Consumer Law

Daytripper2 · Member

Consumer Law

yobarr · Guru

Daytripper2 wrote:
I recently sold a Motorhome for a considerable amount $. On the receipt for the sale I included a clause stating that the MH is purchased " As Is and no warranty or guarntee is implied" which the purchaser signed.The purchaser drove the vehicle for several thousand K's before having a problem with said vehicle which apparently will cost many thousands $ to repair. He has asked the question whether we would be prepared to compensate him in anyway. Just wondering from any legal eagles in our midst "Does he have any legal right to lodge a demand" It will take 2/3 weeks to get an appontment with a Solicitor in my area and wondering where I stand?

DMaxer may offer advice, but it seems, to me, that this fella is just trying you out. Tell him to get stuffed as you have a signed disclaimer advising "As is and no warranty or guarantee is implied". In addition, he's driven the vehicle "several thousand Ks".

Perhaps it was his manner of driving that caused, or contributed to, the "problem" HE now has. Who knows? Forget it.

Vehicle perhaps had a "Letterbox warranty" As soon as it's past your letterbox it's out of warranty.

Forget it, and sleep well. Cheers.

-- Edited by yobarr on Friday 21st of April 2023 08:38:41 PM

msg · Guru

I really don'know I think what I wrote was wrong.

-- Edited by msg on Friday 21st of April 2023 08:11:58 PM

-- Edited by msg on Friday 21st of April 2023 08:13:03 PM

PeterInSa · Guru

Re ( I included a clause stating that the MH is purchased " As Is and no warranty or guarntee is implied" which the purchaser signed.)

A wise move, I will remember that.

Mike Harding · Guru

My understanding is that for a non commercial sale it's buyer beware and therefore you have no legal obligation. Frankly, for what I guess is a $100k+ purchase he should have had a professional inspection and perhaps could then have claimed against the inspector.

Had a major issue occurred within the first couple of weeks of the sale I may have felt some moral responsibility to contribute but not after "thousands of kilometres". Anyway, if he can afford a motorhome of that value he can afford to repair it.

Whenarewethere · Guru

NRMA & others provide a service & report for people buying vehicles. Buyer beware!

shakey55 · Senior Member

IMO you are not entitled to any warranty claim if you purchase a secondhand vehicle privately.

Extract from below link
Important: If you buy a car privately, under the Australian Consumer Law it must be sold with clear title but no dealer guarantees are provided. If you choose to buy privately, it is essential that you get an independent inspection, or you could be stuck with a vehicle that has been poorly repaired or even written-off. No matter how good the bargain looks, always be extra cautious when purchasing a car privately.

Fair Trading NSW

www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/367936/Car_buyers_guide.pdf

Possum3 · Guru

Mike is correct; that for a non-commercial sale it's buyer beware and therefore you have no legal obligation. Caveat Emptor is the term in "Common Law" the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

bobsa · Senior Member

a private sale , there is no warranty

Whenarewethere · Guru

No different to buying a property (other than in a new block of units in a recent build over 3 floors. Not that the warranty is actually worth anything as the companies can simply go bankrupt with their $2 set up & assets elsewhere).

We have owned 4 different Units in our block & currently own 3 (moved to better units, $25k per metre upwards). Would never have bought more if we didn't know the history, but we do, as we have been here since the 1980s, it is a very well managed building with regular maintenance (I actually do the 10 year maintenance plan as required in NSW)

Do the research & get the reports on vehicles or whatever before you sign & or hand over the cash, if you are not in the position to lose the cash (if you miss out in the meantime, so be it, it might be a financial lifesaver!)

Daytripper2 · Member

Thank You all for your comments. Lets me sleep a little easier.

Daytripper2 · Member

Thanks Everybody. I would like to add that we had no prior knowledge of any problem with the vehicle. We had just finished a 3000k trip and decided to sell due to difficulty getting into caravan parks on the east coast. This was early March

-- Edited by Daytripper2 on Saturday 22nd of April 2023 02:06:47 PM

-- Edited by Daytripper2 on Saturday 22nd of April 2023 02:09:28 PM

Daytripper2 · Member

Possum3 wrote:
Mike is correct; that for a non-commercial sale it's buyer beware and therefore you have no legal obligation. Caveat Emptor is the term in "Common Law" the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

Thank You

DMaxer · Guru

The advice you have been given on this forum, though probably well intentioned, is both wrong and misleading.

Whilst the provisions of various statute law pertaining to consumer protection does not always apply to private sales of vehicles, the common law does. There are two kinds of defects. there are patent defects which are defects obvious to anyone inspecting the vehicle and there are latent defects, defects that a casual inspection may not reveal. If you are aware of these defects and you fail to mention them or feign ignorance of their existence, it can be deemed as misleading conduct. If you hold out that the vehicle has had a regular service regime and no faults have been detected when either scenario is incorrect, you can be liable. One of the difficulties the buyer may have though is proving that you either knew, or should have known of the defects. If the buyer was to contact the person who serviced your vehicle who then informed the buyer of issues that had been brought to your attention, then you could have some problems.

