Honest guv, it was a mistake!

legal updates

It is useful to know that if an employee has made a mistake, it is not that employee who is deemed liable.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

“No, it was a mistake” is something that I appear to be coming across rather a lot.

Of course, I am talking about that good old general defence where, in one particular case, it was evident that our member placed reliance on the vehicle information supplied to them. Unfortunately, when our member went to sell the car, they found there was an outstanding finance issue that they had not been informed about. It is always helpful to note that a mistake is a wrong belief held by one of the two parties before entering into a contractual agreement.

In our member’s current position, where a title of goods remains with a finance company, but the item has been sold under the belief that it was free from any encumbrances, then payment should be made by the vendor to remedy the contractual obligation.
It is useful to know that if an employee has made a mistake, it is not that employee who is deemed liable, but the company, because the employer is ultimately responsible for the actions the employee takes on behalf of the company.

So, what does a wronged party seek in such cases? The remedies often sought are in equity, so rectification, an order for specific performance, or rescission. It is essential to establish whether the mistake is a fundamental nature of the contract, whose words and conduct are relied upon, to move to your remedy. Often in equity, it would be about putting the wronged party back in the financial position that they should have been in had the mistake not arisen. It can also mean that the contract is voided or order that the parties carry out what they promised to do from the outset.

A cautionary tale to ensure that both parties understand what they are signing up for will save headaches down the line.

Profit BoxDevelop your people like your business depends on it

What most people don’t know is that talent development doesn’t have to be complicated, high risk or expensive. Once they integrate key development stages, the results can be remarkable. Empower your team. Lead your industry. We’re your strategic learning partner, driving performance by moving skills forward.

Adrian BrazierLitigation ExecutiveRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Sold a Car and Now They Want a Refund? The Truth About “No Mental Capacity”

A refund demand lands after the sale, claiming the buyer lacked mental capacity. Here’s how to handle these calls, what actually counts as evidence, and when a contract could be void.

Tripartite Finance Agreements: Why dealers don’t have to accept a Hobson’s Choice

Finance houses are pushing ‘tripartite’ agreements that look like a Hobson’s choice for dealers.

Written Authority Wins the Day: Dealer Beats Finance Company in Release Row

A finance company tried to claw back the price of a car after telling the dealer the buyer could collect.

Motor Finance Consumer Redress Scheme

The FCA has launched a consultation on a motor finance redress scheme that could see average payouts of around £700 where key commission arrangements were not disclosed.

The FCA £1m Campaign: Better Late Than Never!

The FCA has launched a £1 million campaign to tell motor finance customers they can access compensation without claims firms or lawyers.

Motor Traders have protection under s.27 of the Hire Purchase Act

Told that s.27 offers Motor Traders no protection at all? Not so. A private purchaser’s good title can flow through the chain to protect dealers, and we map out when it does and when it doesn’t.

Proving the ‘chain of custody’ can be a challenge

Conflicting interests on a used car can turn a simple purchase into a legal minefield. Here’s how to evidence the chain, challenge a finance claim, and spot the red flags before you hand over the cash.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.