined the warranty

I'm surprised they're trying it on if the invoice says that.

Gary The Gamer

You will win this in a matter of minutes based on my own experiences of the small claims court. Don't stress over it, get your documents together and enjoy the experience. The judge will probably have a few stern words for the seller which is part of the fun.

venomousfrog

Gary The Gamer wrote: »

You will win this in a matter of minutes based on my own experiences of the small claims court. Don't stress over it, get your documents together and enjoy the experience. The judge will probably have a few stern words for the seller which is part of the fun.

cheers ! i hope your right .

venomousfrog

Well court date is on the 8th October - any more hints or tips are appreciated . im not trying to take these guys to the cleaners I really want them to accept that they were wrong to screw me over and cough up the cost of repairs .

john_cappa

Good luck! hope the seller shows up and gets his due!

john_cappa

Update?

venomousfrog

john_cappa wrote: »

Update?

It wasnt good im afraid , to be honest it was a disaster ...... after taking the stand and swearing on the bible , i was not asked anything by the judge , i presented a detailed report by my mechanic to the judge who told me he couldnt accept it as evidence as it could of been written by anybody ( even though it had the company stamp and signed by the director of the garage ) i was then told to come back with a witness to the report so he could be cross examined by the car dealer who sold me the car ..... these guys didnt have to take the stand and basically said whatever they wanted regarding the transaction .... i feel robbed , mainly by the judge who didnt want to hear from my side.

emmbaasee

Sorry to hear it didn't go well op. Name and shame them here so it could save somebody else from the same hassle.
Better still, put down there address so even if they change name, the chances are they won't have bothered to move there premises.

john_cappa

Are going to go back with a witness to the report? The mechanic I assume. Cost you hos days wages minimnum. Is it worth it?

venomousfrog

john_cappa wrote: »

Are going to go back with a witness to the report? The mechanic I assume. Cost you hos days wages minimnum. Is it worth it?

Yes im going back , in November . My witness ( the garage owner that examined the car ) told me they would stand over the report they gave me . I dont mind having to pay him a days wage if it means i get to my moment in court to show the judge that these guys are cowboys .... if i win its a bonus - i want these coyboys to know that people arent going to stand for this type of service, when the times comes i will name and shame them .....

mdebets

Didn't your solicitor advice you on this?
I would have seen it as a given, that if you have a report from an expert witness, you would need him at court, rather than just his report. Otherwise it could really be written by everyone and it would take away from the other side, the possibility to question him on the report.
Wouldn't the other side have to pay the witness when they loose, so really no cost for the OP, if his case?

venomousfrog

mdebets wrote: »

Didn't your solicitor advice you on this?
I would have seen it as a given, that if you have a report from an expert witness, you would need him at court, rather than just his report. Otherwise it could really be written by everyone and it would take away from the other side, the possibility to question him on the report.
Wouldn't the other side have to pay the witness when they loose, so really no cost for the OP, if his case?

i dont have a solicitor , im representing myself ( this is through the small claims court ) the report had been signed , it also had a company seal pressed into each page so it could only of been drfted by them.... i understand now that court requires the witness so they can be questioned , also im not sure if the other side will have to pay the witness . Also i would like to point out that neither of these 2 guys were involved on the day of sale , 1 guy said he was the customer services manager , however on reporting the issue with the garage this wasnt the guy i was dealing with , and the other guy i had nothing to do with the sale either - me thinks these are just covering for somebody .

Procrastastudy

venomousfrog wrote: »

i dont have a solicitor , im representing myself ( this is through the small claims court ) the report had been signed , it also had a company seal pressed into each page so it could only of been drfted by them.... i understand now that court requires the witness so they can be questioned , also im not sure if the other side will have to pay the witness . Also i would like to point out that neither of these 2 guys were involved on the day of sale , 1 guy said he was the customer services manager , however on reporting the issue with the garage this wasnt the guy i was dealing with , and the other guy i had nothing to do with the sale either - me thinks these are just covering for somebody .

You cant get costs in the SmCC.

mdebets

Sorry, didn't realise that you are going through the SCC.

Before I would go to court again, I would have a chat with the court clerk, to check, that the witness testimony of your mechanic would be enough, or if you would need a more independent witness (or even talk to a solicitor if you are more concerned about winning than the money it costs you).

I (as a non-laywer) would see two potential problems with your case (please correct me, if I have read any of the facts of your case wrong).

On the one hand, you didn't give the garage a chance to rectify the problem. You went straight to the second garage, to get it fixed, after they told you to get lost. It probably would have been better, to set them a deadline in writing, also stating that you'll get it fixed by a third party and suing them for the cost, if they don't fix it.

Your expert witness (your mechanic) on the other hand is not a court approved witness, and also is set to gain from his testimony. He repaired your car and it is still not fully fixed afterwards. So it would be in his best interest to state in his testimony, that the full fault lies with the original garage, rather than himself (from fixing the original problem incorrectly) or yourself (from mistreatment of the car)