Thanks very much for your help.
Could this be construed effectively as a six month warranty?
|
|
|
Well Done, DVD. But as with SGA and SSGA, a set or rules or a statutory instrument don't have any teeth until they are interpreted and upheld through the courts. I'm not aware of any judgements on SSGAC yet. Do any legal minded Bacroomers know of any.
HJ
|
I would also be interested to know if there have been any test cases specific to the motor trade yet. I'm no legal eagle but to my untrained eye these acts seem quite general in nature and I cant help feeling that they would be a little bit innapropriate when it comes to used cars?
For example, for arguments sake lets say we have an honest dealer who sells a used car which later develops a fault after say 3 months. The dealer inspected the car and provided a new MOT before handover and to the best of their knowledge the car was fault free. Bearing in mind that all cars will develop faults at some stage and pretty much everyone already knows this, what more can the dealer do?!
I guess these acts are more to do with stopping unfit vehicles being "patched up" and then sold??
|
I can understand that this law would be difficult to enforce in connection with a fault on a used car. However, we all know that an MOT test does not ensure that the vehicle is in 100% working order and fault-free; it simply shows that, on the day of the test, the car is deemed to be roadworthy.
The MOT test does allow unscrupulous dealers to, as Smartdealer says, patch up and sell unfit vehicles. The only way to remedy this is to replace the MOT with an all-swinging, all-dancing inspection, complete with a rigorous test drive in a variety of driving conditions. Is is just me that thinks this is never gonna happen!!!
|
|
Presumably the use of the word 'retailer' in the regs means that this does not affect private sales?
|
Correct, OP. SOGA (Sale of Goods Act) applies to persons acting in the course of business.
Therefore a private individual selling his car to another private individual is not caught by the regs.
A motor trader selling a car to a private individual is caught.
Perversely, a builder, selling his old white builder's van to a private individual is caught. If he provided a car to a member of staff, then when he sells that, he is caught.
|
|
mapm - these definitions still skate round the grey area discussed here recently - the part-time trader from 'home' premises. I suspect it would be difficult to make mud stick to them?
|
|
As HJ said, the law is toothless in this respect.
|
You'd have to prove they were a trader.
And then they'd have to have sufficient assets to be worth suing.
That's why Owen cannot get forecourt prices for his superminis that he's selling from home!
|
Surely though, a trader is a trader, regardless of how they operate? Just because someone rents a forecourt doesn't mean that they have any more money in the business than a home trader.
Sure, if someone is trading from home but passing themselves off as a private seller then there will be difficulties, but surely you wouldn't buy a car from someone operating like this anyway?
(P.S. 206 still not sold!)
|
Perception is all.
That's why banks built in the Victorian era are all made of stone - to make their customers feel more secure that their money was not going to disappear. (Go and look at LLarclays-TSBC next time you are in the high street - stone faced when the adjacent shops are not.)
Rent a forecourt, borrow loads of money, rent a couple of grease monkeys and the perception of being here today, here tomorrow, then you can charge more for your cars than if you keep them on (off?) the road outside your (rented?) house - here today, gone this evening.
Perception is all - that's why it's so important to get those ads right, as we discussed.
Anybody been to see it yet?
|
|
No viewers yet, but someone caled yesterday, and sounds keen.
|
|
Top! Remember, once they've turned up they've bought the car. They shouldn't, and won't (!) leave without it.
|
|
If she comes to see it, i'm sure she'll have it. Only sticking point is that she wants me to take her 96 Rover 214Si in p/x, and is not happy with the price i have offered her. I've offered her as much as i can, i just hope she realises that the garage that has offered her £600 more than i have for the Rover will charge her £1000 more than me for the car she buys!
|
|
owen, you've got to teach her about Price to Change. But she may want solid warranty cover?
|
Well, just to update anybody who's interested, the green 206 went last night, a wafer thin profit but lots of lessons learnt! Thanks to all those who offered their advice, all taken on board for the next one!
(BTW, have gone slightly downmarket for the next one, a 1995 Fiesta diesel, hopefully should shift a bit quicker!)
|
|
Excellent. Well done! (Does your calculation of profit allow for financing costs (loss of interest on money on deposit) as well? You don't have to answer, just so long as you know the answer.)
|
|