The maxim of caveat emptor is not available as a defence to misleading conduct.

I don't know what puzzles me more. A person coming onto a caravan seeking expert legal advice or people answering the request thinking that they hold that expertise.

-- Edited by DMaxer on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 08:31:37 AM

hufnpuf · Senior Member

DMaxer wrote:
If you are aware of these defects and you fail to mention them or feign ignorance of their existence, it can be deemed as misleading conduct.

OP has said he wasn't aware of any problem with the car when he sold it.

-- Edited by hufnpuf on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 09:39:08 AM

RickJ · Senior Member

Unfortunately the Scales of Justice are often dragged to favour one assessment over another by the weight of money on the balance plate.

watsea · Guru

Sometimes legalistic terms get put into communication trying to help generate the desired outcome. But it does not mean that it works.

A few years ago, my daughter sold her well maintained and well running car via a private sale. A father and son team inspected and test drove the car which was to be that son's first car. My daughter had done the required procedure of obtaining a Road Worthy Cerificate (RWC) for the vehicle to be sold as a registered vehicle.

A few weeks later, the father contacted my daughter informing her that the son had gone to a tyre dealer for some reason. The tyre dealer had stated that the tyres were not road worthy and needed replacement. The father claimed that my daughter should pay for the cost of the tyre replacement.

My daughter told him that she had obtained the RWC so she thought the vehicle was road worthy. The father said that even though the RWC had been obtained, the Cerifier was her "agent" and that the vehicle was not road worthy and she should pay. The father also stated that the matter would be taken to the Department of Transport regarding the matter of the RWC, hinting that it was a dodgie RWC.

My daughter and I discussed the matter with issues about how the vehicle was driven by the buyer since the sale, the buyers had the opportunity to see the condition of the tyres during their buyer's inspection, whether a tyre seller is an approved Certifier for a road worthiness, and how much tyres would have cost if she had replaced tyres before the sale. The RWC did not indicate the tyres were not road worthy.

My daughter also contacted the Certifier who stated the vehicle passed the RWC at the time of inspection. My daughter also informed him of the father's statement regarding the Dept of Transport. The Certifier said that he could be contacted if necessary.

My daughter contacted the father informing him that the RWC was given as passed. She confirmed that she would not be doing anything else and that perhaps the father could take up the matter with the Certifier. She did not hear anything further.

-- Edited by watsea on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 10:27:41 AM

-- Edited by watsea on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 10:44:11 AM

PeterInSa · Guru

Re ( defects that a casual inspection may not reveal. If you are aware of these defects and you fail to mention them or feign ignorance of their existence,)

Years ago I purchased a 4Hp outboard for $440, looked great but could not be started as the owner did not have a fuel tank?

I purchased a fuel tank and could not start the engine. Found out it had no compression. Ended up buying a piston, rings and block and, since the owner knew that it had no compression on sale, he ended up giving me $100 towards the cost of repairs.

DMaxer · Guru

Money has nothing to do with the result Rick. Consumer disputes are decided upon facts and legal principles. Would you care to tell us about the actual cases you were directly involved in that this was not the case?

RickJ · Senior Member

DM

I dont think I need to explain when one side has expensive legal representation and the other doesnt, then the scale is easily tipped.

But I must add that I do enjoy your constant attack on anything I say. It raises the standard here and that is for sure.

I will leave you to argue with your other self on that point.

BTW I considered your first post in this topic to be well presented and contained much wisdom.
Not so much the second.

-- Edited by RickJ on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 11:26:11 AM

-- Edited by RickJ on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 11:28:27 AM

dogbox · Guru

DMaxer wrote:

Money has nothing to do with the result Rick.
Consumer disputes are decided upon facts and legal principles.
Would you care to tell us about the actual cases you were directly involved in that this was not the case?

the time and cost of taking action must be considered . i once accepted two cheques for the purchase of an item the first went thru ok the second bounced (silly me! for letting goods out of my possession before second cheque cleared, i had known person for long time) by the time i recovered my outstanding debt the legal bill had just about eaten up the outstanding amount , the debt was paid as per letter of demand an i was left with my legal bill

Whenarewethere · Guru

bobsa wrote:
a private sale , there is no warranty

I bought a Lancia from my parents as at the time I (other half) needed a car for work. The Lancia was a great "driver's" car, I loved it, but cost a fortune to run. It was always serviced by the dealer on the dot!

I had my own Peugeot 504 for a number of years.

Turned out that the Lancia was never serviced properly by the dealer. Cooling radiator metal plumbing was stuffed ($1000 to replace in the 1980s), got my welding mates to redesign & replace the lot in aluminium for a case of beer, to replace the mild steel plumbing. Many of other issues I fix at well, including the head gasket & machining the aluminium head. The list was endless.

