Cat C write off - VIC Check? Help!

[Knight_Rider]

My lass bought a Clio Extreme, early October of this year. The Garage we got it off said they'd send off the V5 and paid to tax it so we could get home. A few days ago she got a letter saying that the car cant be driven until it has had a VIC check. Surely this should have been mentioned when we bought the car. Now she's got to fork out a shed load of money to get it to the check, pay for it and plus the repairs that we know will need doing (just look at earlier threads and you'll know what I mean!)
Anyone got any idea as to what can be done? Should the car have been sold as spares, scrap or repairs (considering as far as the DVLA know the cars still sat in a scrap yard), should it have been sold at all, should be have been told.
HEEEEELLLLLLPPPPP

 

[Scrooge]

Vic checks take an age to sort out.

You need to back the car.

 

[Laura]

did you not HPI it??

 

[MartinR]

vic checks are not expensive circa £50 iirc, they are not in place to check the condition/repairs of the car they only do vic checks to make sure the identity of the car is right and the engine codes and vin numbers etc all corrospond to that vehicle reg. and it hasn't been ringered (ie just putting the plates on another clio of the same spec ,colour etc)

without the vic certificate you can not get a v5 for the car also if you aren't the registered keeper via v5 you cannot get road tax either can also cause problems aquiring insurance

iirc the garage in question does not have to tell you about cat-c and cat-d's. it is down to the consumer (you)to also run an hpi check.

unless there is obvious substantial damage they shall not condem the car.if there is substantial damage that can be clearly seen..........why did you buy the car??

awaiting daniel to comment he is more knowledgable on this as he is a dealer

 

[DAR]

How did they tax it? Genuine question - not knowing the detailed in's and out's of Cat C/D

 

[Dave Hester]

A legal trader cant sell a car like that!

Phone trading standards

 

[Sir_Dave]

A legal trader cant sell a car like that!

Phone trading standards

This.

Although perhaps its god's punishment for not hpi'ing it yourself?

 

[bmh.01]

Something very fishy here, i'd be wondering if you've bought a stolen car more than anything here.

They can sell a car thats already had the VIC done but they shouldn't have in this state.

 

[leeds_182]

Something very fishy here, i'd be wondering if you've bought a stolen car more than anything here.

They can sell a car thats already had the VIC done but they shouldn't have in this state.

This, have you checked the vin etc?

 

[Clio Neil]

id take the car back.

i currently own a mk4 golf gti which i bought cat c which needed the repair. the repair was bumper, light and bonnet! £47 quid i think it cost me to have the check. all they check that its not a cut and shut and that all chassis numbers are correct and have not been tampered with. they wont be looking at the repair work. if the car looks unroadworthy, they'll just send you away.

 

[bennno2005]

A garage cant sell you a car being CAT C or D without making you aware of it.

Take it back or put it through trading standards.

The test in only about £50 but by the sounds of it you didnt pay for a damage / repaired car so i'd be taking it back.

 

[bmh.01]

A garage cant sell you a car being CAT C or D without making you aware of it.

Yes, they can. Don't ask/don't tell principle.

 

[bennno2005]

Yes, they can. Don't ask/don't tell principle.

Not legally. A trader has to make you aware. They are allowed to sell them but must let you know first.

 

[Bluebeard]

Not legally. A trader has to make you aware. They are allowed to sell them but must let you know first.

Incorrect.

If the buyer asks the seller, Legally the seller has to be honest.

If the buyer doesn't ask, then tough s**t.

I agree with everything in post 4.

I'm not sure what else I can hep with tbh.

 

[Kat@Renparts]

Not legally. A trader has to make you aware. They are allowed to sell them but must let you know first.

The trader would probably just say there weren't aware either.

A VIC check can be very straightforward, just find your local centre that checks, call up and get an appointment. Depending on how busy they are you can sometimes get it done within the week. As someone said earlier, all they check is that the car is legit and all the chassis numbers match up. A lot of the clio II we see that are cat see are very light damage

 

[Bluebeard]

Just take the s**t back to the garage. Is this the one with the idle problem?

If it is, just take it back and get your money back.

Can't believe you've let it go on for this long tbh.

 

[bennno2005]

Incorrect.

If the buyer asks the seller, Legally the seller has to be honest.

If the buyer doesn't ask, then tough s**t.

I agree with everything in post 4.

I'm not sure what else I can hep with tbh.

Laws changed last year. Trade sellers have to disclose it. There was rumours about a law whereby if its CAT C/D you have to put it in the advert but I'm unsure about this one.

Read this if you can be arsed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2010/10/small_car_company.html

 

[Bluebeard]

Laws changed last year. Trade sellers have to disclose it. There was rumours about a law whereby if its CAT C/D you have to put it in the advert but I'm unsure about this one.

Read this if you can be arsed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2010/10/small_car_company.html

Sorry, not being rude, but where does it state that the laws have changed?

 

[bennno2005]

Its doesn't in that. That's what I got told that by the dealership we bought the GF's car from.

That article just states that its illegal for a trader to sell an accident damaged car without informing the buyer.

 

[Bluebeard]

Thats not how I understand it. Nor does my trading standards area guy.

The people in that article were buying smashed cars, repairing them and then selling them. Thats an entirely different game to just taking on in part exchange thats already on the register.

 

[bennno2005]

Thats not how I understand it. Nor does my trading standards area guy.

The people in that article were buying smashed cars, repairing them and then selling them. Thats an entirely different game to just taking on in part exchange thats already on the register.

Trading standards website seems to disagree?

“Insurance claims
Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer may be an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and you should report this to your local trading standards service. It is advisable to ask the trader whether the car has been in any accidents before the sale."

