Car Dealers’ 134k Fine – OVERTURNED on Appeal

legal updates

Trading Standards Departments and consumers have rammed this fine down the throats of the motor industry.

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.

At the end of November 2018, we issued a Legal Update stating how Middlesbrough Trading Standards had prosecuted a car dealership, which resulted in the court handing down a £134,000 fine for an alleged offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. 

That being for their second-time failure to disclose in its advertising that a vehicle it was selling had once been owned by a leasing company.  Specifically, stating that it had “one previous owner” without disclosing that this owner was a leasing company.  Trading Standards (in support of a previous opinion by the Advertising Standards Authority) felt that failure to mention this point was “misleading” and could affect the transactional decision of a prospective buyer.  Surprising, given that the consumer who complained about it, had found out about its history prior to purchase and so never went ahead to buy the car in the first place.

For several months subsequently other Trading Standards Departments and consumers have, frankly, rammed that fine down the throats of the motor industry.  

We were delighted therefore to learn that, on appeal, this fine has been overturned.  The judge ruling that the ex-business use of the car would have had no effect on its value. In what the author of this article can only view as a veiled criticism of the prosecution and its original outcome, the judge went on to say that the courts exist to protect consumers against bad bargains where the playing-field is not level – and not irrational prejudice against ex-business use vehicles whose values are entirely unaffected.

No doubt the motor industry is rather more satisfied with the decision now than either the officers of Middlesbrough Council – or indeed their local Council Tax-payers!

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.

Jason WilliamsLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Mercedes diesel software update leads to NOx sensor fault

Our member now faces a repair bill of almost £700 plus VAT for the cost of a new NOx sensor, which they say is consequential to the Mercedes software update.

Do NOT try to take away a consumer’s rights on an invoice

A Welsh Trading Standards department prosecuted a car dealer for “Furnishing a used car invoice to a consumer giving the impression that the consumer had less rights than they actually did.”

Misleading adverts results in £58,000 fine

The result should serve as a warning to all traders to ensure vehicles are accurately described.

What’s that pain between your shoulders? It’s the Trading Standards’ knife in your back!

Trading Standards are meant to provide help and suggestions to ensure future compliance.

Customer ordered to pay our client’s court costs in mileage dispute

A mileage disclaimer sticker was also displayed on dashboard at the time of sale, advising that the mileage must be deemed incorrect unless otherwise stated in writing.

Court success on vehicle with a mileage discrepancy

The Claimant issued proceedings against our member for the full cost of the vehicle and the cost of the repairs by the main dealer for misrepresentation.

Online Auctions – Bid for Lamb, Ended up with Mutton?

Trade buyers are unhappy at what they are getting, compared with the descriptions and photographs that are supplied to them.

Get in touch

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

01480 455500

Vinpenta House
High Causeway

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.