What determines whether a car is roadworthy?
I recently purchased a very expensive used car privately. I inspected all the documents and the car as thoroughly as possible, however as a low riding sports car I was unable to check underneath. The three month old MoT had no advisories and the seller seemed to be an honest chap. Following a weekend of use I found the car was heavily tram-lining. The car was not driven again until I took it for a warranty inspection (1 week after purchase).
It was discovered that the inner edge of all four tyres was completely worn (report says all are damaged) and the rear suspension was leaking. The advert described the car in fantastic condition and the seller pressed upon me the excellent condition during the sale. Factually the car was mis-described as being modified to 600PS, when in fact the modifier said it was upgraded to 590PS.
Seller points to 'sold as seen' and said it passed the MoT and does not want discuss any further. Where do I stand and what are my next steps?
It was discovered that the inner edge of all four tyres was completely worn (report says all are damaged) and the rear suspension was leaking. The advert described the car in fantastic condition and the seller pressed upon me the excellent condition during the sale. Factually the car was mis-described as being modified to 600PS, when in fact the modifier said it was upgraded to 590PS.
Seller points to 'sold as seen' and said it passed the MoT and does not want discuss any further. Where do I stand and what are my next steps?
Asked on 19 December 2014 by JC
Answered by
Honest John
Different dynamometers could account for the difference in power output. 10PS isn't worth pursuing. The tyre inner shoulders were probably damaged by straddling speed cushions which forces the inner shoulders down against the sloping sides of the speed hump, leading to serious abrasion. The damaged part of the suspension could also have been damaged by hitting the crown of the hump.
You should have a remedy under RTA 1988 section 75. The vendor could claim innocence because, unless he put the car on a hoist, how could he have known the inner shoulders were worn away, but that is still not an excuse for selling an unroadworthy car so he is liable to contribute towards a set of second hand tyres that are legal. He is not liable to replace the worn tyres with new ones.
You should have a remedy under RTA 1988 section 75. The vendor could claim innocence because, unless he put the car on a hoist, how could he have known the inner shoulders were worn away, but that is still not an excuse for selling an unroadworthy car so he is liable to contribute towards a set of second hand tyres that are legal. He is not liable to replace the worn tyres with new ones.
Similar questions
I'm thinking of getting a moped for my 16-year-old son, putting the insurance in his name so he gets a year's no claims towards his car insurance at 17. Would this work?
Can an insurance company sue me because I was at fault for an accident and gave the other driver a false name and address?
I have two cars. Both are registered in my name, although one of these is mostly driven by my wife. To avoid complications, I now wish to transfer this car into her name. How and when is the best way to...
Elsewhere on 