Taken from http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/wirral/con1item.cgi?file=*ADV0003-1011.txt

 

[Bluebeard]

The key word there is, MAY be an offence.

As in if the consumer asks you, you know its a Cat C and you hide it, then its an offence.

 

[Revels]

FatDan is correct. It's only an offence to lie when asked.

 

[bennno2005]

The key word there is, MAY be an offence.

As in if the consumer asks you, you know its a Cat C and you hide it, then its an offence.

"Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer"

That implies to me not having to ask.

 

[theduck]

"Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer may be an offence..."

May is the important word there, that implies it may or may not be an offence depending on the circumstances. So if you are asked and lie, thats an offence, if your not asked you have done nothing wrong.


However, on topic for a minute. Selling a car to someone as road legal when it has not had the VIC done so is not road legal is wrong and surely criminal.

 

[bennno2005]

"Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer may be an offence..."

May is the important word there, that implies it may or may not be an offence depending on the circumstances. So if you are asked and lie, thats an offence, if your not asked you have done nothing wrong.

There is a section called "misleading omissions" in the the consumer protection from unfair trading regulations 2008
which disagrees with you there.

 

[MartinR]

Trading standards website seems to disagree?

“Insurance claims
Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer may be an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and you should report this to your local trading standards service. It is advisable to ask the trader whether the car has been in any accidents before the sale."

Taken from http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/wirral/con1item.cgi?file=*ADV0003-1011.txt

"Selling a car that has been classified as a category C or D write off without making this clear to the consumer"

That implies to me not having to ask.

you have just chopped a few words out of the original statement to make it look like you are correct in a way yes you are but as stated before the key word is MAY. which is missing in the edited version

i part ex'd a cat c in once and the dealer never asked me so i never said (there is no law that differs this only a statement which has more holes in it than a sponge)

 

[bennno2005]

Read my above post.

You're not legally obliged to tell the dealer its up to them to check as you arent classed as a trader. However as i see it they are bound by law to inform the buyer.

 

[theduck]

There is a section called "misleading omissions" in the the consumer protection from unfair trading regulations 2008
which disagrees with you there.

I know all about misleading ommisions and do not see that applies here. You are being sold a road legal vehicle in the condition it is presented. A misleading omission would be something along the lines of

"only 50'000 miles on the clocks" when you know full well its gone around the clocks already and so the mileage is 150'000 miles. You are omitting the fact it has been around the clocks once, your not lying as the clocks display 50k, but you are implying the mileage is lower than it is and so lying by omission.

 

[Revels]

Beeno, you're wrong. Give up. Lol.

 

[bennno2005]

I know all about misleading ommisions and do not see that applies here. You are being sold a road legal vehicle in the condition it is presented. A misleading omission would be something along the lines of

"only 50'000 miles on the clocks" when you know full well its gone around the clocks already and so the mileage is 150'000 miles. You are omitting the fact it has been around the clocks once, your not lying as the clocks display 50k, but you are implying the mileage is lower than it is and so lying by omission.

"Misleading omissions
6.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account
of the matters in paragraph (2)—
(a) the commercial practice omits material information,
(b) the commercial practice hides material information,
(c) the commercial practice provides material information in a manner which is unclear,
unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely, or
(d) the commercial practice fails to identify its commercial intent, unless this is already
apparent from the context,
and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision
he would not have taken otherwise."

I would say as a consumer that knowing a car has been subject to a previous insurance write off would have an influence as to whether or not I bought it.

I think you are getting confused between omitting and hiding material information, both of which are against this law.

 

[bennno2005]

Beeno, you're wrong. Give up. Lol.

I really dont see you lot proving me wrong though.

 

[theduck]

You have to consider this section though:

"and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision
he would not have taken otherwise"

It would affect 90% of the people on heres decision to buy or what they would pay, but I reckon the average customer wouldnt have a clue what was meant if they were told it was CAT C/D, and probably wouldnt care.

 

[SC03OTT]

Seems pretty ambiguous reading all of the above.

 

[MartinR]

Read my above post.

You're not legally obliged to tell the dealer its up to them to check as you arent classed as a trader. However as i see it they are bound by law to inform the buyer.

i'm not a trader no

but it works both ways

internet information is not always correct

 

[bennno2005]

You have to consider this section though:

"and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision
he would not have taken otherwise"

It would affect 90% of the people on heres decision to buy or what they would pay, but I reckon the average customer wouldnt have a clue what was meant if they were told it was CAT C/D, and probably wouldnt care.

So the average consumer who upon being told the car they’ve gone to see is a CAT D would just go “ill take it” rather than ask what it means?

If the average consumer knew that a car they were looking at had been previously written off then yes i would say it would influence their decision

 

[bennno2005]

i'm not a trader no

but it works both ways

internet information is not always correct

Yes which is why ive been carefull where I've got my information from. It doesn't work both ways at all as you not being a trader you're not bound to the TRADING regulations!

 

[Pete.M]

Incorrect.

If the buyer asks the seller, Legally the seller has to be honest.

If the buyer doesn't ask, then tough s**t.

I agree with everything in post 4.

I'm not sure what else I can hep with tbh.

You are a car dealer aren't you Daniel?

Just out of interest would you sell a car that you knew to be on the register to someone without telling them if they didn't ask?

 

[bennno2005]

"It's not illegal for a dealer to sell you a car that has been a total loss, provided that you have been made aware of the fact"

Taken from HPI website. (item 7)

http://www.hpicheck.com/buy_trade.html

f**k you all.

 

[Knight_Rider]

They repled to my mail today stating they won't take it back so looks like trading standards need to get involved now.