A few years later my sister bought it from me (only received about a 1/4 of what we agreed). The car was fully repaired.

A few years after that my sister sold it to my brother (at a profit!), no servicing had been done on it, cost him a lot to catch up with the maintenance never done.

Thankfully I kept the 504 & not the Lancia for 18 years as it cost very little to maintain.

Swings & roundabouts!

DMaxer · Guru

It has nothing to do with representation. The worst cases to run are against an unrepresented or inadequately represented party. In those instances the court seems to go out of its way to ensure that the unrepresented party is given equal footing by assisting in the cross examination and making general enquiries from the bench. Have a look why trials are delayed or stayed when a defendant is unrepresented. Go and argue with someone else.

Dougwe · Chief one feather

Give up DMaxer. Mate, you just made a career out of the law so know nothing disbelief

Hope you are well

Mike Harding · Guru

Dougwe wrote:
Give up DMaxer. Mate, you just made a career out of the law so know nothing

Dougwe:

I seem to recall you are fond of saying:

"An Xpert is a drip under pressure."

Can't have it both ways, I think.

Dougwe · Chief one feather

Mike Harding, get your facts right. DMaxer is not an 'Xspurt' he is an expert. There is a massive difference.

Mike Harding · Guru

Dougwe wrote:
Mike Harding, get your facts right. DMaxer is not an 'Xspurt' he is an expert. There is a massive difference.

Ah, Dougwe... it is reassuring to note that you feel qualified to assess the difference between "Xspurts" and "experts" from so many different areas.

---

Edit: typo.

-- Edited by Mike Harding on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 04:00:38 PM

dogbox · Guru

DMaxer wrote:

It has nothing to do with representation. The worst cases to run are against an unrepresented or inadequately represented party.
In those instances the court seems to go out of its way to ensure that the unrepresented party is given equal footing by assisting in the cross examination and making general enquiries from the bench.
Have a look why trials are delayed or stayed when a defendant is unrepresented.
Go and argue with someone else.

an these legal people work for nothing maybe ? the minute you require legal representation, the meter is running an it all comes down to how much it is going to cost to pursue the matter, even if it is your time own time that you may have to take off work to deal with the matter an in my case the matter got the run around and the debt was paid before getting to a hearing, problem solved. would have had to go thru same process to claim legal expenses incurred.
at some point the expense incurred could become more than the original claim.

hufnpuf · Senior Member

dogbox wrote:
at some point the expense incurred could become more than the original claim.

Right from the get-go in some cases. I knew somebody who was trying to get half of the cost of a fence from the other side of the fence and a lawyer she contacted asked her for double the amount she was trying to recover to act for her.

shakey55 · Senior Member

watsea wrote:
Sometimes legalistic terms get put into communication trying to help generate the desired outcome. But it does not mean that it works.

A few years ago, my daughter sold her well maintained and well running car via a private sale. A father and son team inspected and test drove the car which was to be that son's first car. My daughter had done the required procedure of obtaining a Road Worthy Cerificate (RWC) for the vehicle to be sold as a registered vehicle.

A few weeks later, the father contacted my daughter informing her that the son had gone to a tyre dealer for some reason. The tyre dealer had stated that the tyres were not road worthy and needed replacement. The father claimed that my daughter should pay for the cost of the tyre replacement.

My daughter told him that she had obtained the RWC so she thought the vehicle was road worthy. The father said that even though the RWC had been obtained, the Cerifier was her "agent" and that the vehicle was not road worthy and she should pay. The father also stated that the matter would be taken to the Department of Transport regarding the matter of the RWC, hinting that it was a dodgie RWC.

My daughter and I discussed the matter with issues about how the vehicle was driven by the buyer since the sale, the buyers had the opportunity to see the condition of the tyres during their buyer's inspection, whether a tyre seller is an approved Certifier for a road worthiness, and how much tyres would have cost if she had replaced tyres before the sale. The RWC did not indicate the tyres were not road worthy.

My daughter also contacted the Certifier who stated the vehicle passed the RWC at the time of inspection. My daughter also informed him of the father's statement regarding the Dept of Transport. The Certifier said that he could be contacted if necessary.

My daughter contacted the father informing him that the RWC was given as passed. She confirmed that she would not be doing anything else and that perhaps the father could take up the matter with the Certifier. She did not hear anything further.

-- Edited by watsea on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 10:27:41 AM

-- Edited by watsea on Sunday 23rd of April 2023 10:44:11 AM

Firstly they inspected the vehicle, tyres included and accepted them in the condition they appeared at the time

secondly its been a couple of weeks and this is the first car for the young buyer, you can almost be assured that he drive the car hard, spinning tyres etc (we all did this with our first)

thirdly, of course the tyre salesman said they need replacing, he needs a sale

just my opinion.