ScoobyKev

Hi list.

Someone plz give me some advise. I've paid a deposit on a car and now the person has pulled out cus "I don't want to sell it now".We have signed a receipt or contract ie name/address, deposit paid and the full amount. It is a private sell and the person has said that he would refund the money. Well I'm not happy with that cus if it was me pulling out he would keep the deposit, all I want is the bloody car. I have got a application for small claims court and will be handing it in tomorrow.

Questions :

Is this car legally mine cus I paid a deposit and have signed a contract..?

Has the court got the authority to forward the car to me when the final payment has been received..?

I know I can claim for damages but I just want the car.

Regards

Kev..

[Edited by ScoobyKev cus I can't spell- 11/20/2002 5:27:14 PM]

[Edited by ScoobyKev - 11/20/2002 5:27:51 PM]

Dunk

iTrader: (1)

Not a legal eagle but here goes: What terms was the deposit taken on ? Normally a deposit is a part payment against goods which you will then take title to, when the consideration is paid in full and therefore amounts to a contract between the two parties. The vendor is breaching this agreement by not accepting your final payment to take title. IMHO I would expect you're able to sue for breach of contract, however due to the lack of documentation & lack of proof, it's is unlikely that you'd be successful. You'd be better off getting your deposit back & a goodwill gesture for your inconvienence & avoiding the courts.

[Edited by Dunk - 11/20/2002 5:47:51 PM]

DrEvil

Bit extreme isn't if he is willing to give your deposit back?

I'm no solicitor, but as you say, said person has entered into a contract by accepting the deposit, but how that stands in a court of law, I dunno.. sorry.

Alex

Brendan Hughes

Tricky without seeing the wording or hearing what was agreed between the two of you at the time. My guess is you have only signed a receipt, not a contract; I suspect it says "I acknowledge receipt of X for the car at the full price of Y", rather than "I promise to sell/ acknowledge the sale of the car...".

Presumably it's a private seller, so there are less implied terms involved than if it had been a dealer.

Equally, I'd be just as puzzled if you'd pulled out and he'd wanted to keep the deposit. TBH, I don't think that deposits in private sales are usually kept, they are returned? In which case he wouldn't be bound to sell the car.

Suggest you get legal advice on "Is a deposit acknowledgement of a binding contract".

Sorry, above is barely worth tuppence .

BJH

Kev_turbo

If you spent any other money on the sale (HPI, petrol to see it, etc) I would be asking for that and threatening court action, though if it went to court I think they would laugh it out.

Sorry

Kev

akshay67

Hmmm...To have legal ownership of a car, I thought you'd have to have it registered under your name with the DVLA? There's a special form that you fill in for this - I assume you haven't done this yet?

Is it really worth the time and money trying to take the matter to court?

Cheeky Jim

Not a legal eagle either :

But - I believe he is entitled to pull out - the deposit is the sellers guarantee that you are serious NOT your guarantee of purchase - however, as he is offering you your money back and you have not paid anything else then I don't think it's binding.

There are plenty of Scoobies around, just a bit of a pain for you. I would take your money and go find another. It's not worth the agro of small claims court or pursuing any further.

Jim

ScoobyKev

Yes it is cus it is a bargain and I don't want this to slip through the net. I know this ounds silly and would never of thought that I would do this. But the car is gorgeous and I guess he has got a better offer.

Just spoken to a solicitor and I should first send a letter stating to pay full amount and to collect car. If I haven't heard from him in 7 days then court proceedings will take place.

I know this is petty but really want this car.

Regards

Kev..

jods

I think your on a hiding to nothing on this one - Give it up.

kelvin

Legally, you probably have quite a good case if you decide to take it all the way to the courts.

All there needs to be for a contract to be in existence is a valid offer and acceptance. It's NOT necessary for it to be in writing.

The fact that you have paid (and he has accepted) your deposit is evidence enough to any court that a contract exists IMO. It's harsh on the seller but thats the law - in all fairness he'd probably have been better not accepting a deposit... I remember doing an exam question similar to this in my Contract Module and that was the conclusion I came to in that...

All the best...

Kelvin.

