|
The issue that arises is that the dealer should have stated what’s on the log book. 1 previous owner . So the current person listed is the second owner. When the new keeper registers the car , it will come back as 2 previous keepers .
|
|
I think the suggestion is that the number of owners is secondary to more serious issues but is meant to show a pattern of dishonesty.
I'm not 100% convinced of that. Having obtained an HPI or similar check and been satisfied, I don't think you could then suggest that you have relied on the dealer's statement in that regard.
If I was putting a case together, I might mention it as part of a long list of issues, but wouldn't give it any focus at all. I certainly wouldn't mention that I had a third party check before buying the car
|
I think the suggestion is that the number of owners is secondary to more serious issues but is meant to show a pattern of dishonesty.
I'm not 100% convinced of that. Having obtained an HPI or similar check and been satisfied, I don't think you could then suggest that you have relied on the dealer's statement in that regard.
If I was putting a case together, I might mention it as part of a long list of issues, but wouldn't give it any focus at all. I certainly wouldn't mention that I had a third party check before buying the car
We have been advised to put all matters forward in the complaint, rather than adding bits later, and to not miss anything out.
I didn't want to go into the whole saga, as threads then veer off into a different territory than the query raised, and it's impossible to get back on track.
I can add that also a new timing chain was included in the ad also. The seller said he replaced it in his own garage, with other parts.
When asked if we could have something to verify this, such as parts invoices etc, he said he'd dig them out. Then when reminded and asked again later, he said "No, I don't do that"
As you said, these are secondary matters to the main issues, but we do need to include everything, and we feel the '1 owner' statement was also misleading.
Thanks again
Edited by Sadie100 on 12/05/2023 at 11:01
|
|
<< ....we feel the '1 owner' statement was also misleading. >>
I'm sorry, I can't see how you have been misled. When the seller placed the ad, there was one previous owner. After you bought, there are now 2 previous owners. Your third-party report confirmed that, and you don't appear to disagree. I fail to see the point you are raising as I don't see any false claim - tho I accept there may be others, which is what you should focus on.
|
<< ....we feel the '1 owner' statement was also misleading. >>
I'm sorry, I can't see how you have been misled. When the seller placed the ad, there was one previous owner. After you bought, there are now 2 previous owners. Your third-party report confirmed that, and you don't appear to disagree. I fail to see the point you are raising as I don't see any false claim - tho I accept there may be others, which is what you should focus on.
When the seller placed the ad, there were two previous owners.. The owner of the car from new, then the second owner who sold the dealer the car.
|
|
<< When the seller placed the ad, there were two previous owners.. The owner of the car from new, then the second owner who sold the dealer the car. >>
All correct, but dealers rarely take official ownership of vehicles, at least as far as DVLA is concerned, they only take them into stock. On the car's record the owner before you will be the person who 'sold' to the dealer. Dealers usually do this simply to avoid adding another 'owner' to the list.
Anyway, as you say they only had it for 2 days, what are you arguing about ?
|
<< When the seller placed the ad, there were two previous owners.. The owner of the car from new, then the second owner who sold the dealer the car. >>
All correct, but dealers rarely take official ownership of vehicles, at least as far as DVLA is concerned, they only take them into stock. On the car's record the owner before you will be the person who 'sold' to the dealer. Dealers usually do this simply to avoid adding another 'owner' to the list.
Anyway, as you say they only had it for 2 days, what are you arguing about ?
I don't really understand what you wrote, as the first owner had the car about 10 months, then the owner before me had the car for years.
It doesn't matter now anyway.
I had no choice but to call the consumer helpline after what happened later today, which I have posted about.
A case has been opened and Trading Standards were passed the info. They can look into everything in due course.
I'll call a close to the thread now.
|
|
|
|
<< ....we feel the '1 owner' statement was also misleading. >>
I'm sorry, I can't see how you have been misled. When the seller placed the ad, there was one previous owner. After you bought, there are now 2 previous owners. Your third-party report confirmed that, and you don't appear to disagree. I fail to see the point you are raising as I don't see any false claim - tho I accept there may be others, which is what you should focus on.
When the seller placed the ad, there were two previous owners.. The owner of the car from new, then the second owner who sold the dealer the car.
The dealer buying the car doesn't count in ownership number terms - at the point you bought the car it had 1 previous owner and the current owner - that's how it's always worked.
That logic may annoy you but you need to focus on the car's real issues.
|
|
|
|
|
We have been advised to put all matters forward in the complaint, rather than adding bits later, and to not miss anything out.
Getting it all in one comprehensive 'hit' is absolutely solid advice. That way you only need to add to it if something comes to light subsequently.
I didn't want to go into the whole saga, as threads then veer off into a different territory than the query raised, and it's impossible to get back on track.
Sort of, but if there's a catalogue of issues then, when seeking advice, probably best to bring them all out.
If the car was sold with a catalogue of faults, some of which affected its being roadworthy, I'm not sure something that the seller can claim was a cock up or misunderstanding, is going to be decisive.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 12/05/2023 at 13:35
|
|
Ah well, things just got worse...
He has the car, as he took it back to look at why smoke was coming out from under the bonnet. He loaned us an old Smart car in the meantime. He called me to say he can't find anything wrong and to come and collect it.
We decided to reject the car, as so much else had gone on, and messaged the trader to say so.
We could only do this through an online 'Message us' general form as he would never give us an email or mobile number, just landline.
I did say at the end of the message that I hope we can sort matters respectfully (I said that, because he is the most angry guy I've ever known, and hands up, it's my mistake for not reading all reviews where previous customers have said the same about him)
In the message I politely asked for him to email me with his response to my request to reject the car - I haven't dared to mention consumer law breaches.
I asked him to email me because he doesn't call, and us using a 'Message Us' form gives us no proof of sending.
We'd not heard anything, and Trading Standards said if he didn't agree to a refund, to go get the car back and get an independent inspection done.
I've just called the dealer, and all I managed to say was: "Hello, I'm just calling to hear your intentions regarding my message" He was raging: "You told me to email you. I don't want to speak to you further!" and slammed the phone down.
I had envisaged him reacting like this, so was careful to remain polite, but thought I might get some conversation out before he imploded.
We have no child car seat for the little grandchild or our possessions from the car. Lord knows when we'll get those now.
I don't even know if we should carry on using the Smart car. We've only used it twice, but can that go against us? I can't return it either.
|
|
Well, Sadie,
Between this one and your recent Renault scenic with various defects and the sidelight bulb issues, you are not having a lot of luck.
As others will add, do your research BEFORE buying next time, and remember, most car salesmen are economical with the truth.
Simple, return the smart car, collect yours and then when you have possesion go down the legal route if you want. It'll cost you money with no guarantee of sucess.
If you still want, we can close the thread.
ORB moderator.
|
Well, Sadie,
Between this one and your recent Renault scenic with various defects and the sidelight bulb issues, you are not having a lot of luck.
As others will add, do your research BEFORE buying next time, and remember, most car salesmen are economical with the truth.
Simple, return the smart car, collect yours and then when you have possesion go down the legal route if you want. It'll cost you money with no guarantee of sucess.
If you still want, we can close the thread.
ORB moderator.
I just looked, and I last spoke to you 7.5 weeks ago.
My final words were:
"Thanks again for your help and discretion.
Kind regards
Sadie"
Sadly, I get people wrong all the time. So disappointing.
Yes, do close the thread please.
|
|
All of your posts are available for anyone to see, 3 separate threads.
Nothing indiscreet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
