Nottm_S2

The places who do the checks keep records if you do want to pursue

richmc

Yes but in this case the dealer provided incorect evidance to show it wasn't CAT D, therefore the dealer is legally stuffed. And thats a criminal offence even if was given the certificat by a third party. This case is not about what goes on the paperwork but the deception involved.
A recent case I heard was a double glazing leaflet, stating a gap of 20mm between the glass turned out to be only 12mm, the buyer was therefore compensated by the court and only payed 20% of the cost of the windows. (can't remember the exact mm's)
It's about being sold one thing and receving something different.

Stoker76

Have you still got that report he produced? If not, it seems like you've had it as it will be your word against theirs - You need some proof. I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as 'criminal misrepresentation'.

Is it the law that all traders have to declare that cars are cat D or other category? If not, then it's probably 'caveat emptor' unless you can prove he did or said something to mislead you - Where is that report? Sharp practice at best.

If you have the report and it is kosher (i.e. he didn't make it up on his home computer), it seems difficult to see that it is his fault - I don't see how there is a criminal offence unless there is some specific piece of legislation that says the dealer is legally responsible for any report he gives to a customer regardless of where it came from.

cat5cable

mines a cat d but i got it much cheaper than it should be, the problem with a cat d is its cosmetic or other financial reasons car hire etc etc, mine was a total insurance loss in 2002 apparently, its a 1999 car but no paperwork has ever come to light about what the damage was.

mark it up to experiance and enjoy your s2

ginger

richmc

Yes that legislation is in place.

MB

Where's the OP?

I'd till like to know what the dealer supplied as an HPi which showed clear...

Lurking Lawyer

1. Making it a criminal issue is unlikely to be of any direct help to the OP - it will almost certainly not result in any award to him. At best, it means a fine for the dealer.

2. Whether there is a civil claim depends on whether the OP paid more for the car than it was worth, believing it to be a "clean" car and not a Cat D. The extent of any loss depends on what the difference in value is and what the market price would have been had he known it was a Cat D and paid accordingly.

3. Just because its a Cat "D" doesn't mean the damage was severe. A lot of cars get this category because of the cost of parts and labour make repair uneconomical. It does not follow, therefore, that there will automatically be a significant difference in price between a "clean" car and a Cat D.

4. Can you point me towards the legislation you refer to below which puts a positive obligation on a trader to disclose that it is a Cat D? (I'm not saying you're wrong - I just don't do a lot of consumer law and would be interested to know what the authority for your proposition is).

In civil terms, it's usually a case of "caveat emptor" in terms of there only being a remedy for misrepresentation if you ask a question and get a false answer, as opposed to you not asking the question to begin with and so the dealer not offering information on a given point.

s2k4tony

Cat D is nothing to be worried about if you keep the car for a long time. In the short term, of course... you have scuppered a chunk of the car's margin. I would say, a significant number of s2000's are crashed then repaired, without any logging of it. My W-reg had wing repair that I could see, my 02 plate certainly had a lick of paint on the boot lid. Both owners declined to tell me about any bump. I'm not saying you'll hardly find a clean one that's not had some hedge action, but its what you expect when you buy one. The most important thing for the OP here, is how well the repair has been done. If its an invisible repair i.e totally un-noticeable, it's all good and someone like me would buy it (that appreciates these cars find themselves sideways at times in their life)
A truly big cock-up for trusting a dealer though OP, as it is nowadays... you cannot trust any dealer i'm afraid.

richmc

1. Making it a criminal issue is unlikely to be of any direct help to the OP - it will almost certainly not result in any award to him. At best, it means a fine for the dealer.

2. Whether there is a civil claim depends on whether the OP paid more for the car than it was worth, believing it to be a "clean" car and not a Cat D. The extent of any loss depends on what the difference in value is and what the market price would have been had he known it was a Cat D and paid accordingly.

3. Just because its a Cat "D" doesn't mean the damage was severe. A lot of cars get this category because of the cost of parts and labour make repair uneconomical. It does not follow, therefore, that there will automatically be a significant difference in price between a "clean" car and a Cat D.

4. Can you point me towards the legislation you refer to below which puts a positive obligation on a trader to disclose that it is a Cat D? (I'm not saying you're wrong - I just don't do a lot of consumer law and would be interested to know what the authority for your proposition is).

In civil terms, it's usually a case of "caveat emptor" in terms of there only being a remedy for misrepresentation if you ask a question and get a false answer, as opposed to you not asking the question to begin with and so the dealer not offering information on a given point.
[/quote]

Hi.
1-The surgestion of the possibility will possibly put more pressure on the dealer to settle the matter.
2-I agree the buyer will have to provide evedence ads etc to show there was a difference in price.
3-Again I agree, but the fact that CAT D cars generally sell for less than a non CAT D could be be an issue when reselling.
4-The trader gave a false impression by showing a clean report to the buyer, that he needed to disclose or not is not the issue, he has given a false impression to the buyer. It is covered by the sale of goods act, implied terms.

Your last point the OP stated he was offered the information by the dealer whilst inquiring about the car, if you bought a TV for example and then found it had been an ex-display model when the seller said it was BNIB, you would have the same rights, a reduction or refund. And the threat of reporting to trading standards and being subject to their powers would do no harm.

Dracoro

This is a bit (lot) misleading. The "only" difference between the two is that Cat C repair costs exceed value of car IIRC. The damage CAN actually be worse on a Cat C than a Cat D, i.e. some damage on a £2000 car can result in a Cat C but a load of damage on a £30k car may be a Cat D.

Category A Insurance Write Off – the vehicle must scrapped and no parts or components can be sold other than for scrap.
Category B Insurance Write Off - the vehicle must not be used again but non- structural and roadworthy parts and components may be recovered for use in other vehicles.
Category C Insurance Write Off – the vehicle is repairable but the parts and labour would exceed the value of the car.
Category D Insurance Write Off – the vehicle is economically repairable but other factors are involved that cause the insurer to declare the vehicle a write off.

Regardless, unless you know what the damage was (and supporting documentation), you'll never know how bad (or not) it was. Doesn't take much to write of an 8 year old car, takes a lot to write off a 1 year old car etc. Sometimes it's not the damage that costs but other cost (silly hire car charges whilst waiting weeks for that rare part etc.).

Anyway, eyes open, know what you are buying and decide thereon. Doesn't help the OP but he needs to check his documents from sale time as, irrespective of the actual damage done, he may have lost 25% (or whatever) of the value of his car. Which provides a clue, OP did you pay market rates for a non-cat car or did you get a cheap "deal"?