What? You want me to pay after nearly 6 years?

legal updates

After 5 years, 8 months, and 41,000 miles, there was a problem with the vehicle, and it ultimately required a new engine costing £4,600.

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.

Recently, we had a case where the claim against our client was only notified 5 years and 8 months after the sale of the vehicle.

As the customer issued proceedings within the six-year limitation period, Lawgistics were contacted to assist.

The customer had bought a new vehicle from our client. After the purchase, the customer did not return to our client again.

After 5 years, 8 months, and 41,000 miles, there was a problem with the vehicle, and it ultimately required a new engine costing £4,600.

The customer believed there was an inherent issue with the original engine and the car should not have failed at 41,000 miles, or indeed just under 6 years from sale, so she brought a claim.

We assisted by drafting a defence and taking all appropriate steps to prepare our client for a court hearing.

Although the customer had not returned the car to our client at any point since purchase, they had maintained the service schedule at independent garages.

As part of the interrogation of the claim, and with the customer’s permission, we were able to apply directly to Ford for copies of all service documents and the paperwork considered by Ford as the original request for a new engine had been made to Ford.

Once we had this paperwork, it soon became clear the reason Ford had declined a replacement engine was that although services had been carried out, there was a suggestion the wrong kind of oil had been used in the services, thus rendering the service history incomplete, and therefore not covered by Ford.

At this stage, the customer tried to pursue a claim from our member.

Octane FinanceFuel Your Finance

Octane Finance is the broker of choice for new and used car dealers nationwide. With our uncompromising service levels and our genuine and professional approach, you and your customers can trust us to deliver.

The claim went to a final hearing where our member was represented by a legal representative. Once all the facts were set out before the judge, the court decided the Claimant had not proved her claim that our member had sold a vehicle with an inherent fault, but that the failure to prove the services were carried out correctly meant that her claim must be dismissed.

After 6 months, the burden of proof to show there was a fault with a vehicle at the point of sale is transferred to the customer. The customer simply could not prove their claim and it was dismissed.

Darren FletcherLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Your Evidence Is Vital

As opposing witnesses give different accounts of what has happened, some cases really will hinge on which version of events the judge prefers.

Claim Dismissed: No Proof of Fault at Purchase

Our member argued that numerous issues could have caused the overheating and ultimate failure.

Finance Company Unhappy with Court Ruling

The court found that the claim and particulars were inadequate and the finance company was told they had to submit a compliant claim/particulars.

Disclose or not to disclose, that is the question

It is imperative that you know what is required to be disclosed, when to disclose the documents, and what your legal duty is both before proceedings and when a claim is issued.

Indemnities – Handle with Care!

Indemnity clauses are usually onerous by design and drafted in broad terms so dealers should not make the mistake of overlooking them.

Detailed records avoid post-sale issues

The Claimant was only entitled to compensation for the cost of repairs to the locks, which were considered likely to have been faulty at the point of sale and was awarded £385.

Claimant failed to satisfy the burden of proof

No real evidence to suggest the extant problems with his vehicle were in any way related to the repairs that had been undertaken

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.