Re: car salesman : Sat Apr 26, 2014 7:03 pm  

Subject to any terms and conditions (if any) which we haven't seen (including website t&c's), it does appear that a contract was entered into for the 2.0L vehicle for the lower price.

They may be able to advance some kind of 'mistake' argument or rely on their website t&c's which usually account for mistakes like this but frankly what are you going to be able to do?

Presumably you are not in possession of either the 1.6L or the 2.0L vehicle. They won't sell you the 2.0L unless you pay for the extra - even if this does amount to a breach of contract.

Your options are limited. Best to do what the poster above suggested and try and negotiate a discount or some extras for the inconvenience caused.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 12:55 am  

I think the OP has a case.

He did not especially want to buy that particular specific car, his requirement was to be supplied with a particular model of car, and as long as it had a 2.0 engine, it didn't matter which particular car. They could have sourced one from any of their stock anywhere. In this case, the contract and the pre-contract negotiations were all about a type of car and a specification, and not about one specific motor.

He should argue that they agreed to sell him a type of car at a 2..0 spec at an agreed price and so they should do so. The claim that they made a mix-up with their pricing is not his problem, since the price was not manifestly absurd. For example, if you were buying a 100K Roller which was mistakenly advertised in an ad for £1 then that wouldn't wash legally, as any reasonable person is taken to obviously know that a major mistake has occurred and no court is going to enforce it.

OTOH if you are selling loads of cars, and you do misprice one, but not by so much that it is blatantly obvious it's a mistake, then a court may well say tough luck, the deal stands.

The OP went to a car dealership - not to a sweet old white haired lady selling her runabout. It seems the salesman locally didn't know that a 2.0L model couldn't reasonably be sold at the lower price, and clearly if an experience car dealer doesn't immediately see it is an obvious mistake, then it can't BE an obvious mistake.

I don't think it's a certain win, but well worth a go - especially since it would be a small claims case so no costs risk if you lose. And the dealership wouldn't want to be dragged through court. You could also threaten them with Trading Standards.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 5:56 am  

Take the advice of the Bradford fan! Them being "legal eagles" an' all!

Sorry FA - Couldn't resist!

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 7:09 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

The OP went to a car dealership - not to a sweet old white haired lady selling her runabout. It seems the salesman locally didn't know that a 2.0L model couldn't reasonably be sold at the lower price, and clearly if an experience car dealer doesn't immediately see it is an obvious mistake, then it can't BE an obvious mistake.

Just to pick up on this point as just yesterday I was in my local car dealer sorting out a car for my youngest - they sold the car that we really wanted but he has located on his clever cardealer-webby thing an identical spec, same year, lower mileage version for £500 less than the original. Part of the reason for this is because the cardealer-webby thing has the model listed wrongly, its one of those car name things that manufacturers do when they add alloy wheels one year and give it a fancy name - anyway, my dealer (who I've dealt with for a long time) spotted that they had it listed as a lower value model and so he's got it cheaper than it should be, showed me the web-page and everything.

We'll know for sure when it turns up this week of course but the point to make is that you are correct and incorrect, the dealer could easily have located a 2.0L model as they have huge dealer sources to pick from, but as for spotting the incorrect valuation, not so easy - by the way, one other thing I discovered yesterday, Glass's guide is not the bible in the trade anymore, in fact he laughed at the Glass's valuation on the car we were looking for yesterday saying "No-one goes by that anymore".

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 7:41 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

The OP went to a car dealership - not to a sweet old white haired lady selling her runabout. It seems the salesman locally didn't know that a 2.0L model couldn't reasonably be sold at the lower price, and clearly if an experience car dealer doesn't immediately see it is an obvious mistake, then it can't BE an obvious mistake.

But it was an obvious mistake. It was an obvious mistake by the other dealer who has the car listed as a 2l when it is only a 1.6l.

The dealership where the OP was buying the car made a good faith attempt to find him the car he wanted. He seemed to have found the car. The OP like the sound of it, agreed to buy it and put down a deposit.

The OP then did some research into the car and found the clear error. He called the dealer, who after looking into it agreed that the OP was correct and obviously all interest in that car disappeared.

The dealership has his 200 deposit. That should be refunded.

But trying to hold that dealership responsible for the other dealers error is ridiculous.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 7:44 am  

You need to consider your position practically. Not just your legal position.

Whilst obviously a decision for you, there are some strong factors against issuing a claim.

1. You may not win;
2. It takes time - don't expect a hearing (if it gets that far before six months from now)
3. Initial cost - There is a claim fee and a hearing fee (£200 approx)
4. You may need to instruct a solicitor at further cost unless you know how to conduct litigation;
5. It is stressful for most people;
6.You are highly unlikely to be awarded the car at the lower price - you have a duty to mitigate your loss which means you can't sit on your hands for six months bemoaning the fact they didn't sell you the car. You need to actively source another car and your claim would then be for the difference in price, not £1300.

Litigation should be a last resort.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:35 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

But it was an obvious mistake. It was an obvious mistake by the other dealer who has the car listed as a 2l when it is only a 1.6l.

The dealership where the OP was buying the car made a good faith attempt to find him the car he wanted. He seemed to have found the car. The OP like the sound of it, agreed to buy it and put down a deposit.

The OP then did some research into the car and found the clear error. He called the dealer, who after looking into it agreed that the OP was correct and obviously all interest in that car disappeared.

The dealership has his 200 deposit. That should be refunded.

But trying to hold that dealership responsible for the other dealers error is ridiculous.

I get what you are saying but the dealership they sourced the car from is the same one just another branch.
The website show all cars from around the country but it's all one franchise. Funnily enough just been on auto trader and they are still advertising 1.6 cars as 2.0 although they must know after I kicked up a fuss.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 10:15 am  

Personally, if I was the dealership, I'd give you the option of having your deposit back, or supplying a similarly specced 2 litre model at the price agreed.

Unfortunately, at this price, the alternative car would have a substantial increase in the mileage etc, etc, but as you sound like the type of customer nobody would really want..... Tough titty.

And a final piece of pro bono advice. If the bargain seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:33 pm  

It's a straightforward breach of contract.

You enquired about a 2.0L car. They said they had one. A price was agreed.

One delivery, and following payment, you discovered it was not a 2.0L car.

At law, they now have a duty to put you in the posision you would have been in, but for the breach of contract. I.e. they should supply a 2.0L car without you having to pay extra.

That said, you will probably find something in their Ts&Cs about mistakes.

Realistically, you probably have two options - return car and get cash back, or pay a sum to 'upgrade' to the 2.0L.

Re: car salesman : Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:36 pm  

I believe FA is right when he says mispricing has to be blatently obvious before the seller is entitled to charge more or withdraw from the contract.