Car Dealer Magazine reports that a dealer from Reading who sold a Ford Ka without telling the buyer that it had been previously damaged was given a 12-month conditional discharge as well as being ordered to pay £500 compensation and £1,000 costs (which seems to attach more importance to legal fees than to the damage done to the consumer, but perhaps we should not be surprised at that).
At first, the magistrates were not convinced that the offender, an individual, should be treated as a trader for the purposes of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 - notwithstanding that he had sold 19 cars in the two years leading up to the offence (in 2011). On appeal, Deputy District Judge Khan said that there was 'compelling evidence' that he was a car trader because of the regularity of the deals. In addition, his account with Auto Trader had a trade discount and he used a trade name in advertisements and on the receipt (which incidentally also bore the legend 'sold as seen', which wouldn't get him very far - indeed, could possibly even have got him prosecuted for another offence if it was seen as an attempt to exclude statutory warranties).
'via Blog this'
At first, the magistrates were not convinced that the offender, an individual, should be treated as a trader for the purposes of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 - notwithstanding that he had sold 19 cars in the two years leading up to the offence (in 2011). On appeal, Deputy District Judge Khan said that there was 'compelling evidence' that he was a car trader because of the regularity of the deals. In addition, his account with Auto Trader had a trade discount and he used a trade name in advertisements and on the receipt (which incidentally also bore the legend 'sold as seen', which wouldn't get him very far - indeed, could possibly even have got him prosecuted for another offence if it was seen as an attempt to exclude statutory warranties).
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment