Hi

I can see this from both sides. If I was in this position I would be asking myself whether it was worth risking my business reputation for £100. As you say Motor Traders are already much maligned, when in truth it is only a small minority that are unprofessional.

Huckster

I believe that from both the legal and moral standpoint, that you have been reasonable and have shown goodwill throughout and kept your side of the agreement.

Legally you are allowed to keep "reasonable" out of pocket expenses that you can demonstrate you have incurred, if the buyer withdraws from a cash deal once the car has been inspected and the agreed work carried out to the standards you agreed.

You have fulfilled these obligations as agreed so far, regardless of the bubbling paint on the passenger door which he later noticed after agreeing the deal...even though you have kindly offered to rectify a separate condition which you were not obliged to.!

The buyer does have the right to reasonably expect the car to be as described considering the age and mileage of the vehicle. However, he cannot reasonably expect a used Seven year old car to have pristine body and paintwork unless a full re-spray was agreed at the point of sale...which it wasn't.

Based on what you have explained, legally this buyer has had all his conditions met and seems to be expecting far much more than was agreed, in my view....he should consider himself more than fortunate that he is being offered as much as £100 of his deposit returned under these circumstances..

Thanks for your input - yes I am in agreement with you up to a point regarding the MOT, a full year is generally to be expected. However the headlight wasnt actually an MOT failure (or even an advisory), it was a tiny crack to the very outer edge that wasnt even in the 'lit' area, more cosmetic than anything else. So my point is he is rejecting the car on the basis of having spotted some bubbling to the bottom of the door that he had not picked up on previously, I offered to rectify this but he was still insistent he did not want the car - I simply felt that I was entitled to the cost of at least the headlight (£70 + labour) as this really was so minimal on a 7 year old car I almost certainly would not have had it changed if it was not for the customers insistence. I felt I carried out all the work required upon which basis he left the deposit and he has since noticed a blemish that has changed his mind with regard to buying the car - even though I offered to rectify this and that this point was not even part of the original agreement. Further opinions much appreciated, I will probably refund the entire deposit anyway but feel slightly aggrieved as I feel a lot of car dealers get a disproportionate amount of bad press when actually the vast majority are trying to be exceptionally fair and honest!

Hi

I think you would only be correct in keeping a deposit or part thereof, if any receipt you issued for the deposit, noted that deposits may not be returned in the event that any oustanding balance was not paid to purchase the vehicle. If the customer was warned of this, then they could have walked away or agreed with you to note the receipt that if the customer was not happy with repairs, the full deposit would be refunded. You should have a vehicle checklist to be signed by both parities noting any faults, against which you could note repair before sale or customer happy to accept without repair.

This is from Lincolnshire Trading standards report about Motor Trade Sales

"Deposits are usually considered to be non-refundable. However, if you are in breach of contract, or if
you agreed that the deposit would be refundable as an express term of the contract, then you should
return the customer’s deposit. You would also be under a duty to mitigate your losses - i.e. only take
from the deposit any losses that you have actually made.
If the deposit was taken as part of a sale which was to be completed via a finance agreement, then the
deposit must be refunded if the finance agreement is cancelled."

I think you may be on dodgy ground morally and legally (breach of contract) if you did not mention that the deposit may not be refunded, if the customer did not proceed. For £100 it is not worth it. If the customer bad mouths you down the pub, you could lose more money in future sales. Bad publicity spreads much more quickly than stories about good service.

This is a bit gutting when you have paid out money but I suppose this comes with the territory.I am in agreement with the customer that any MOT type faults e.g. headlight should be fixed before sale and it is normal for cars to be sold with reasonable MOT period left. I would not buy a car from a motor trader where there is only about 4 months MOT left.

Huckster

Hi all,

Thought I would seek your opinions on this matter, I am actually a motor trader so this is a different circumstance to someone trying to get their deposit back, I actually believe I have a right to keep one. I agreed to sell a gentleman a Vauxhall Corsa for his daughter, the car is a 2002 model with 39,000 miles. We agreed a price of £3150 subject to me putting on a full years MOT (car was MOTd to the end of September beforehand), replacing a headlight (had the tiniest crack to one edge) and removing some insignificant parking 'dinks' to the passenger side of the car. He did inspect the car fully prior to us agreeing I would get this work done and left a deposit of £200 "subject to the work being carried out to his satisfaction" - I said this was fine although the dinks may not be totally invisible once rectified as the marks would need touching up after being tapped out, but that it would be 90% improved. On that basis I got the work done, he came to collect the car today and told me he was not happy - he stated he was not happy with the marks on the passenger side as you can still see where some tiny marks have been touched up (despite me telling him that they would not be absolutely perfect - simply that they would be much improved). However, he was mostly upset as he had spotted some bubbling to the paintwork around the very bottom of the passenger door, neither he nor myself had spotted this prior to today, but he did inspect the car fully last time around and the car is 7 years old, after all.

He has made it clear he now no longer wants the car and that he wants his £200 deposit back as the car is "not to his satisfaction", I told him I would be very fair and even offered to have a professional bodyshop rectify the bubbling to the bottom of the door (even though he did not notice this when he left the deposit after a considerable inspection). He would not accept this and still wanted the deposit back. On that basis, I said fair enough, I will refund £100 of the deposit which still leaves me greatly out of pocket as I have MOT'd the car (when it already had 4 months remaining), and replaced a headlamp (this did not affect the MOT and was barely cracked, most people would have not worried about this). He did not accept this and my opinion is he is being totally unreasonable and as I have spent both considerable time and money on the car, he is lucky to receive even part of his deposit back. His argument is that I should have replaced the headlight and MOT etc anyway - I would not agree as the car is 7 years old and a fraction of its new price - It is a used car after all. I would appreciate people's opinions both from a 'moral' position as well as a legal standpoint.

Many thanks in advance.