Consumer continued to drive vehicle to destruction regardless – claim dismissed


The Consumer had wrongly taken it upon himself to continue driving the vehicle to destruction,

Author: Howard Tilney
Reading time: 2 minutes

This article is 6 years old.

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.

Last week a client attended Court in Wrexham to face a claim for almost £10,000 by a consumer seeking a full refund for breach of contract who was alleging that the vehicle supplied by the Dealer was not of satisfactory quality.

The Judge found that whilst the reported issue may have been present at the time of purchase, the Consumer had wrongly taken it upon himself to continue driving the vehicle to destruction, despite clear warning signs, third party advice and a specific request from the Dealer to return the vehicle for inspection, immediately once the problem had been reported.

Indeed, upon receiving notice of the problem, the Dealer emailed the Consumer back within just 5 minutes to request inspection.

Unfortunately, the Consumer continued to drive the vehicle for some time thereafter before it suffered a catastrophic engine failure and then he sought to reject the wrecked vehicle and claimed a full refund.

The fact that the Dealer acted entirely properly and in writing so quickly was instrumental in the Courts decision, as was the Consumer’s obvious disregard for the very clear warnings, which had been before him.

Moreover, under effective cross examination by our client and the Judge, the Consumer made many mistakes and was simply unable to answer certain questions.

A good case is one thing, but good preparation is crucial and here at Lawgistics we ensure that all Court cases are prepared fully and properly to ensure that our clients have the best possible chance of success before the Courts. 

Should you require assistance in dealing with a rejected vehicle or a court case Lawgistics members can contact the legal team.

Howard Tilney

Legal Advisor

Read more by this author

Getting in touch

You can contact us via the form or you can call us on 01480 455500.