Car not as advertised, dealer won't give deposit back
Discussion
Hi all,
I was planning to buy a Volvo V60, test drove it and put down a deposit and made a plan with him to pick it up. It was advertised as having matrix lights, and when I did a bit more research I discovered this model didn't come with them. I checked with Volvo, and that car wasn't built with them and didn't have them. Communicating with the dealer, he eventually said "it may not have matrix lights" and offered me £100 quid off. I also found out that the car didn't have an MOT, and he didn't know that, which was a bit off putting.
Instead of taking his offer of £100 off, I decided to pull out and I think he's now sold it to someone else. I've kept a copy of the advert though. I think I'm entitled to my deposit back under the Consumer Rights Act for something that wasn't as advertised, but he's said "if it was refundable, there'd be no point taking it". It's a bit different given that I didn't actually fully buy it, but I would expect a part payment to be covered. Ironically, if I had gone through with the purchase, I'd be able to return it for my money back.
Have any of you been in a situation like this? I think my only course of action is to take them to small claims court, but I think I'd win. The deposit was £300.
I was planning to buy a Volvo V60, test drove it and put down a deposit and made a plan with him to pick it up. It was advertised as having matrix lights, and when I did a bit more research I discovered this model didn't come with them. I checked with Volvo, and that car wasn't built with them and didn't have them. Communicating with the dealer, he eventually said "it may not have matrix lights" and offered me £100 quid off. I also found out that the car didn't have an MOT, and he didn't know that, which was a bit off putting.
Instead of taking his offer of £100 off, I decided to pull out and I think he's now sold it to someone else. I've kept a copy of the advert though. I think I'm entitled to my deposit back under the Consumer Rights Act for something that wasn't as advertised, but he's said "if it was refundable, there'd be no point taking it". It's a bit different given that I didn't actually fully buy it, but I would expect a part payment to be covered. Ironically, if I had gone through with the purchase, I'd be able to return it for my money back.
Have any of you been in a situation like this? I think my only course of action is to take them to small claims court, but I think I'd win. The deposit was £300.
BertBert said:
OutInTheShed said:
How did you pay the deposit?
If you paid using a certain popular credit card, quite likely a phonecall to them will result in the dealer having a bad day.
Or perhaps any credit card, even an unpopular one?If you paid using a certain popular credit card, quite likely a phonecall to them will result in the dealer having a bad day.
For me the real crasher is the MOT failure, which has to be illegal to sell.
Paid by bank transfer unfortunately.
He did get it MOT'd after I told him it didn't have one, so in fairness I would have ended up with a car with a fresh MOT.
Ah well, I've submitted a court claim. I was surprised how you didn't have to fill in all that much. I guess I'll have to provide more detail and evidence if he submits a defence.
He did get it MOT'd after I told him it didn't have one, so in fairness I would have ended up with a car with a fresh MOT.
Ah well, I've submitted a court claim. I was surprised how you didn't have to fill in all that much. I guess I'll have to provide more detail and evidence if he submits a defence.
Simpo Two said:
For me the real crasher is the MOT failure, which has to be illegal to sell.
Tell me you know nothing about anything without telling me you know nothing about anything.It would not be illegal to sell the car without a mot. However in this instance the dealer probably had the car so long in stock that the MOT ran out.
He would not have been able to sell the car to a customer as the customer would not have been able to tax or insure the car without an MOT.
It’s just an oversight and happens all the time.
As to the OP the dealer is being a melon, you are legally entitled to your deposit back.
The MOT point is moot, it would have had a fresh MOT done before the sale either way.
I guess the dealer will argue that you test drove the car after reading the advert and then put the deposit down, so you were fully aware of what you were buying based on the test. They will then argue they put other test drives on hold for you.
Think it's going to be a small claims court job unfortunately.
I guess the dealer will argue that you test drove the car after reading the advert and then put the deposit down, so you were fully aware of what you were buying based on the test. They will then argue they put other test drives on hold for you.
Think it's going to be a small claims court job unfortunately.
J2daG1990 said:
I guess the dealer will argue that you test drove the car after reading the advert and then put the deposit down, so you were fully aware of what you were buying based on the test. They will then argue they put other test drives on hold for you.
The trader/dealer is expected to be the expert, not the buyer, so it would be misrepresentation? A spec list in an advert can be binding.
)That's right, it didn't fail an MOT, it just expired while it was in his stock. We agreed I'd pick it up on the Saturday, on the Friday I looked at the MOT checker and found it had expired. I would put that down to a mistake.
I had test driven it without dealer plates or an MOT, so I guess that's a bit dodgy if we'd been stopped or anything. Nothing happened though.
You would have to know exactly what you were looking for in that car to know if it had adaptive lights or not. With the conditions on the day you just couldn't tell.
It also had a couple of thousand miles more than it did in the advert. That's a bit annoying, but I guess he did it to get people who search for "70k miles or less".
I had test driven it without dealer plates or an MOT, so I guess that's a bit dodgy if we'd been stopped or anything. Nothing happened though.
You would have to know exactly what you were looking for in that car to know if it had adaptive lights or not. With the conditions on the day you just couldn't tell.
It also had a couple of thousand miles more than it did in the advert. That's a bit annoying, but I guess he did it to get people who search for "70k miles or less".
richard_86 said:
It also had a couple of thousand miles more than it did in the advert. That's a bit annoying, but I guess he did it to get people who search for "70k miles or less".
I once bought a BMW 7-series from a small 'prestige' dealer. Between seeing it/paying the deposit and picking it up a week later, it had traveled another 1,000 miles and half the tools had gone missing. Luckily I spotted the tools and he just refilled the tray from another car...Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff