Burden of proof? Get your evidence while you can!

legal updates

The burden of proof reverses for issues raised between 30 days and six months of ownership.

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.

Consumer cases usually have a similar timeline of events, but this can depend on the consumer you encounter. For example, a vehicle may break down or start making weird noises, and the consumer will come to you for help straightaway, or they may not.

It may seem straightforward for you to assess what has been advised by the consumer and to deduce that you cannot be liable for any repairs required. However, evidence should be obtained while you have the chance to do so. Failing to do so may result in a court claim and you will fall short of being able to prove your position.

The above, of course, depends on when the consumer raises the issue. The burden of proof is placed on the consumer to prove their position if an issue arises within 30 days of purchase. Even if evidence is produced, you may still want to inspect the vehicle yourself, and you should request to do this as soon as possible. In any event, the vehicle should be inspected prior to any monies being handed over to ensure it has not been damaged during the consumer’s ownership.

The burden of proof reverses for issues raised between 30 days and six months of ownership. The issue is presumed to have been present or developing at the time of sale unless the trader can prove otherwise. Whilst this may seem pointless in cases where the issue could clearly not have been present at the time of sale, the evidence should speak for itself. If you have inspected the vehicle both prior to the sale and once an issue became evident, you have a much better chance of fighting your corner with the correct evidence.

For issues raised beyond six months after purchase, the burden is placed back on the consumer (reverse burden of proof) to prove that the issue was present or developing at the time of sale.

If you choose not to inspect the vehicle in situations where the reverse burden of proof applies, the consumer can claim that the fault is implied to have been present or developing at the time of sale, and unfortunately, you will have little to no evidence to show otherwise.

Impression Communications LtdPutting the motive in automotive

Impression works with businesses across the automotive aftermarket supply chain such as parts suppliers, warehouse distributors, motor factors and independent garages. Covering all aspects of automotive aftermarket marketing, including social media, event management, customer newsletters and PR, Impression is able to quickly establish itself within a client’s business and work towards their objectives.

Kimberly StickleySolicitorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

The customer isn’t always right…

As it was a defect he knew about, he cannot now claim it renders the vehicle not fit for purpose or not of satisfactory quality.

Implications, assumptions, and confusion – why being clear on your actions could be key to winning

The diagnosis showed the third-party garage had failed to repair the vehicle to a satisfactory standard and this was relayed to the consumer.

On your Marks… Get Set… Doh!

The TSO told our member that the consumer ought not to have experienced a failure given the age and mileage of the car.

Indemnities – Handle with Care!

Indemnity clauses are usually onerous by design and drafted in broad terms so dealers should not make the mistake of overlooking them.

A New Case – What Do We Need From You?

You might be thinking, “Why do my thoughts and comments matter?”

Always prep, check, then check again

If you state that every vehicle comes with a new MOT, then ensure that they do!

The finance industry focuses on durability, and misses the point!

There is plenty of sound legal authority that makes clear a buyer of a used vehicle must expect that faults will develop sooner or later.

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.