[Edited by kelvin - 11/20/2002 6:36:12 PM]

ScoobyKev

Thanks Kelvin thats what I want to hear

Regards

Kev..

kelvin

No problem - I've just noticed your post referring to the fact that you have already spoken to a solicitor so I'm sure you're already well briefed on where you stand.

Good luck though - I'll be interested to hear how you get on so keep us posted :-)

Kelvin :-D

Luke

I would take the money back and start again. You will not benefit from fighting this. Anyone with cash can get a bargain with tha state of the Scooby market at the moment. Next time get the deposit receipt worded in yoour favour.. ie "The car is promised etc.."

maybe it was"too good to be true"...

roadrunner

IMO I would take the money and look for another car. No doubt going through the courts would be a long process. By the time you get this sorted the car would be less in value. No doubt it would no longer be the bargin that it is now - higher mileage, older, possible scratches, different wheels etc etc.

Also there is no guarantee you will win.

Good luck on what you decide to do.

Neil Smalley

Also

If he is forced to sell the car, he might just forget to do things like wait until the engine is warmed up before flooring it, and cooling down. Or do several handbrake turns to naff the diffs or any combination of things that will mess the car up, past an initial drive home.

IMHO take the money and find another car.

Chrisgr31

Sounds to me like the Solicitor just sees this as a chance to amke money.

Lets say there is a contract in place, and the seller refuses to honour it. He may have sold the car to another person, the court are unlikely to order it is claimed back and sold to you! Indeed they are unlikely to order the seller to pass it on to you. All they will do is put yoiu back in the position you were, which is to refund your deposit and maybe some expenses.

Is it worth all the hassle? Surely its easier just to start looking for another car?

Chris

Flyboy-F33

What was so good about it anyway? MY? Price? Mileage? Please tell.

RichiW

When i sold my Terzo i had second thoughts as i stood waiting for the guy to turn up at the arranged meeting point, i was sooooo close to phoning him up, so i can identify why the guy has backed out on the deal.

As it turned out i sold the car to said guy, but not before he knocked me down, even though i`d told him my minimum price o.k., my fault i know.Still i was annoyed and as has been said before, the car got thrashed the next couple of days, standing starts(i`d never have done any of this had he kept to what we arranged on the phone).He also missed out on a brand new set of OEM floor mats and i accidentally forgot to give him the PIAA plastic covers, opps...how unfortunate!

Take the deposit back, and find another car!


Rich.

MattN

yeah give it up.

If i was forced to sell a car just before you turned up I stick diesel in it or something.



[Edited by MattN - 11/20/2002 11:03:35 PM]

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

sorry to hijack the thread but.........Rich, Wanna sell the clear covers?

Hol

iTrader: (1)

Hmmm, tricky. Im not trying to be funny in any way or form.

But, playing devils advocate for just one moment, does that mean that you won the car on payment of deposit?

Taking that to the logical conclusion.

If I take a deposit, does that mean I can no longer drive the said car? Am I to account for any additional miles I make until you pay the balance. Is there a set amount of wear I can make to the tyres and clutch before a price reduction must be made.

You might have trouble if such counter-arguments are issued as the adjudicator will be employing a common sense interpretation of the law. However, if the guy has sold the car for more money elsewhere, that may be viewed differently.

The question is, WHO has title to the car?

Cropton

When he advertised the car, under the sale of goods act I don't think he was offering it for sale, but merely making it available for sale. The important case here concerned Boots Co when, years ago, they put prescription drugs on their shelves and someone complained they were offering them for sale. The court decided that in fact they were only making them available for sale and that it was down to a punter to offer to buy them. If Boots then accepted the offer from a punter, they would have formed a contract of sale thus breaking the law.

I think the same applies to your car. You offered to buy it and gave a deposit. Seems to me the seller does not accept your offer and so you do not have a contract and so you should be a good lad, pipe down and find yourself something else in Exchange & Mart.

Bearing in mind your lack of foresight, a Metro might be a more appropriate mode of transport for you.

father_jack

This is so daft. Have I got this right? You want to take someone to court and THEN buy their car off them?
What's to stop the bloke draining all the oil out of it or putting sand in the engine just for spite .
You'd have no comeback to that, buyer beware etc. Just find another one.

