The vehicle was of satisfactory quality – Claim dismissed!

legal updates

Although the vehicle had covered an additional 17,000 miles since purchased, the Claimant alleged the vehicle was not of satisfactory quality at the point of sale.

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 handled a county court claim with a few twists but ultimately, our client (the Defendant) won.

The Claimant purchased a vehicle to be used for private hire and the vehicle was also subject to a hire purchase agreement.

A fault developed with the vehicle around three months after the sale. Both the finance company and Defendant offered to assist with the repair which meant the Claimant was required to contribute only a third of the repair cost. The Claimant refused. 

The Claimant went on to sell the vehicle to We Buy Any Car and then issued court proceedings for the difference between the price received from We Buy Any Car and the price originally paid for the vehicle.

Although the vehicle had covered an additional 17,000 miles since purchased, the Claimant alleged the vehicle was not of satisfactory quality at the point of sale.

The Defendant’s argument included:

  • the Claimant had issued proceedings incorrectly. As the vehicle was subject to a hire purchase agreement, the contract was in place between the Claimant and the finance company.
  • the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) was not applicable as the vehicle was purchased to be used for the individual’s trade and (S2(3) of the CRA 2015 defines a consumer as “an individual acting for purposes that are wholly or mainly outside that individual’s trade, business, craft or profession.”
  • the vehicle was fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality at the point of sale.
  • any fault present developed whilst in the Claimant’s possession and, therefore, no liability owed.

The judge dismissed the claim. He found that the vehicle was of satisfactory quality at the point of sale and this was demonstrated by the additional mileage incurred by the Claimant.

Cable For My CarWe offer free next day delivery* on all EV charging cables when shipped within mainland UK

Stocking only premium EV charging cables, we ensure you experience a stress-free EV charge, over and over, confidently backed by our 2 year warranty. Our premium & reliable charging cables are compliant with EU & UK safety standards. We offer free next day delivery* on all EV charging cables when shipped within mainland UK.

Roxanne BradleyLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

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.

The etiquette of handling consumer complaints

It is always best practice to get involved while you have the chance and follow the correct process at the very beginning.

Small Claims Mediation Pilot Scheme

I predict HMCTS (HM Courts and Tribunal Service) will announce the scheme as a success by May 2026.

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.

Burden of proof? Get your evidence while you can!

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

I’m On The Register!!

If a judgment in default is issued, a CCJ is recorded immediately on the relevant credit file.

A New Case – What Do We Need From You?

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

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.