Catalytic Convertor Theft – is the seller responsible?!

legal updates

It would be ridiculous to suggest that every car dealer has to mention to a potential buyer that something on or in a vehicle might be attractive to thieves

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.

Well, according to one irate purchaser they are!  

The consumer purchased a vehicle from our client.  He parks it outside of his house and one evening some local thieves come along and extract the catalytic convertor. That consumer then seeks to reject the car because its design is not fit for purpose in that it allows the catalytic convertor to be stolen too easily.  Additionally or alternatively, he wanted to reject it because of a misrepresentation by the dealer for NOT mentioning that his car was at risk of having the component stolen.

Not surprisingly, we wrote advising that our client could not be held liable.

As the consumer paid on his credit card he went to his card provider under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act – joint liability of the credit card provider – who, instead of dismissing it out of hand, asked our client to explain why they felt they were not liable for breach of contract and/or misrepresentation!  So we told them in no uncertain terms.  We mentioned that it would be ridiculous to suggest that every car dealer has to mention to a potential buyer that something on or in a vehicle might be attractive to thieves – whether it be the catalytic convertor, the wheels, the fuel or the badge on the radiator grille.

We somewhat sarcastically reminded the card company that we hoped that they had told their customer prior to taking their credit card that it ran the risk of it being stolen – as otherwise he would have them for misrepresentation if someone nicked his card from his wallet when he wasn’t looking!  A reply has not (yet) been received.

Wearewood Services LtdMotor Trade Web Specialists

We offer an all-encompassing web, digital & design service specially tailored to the Motor Industry.

Jason WilliamsLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

AI is the future – but treat it with care!

AI can be a powerful ally—but recent cases show its misuse can lead to serious consequences, even contempt of court.

The devil is in the detail

A solid report can make or break your legal case, but even minor mistakes can be costly. Learn what details to double-check in vehicle reports and how to avoid common pitfalls that could undermine your evidence in court.

Major changes to UK Consumer Law have landed

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 has introduced sweeping updates to UK consumer law, including powerful new enforcement tools for the CMA.

The power of expert evidence in vehicle disputes

Our member never claimed the 5-year-old, multi-owner car was perfect.

Recent Cases, Real Consequences – and What to Learn

From missed emails to misplaced vehicles, here are a few real-world reminders to help you avoid unnecessary headaches.

Section 23 – Consumers Rights Act 2015 (CRA2015)

The judge determined our member was liable for the repair, despite the clear MOT and trouble-free driving over three months.

Legal Disputes: Why traders should avoid direct contact

The urge to sort the matter out, or attempt to, can put a strain on the process and you may find yourself in a difficult position.

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.