Car Sale Refund Dispute

sold a car buyer trying to get a refund in the uk

yes

the vehcile has rust and the buyer signed a receipt where it said car will neeed some welding

can you check a letter i want to send them to make sure its legally correct

Dear Mr. Gardner, August * * Without Prejudice I appreciate your concerns regarding the Toyota Hilux (registration SW09 DHL) you purchased from me on January *, *, after leaving a deposit a few days prior. To clarify, the Toyota Hilux you purchased was sold privately by me. The vehicle was registered in my name, and the payment was deposited into my personal bank account. The paperwork for the sale accurately reflected these details. Regarding the vehicle's condition at the time of sale, you and your father inspected the vehicle, left a deposit, and then collected it a few days later. Any further inspections could have been arranged during this period. The vehicle had a valid MOT certificate available on the government website, demonstrating that it met the required safety standards at the time of sale and importantly was roadworthy. At any time, you could have had someone inspect the truck and provide a second opinion. In your last letter and in a recorded voicemail from your father, both of you questioned the validity of the MOT. As I suggested, if there were any concerns about the MOT, those should be addressed with the DVLA. Since then, I have seen no further mention of this issue. Additionally, in your latest letter, once again you acknowledge the receipt, which clearly stated that the Toyota "will need some welding," indicating that sometime in the future, attention to the vehicle was necessary. I don't understand how much clearer that can be. This disclosure was made to ensure you were fully aware of the vehicle's condition. You still proceeded with the purchase, likely due to the vehicle's low mileage and overall good body condition and of course price. To the best of my knowledge, I provided an accurate description. Your signature on the receipt is an acknowledgment of this. At the time you purchased the vehicle, which was more than six months ago, it was in very good mechanical condition and the body was in above-average condition for an older Toyota truck. This disclosure regarding potential future rust repairs was made at the time of sale, which was not a requirement. Since the sale, the truck has been in your possession and used for your purposes. If the truck was used for heavy work, or traveled many miles, it would have been prudent to have it inspected, especially as you knew and were given the knowledge that welding might be needed in the future. I am reiterating this so you can recall the actual events. Even today, a Toyota truck with that mileage would be difficult to find at the price you paid. There was a reason for that, and it is clearly stated on the receipt you signed. Despite my previous request, you have not provided any proof to support your claims about the vehicle's condition. As I previously mentioned, "However, I remain open to any specific repair quotes or evidence you can provide demonstrating that the welding needs were drastically underrepresented or mischaracterized at the time of sale." If you believe you have a legitimate claim, you may pursue this matter through the courts, where mediation is compulsory, and let an impartial party make the decision. I am prepared to recount the details of the transaction as they occurred with the court-appointed mediator and, if necessary, the Judge. Sincerely, Robert Vernon * Evesham Road Astwood Bank Dear Mr. Gardner, August * * Without Prejudice I appreciate your concerns regarding the Toyota Hilux (registration SW09 DHL) you purchased from me on January *, *, after leaving a deposit a few days prior. To clarify, the Toyota Hilux you purchased was sold privately by me. The vehicle was registered in my name, and the payment was deposited into my personal bank account. The paperwork for the sale accurately reflected these details. Regarding the vehicle's condition at the time of sale, you and your father inspected the vehicle, left a deposit, and then collected it a few days later. Any further inspections could have been arranged during this period. The vehicle had a valid MOT certificate available on the government website, demonstrating that it met the required safety standards at the time of sale and importantly was roadworthy. At any time, you could have had someone inspect the truck and provide a second opinion. In your last letter and in a recorded voicemail from your father, both of you questioned the validity of the MOT. As I suggested, if there were any concerns about the MOT, those should be addressed with the DVLA. Since then, I have seen no further mention of this issue. Additionally, in your latest letter, once again you acknowledge the receipt, which clearly stated that the Toyota "will need some welding," indicating that sometime in the future, attention to the vehicle was necessary. I don't understand how much clearer that can be. This disclosure was made to ensure you were fully aware of the vehicle's condition. You still proceeded with the purchase, likely due to the vehicle's low mileage and overall good body condition and of course price. To the best of my knowledge, I provided an accurate description. Your signature on the receipt is an acknowledgment of this. At the time you purchased the vehicle, which was more than six months ago, it was in very good mechanical condition and the body was in above-average condition for an older Toyota truck. This disclosure regarding potential future rust repairs was made at the time of sale, which was not a requirement. Since the sale, the truck has been in your possession and used for your purposes. If the truck was used for heavy work, or traveled many miles, it would have been prudent to have it inspected, especially as you knew and were given the knowledge that welding might be needed in the future. I am reiterating this so you can recall the actual events. Even today, a Toyota truck with that mileage would be difficult to find at the price you paid. There was a reason for that, and it is clearly stated on the receipt you signed. Despite my previous request, you have not provided any proof to support your claims about the vehicle's condition. As I previously mentioned, "However, I remain open to any specific repair quotes or evidence you can provide demonstrating that the welding needs were drastically underrepresented or mischaracterized at the time of sale." If you believe you have a legitimate claim, you may pursue this matter through the courts, where mediation is compulsory, and let an impartial party make the decision. I am prepared to recount the details of the transaction as they occurred with the court-appointed mediator and, if necessary, the Judge. Sincerely, Robert Vernon * Evesham Road Astwood Bank

if this went to small claims based on what you have seen will i be able t defend myself

i do voulantry work for a car dealer and i found a truck i liked i bought it but it prooved to big so after it was in my name i sold it the new buyer after 6 months claims it was not fit for purpose and wants his money back i dont know whathe did with teh truck and how many more miles its done should i be concerned as i told him and got him to sign a receipt staaating it neded some welding but he did not follow up on it