Alpine

A similar thing happened to a friend of mine. He went into a shop and placed a deposit on a limited edition TAG watch.. The shop rang him two weeks later and said we're not being allocated one.. He knew this to be rubbish as they had one in the shop when he went but they wanted to retain if for a few weeks as part of their display. He consulted his solicitor who wrote them a letter saying you have a contract to supply so either supply or my client will try and buy one at a premium from a private seller on the open market and you can foot the price difference. Hey presto his watch arrived...

The upshot is I think you have a right to insist he sells you the car, or possibly provides one of a similar spec at the same price. The reality of the situation is that if you did this you'd probably not get a car worth having. He has no reputation to maintain and there is no manufacturers warranty. Take your money back and ask for some petrol money seems the most sensible..

MarkO

Strikes me that no car is that good so as to justify this much trouble to purchase it. And if the price/package really is so astonishingly amazing, then the phrase "too good to be true" probably applies.

Since the guy is offering to return the deposit, it strikes me as totally stupid to do anything other than take the money and walk away.

seejay555

Kev,
I very much doubt that any court would order him to sell you that car (it's called specific performance and not available as a legal remedy if money is adequate compensation). The court would take the view that, as there are lots of scoobys readily available for sale, money is adequate compensation for your losses. Second question - if he repays your deposit, what have you lost? Some interest maybe, the hassle of losing the deal (hard to value maybe the cost of travelling there and back to view the car (perhaps not worth suing for?).
Might be one to chalk down to experience.


[Edited by seejay555 - 11/22/2002 11:18:53 AM]

Fullonloon

TomM

MarkO is right - no car is worth this grief!!

As has been said, who knows what he will do to the car if forced to sell it! Keep the money and find another one - these things happen.

Put yourself in his shoes, imagine you had to sell the car then you didnt!, even after you have taken a deposit you will still keep it!

Let it go mate.

kelvin

But, playing devils advocate for just one moment, does that mean that you won the car on payment of deposit?

Taking that to the logical conclusion.

If I take a deposit, does that mean I can no longer drive the said car? Am I to account for any additional miles I make until you pay the balance. Is there a set amount of wear I can make to the tyres and clutch before a price reduction must be made.

You might have trouble if such counter-arguments are issued as the adjudicator will be employing a common sense interpretation of the law. However, if the guy has sold the car for more money elsewhere, that may be viewed differently.

The question is, WHO has title to the car?

The seller owns the car until he accepts full payment and hands the keys over. He can do what he wants in the meantime, but bearing in mind, that if he were to totally wreck the car, the buyer could pull out claiming that the car wasn't in the same condition that it was when the "contract" was made.

The point here is not who currently has ownership though, but whether the seller is obliged to follow through with what he has already said he would do - I just pointed out that legally, he does, and a court would more than likely see that if it were to get that far. Whether or not it's worth the time/money/hassle of taking the guy to the court is another question altogether and only a seller can decide that.

When he advertised the car, under the sale of goods act I don't think he was offering it for sale, but merely making it available for sale.

Whilst the advert was in the paper, the car was an "invitation to treat", as soon as a deal was reached though and the seller took a deposit, a contract was formed and both parties were obliged to follow through in the eyes of the law. Either side pulling out results in a breach of contract and thus technically, they can be sued.

The important case here concerned Boots Co when, years ago, they put prescription drugs on their shelves and someone complained they were offering them for sale. The court decided that in fact they were only making them available for sale and that it was down to a punter to offer to buy them. If Boots then accepted the offer from a punter, they would have formed a contract of sale thus breaking the law.

Not wishing to be pedantic, but the actual argument concerned whether or not it was illegal to sell prescription drugs to people "off the shelf", as opposed to "through" a pharmacist. Boots' argument was centred around the fact that the prescription drugs could only actually be purchased by approaching the pharmacist, and handing the money to him directly. Thus, the contract was only formed when the customer was with the phartmacist and so entirely legal - while the goods were on the shelf, or in the customers basket, theuy could still be put back and so the goods were only "invitations to treat" Sorry for being so picky...

Anyway... long post over... Hope you didn't all fall asleep during that...

Kelvin.

TopBanana

Why don't you offer him another 500 quid to settle?