Do we have a deal?


As the letter before action sent to the main dealer produced no joy, legal proceedings were inevitable.

Author: Darren Fletcher
Reading time: 3 minutes

This article is 1 month 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.

We had a client who believed they had an agreement with a main dealer to take a part exchange off the main dealer’s hands as it was not the kind of vehicle they would normally sell.

Our client agreed to underwrite and gave an undertaking to purchase the vehicle if the sale went through and if the vehicle was taken in part exchange. This was agreed with the main dealer’s sales manager.

In December 2020, the main dealer’s general sales manager confirmed the vehicle was in and available for purchase. This was also confirmed by the main dealer’s new car sales manager. The main dealer stated permission had to be obtained from their head office and, a day or so later, the head office issued an invoice from accounts by email with the main dealer’s business manager also copied in. Our client paid £1 to ensure the account details were correct and prepared to visit the following day to collect the car.

However, prior to collection, our client received a brief email stating it wasn’t company policy for the main dealer to sell to traders and they had sent the vehicle to auction instead.  Understandably, our client was not happy as he had a buyer ready to go and a guaranteed profit from the sale.

As the letter before action sent to the main dealer produced no joy, legal proceedings were inevitable, and the case was heard last month.

The Defendant’s argument against this claim was there had been a policy in place since 2016 not to sell part exchange vehicles to traders and that all such vehicles were to be sold at auction. This seems to have been a revelation to the various managers there, none of whom questioned the sale!

Impression Communications Ltd

Putting 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.

At the hearing, the Defendant’s counsel sought to argue there was no contract in place and neither was there any evidence of loss. The Claimant explained his claim well under cross-examination and the Defendant’s employee was inconsistent in their account. The judge considered the evidence, found in favour of the Claimant, and awarded him the full amount of his claim plus interest and his costs.

Undertakings are not contracts as they are dependent on various factors but when a sale gets as far as this one did and the plug is then pulled, the courts can find in favour of the aggrieved purchaser and award damages.

Lawgistics are here to review such scenarios and provide you with a realistic assessment of the prospects of success of legal action.

Darren Fletcher

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.