Got my Lotus Elan Yesterday!!

[Monty]

what about posting some photo`s

[clemo]

i haven't seen the car yet and look forward to helping out a elaner in need.
also ii will try to look at the paperwork for any clues...


the inspector.

[GeoffSmith]

According to the inspector, all is not well!

No coolant after 42 miles, doubtful it would pass an MoT, service history of red car, worn out seats, mats etc. etc. Looks like a case for trading standards.

Does anyone know of a good pyromaniac in Nottingham?

[Enright]

Did somebody call?

[TrueBlue]

ive called trading standards and here is the copy of pm just written to clemo below
Thanks all of u guys for being so helpfull i really wish i had found this site sooner

if i hadnt seen clemo i would have been on the motorway tommorow and clemo says it would have seised up!!! and i probably would have died!!
THE LIGHT BULB WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE ENGINE MANAGEMENT SENSOR COMPUTER THING!!!!!!!!! and no water!!!!
THIS CAR WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE HAD A full sevice!!!
i JUST CANT BELEIVE THIS!!!!

copy below
.........................

hi clemo

thanks very much for helping me today
100 brownie points

i called trading standards and they said it is breach of the sales of goods act 1979 or not as described or satisfactory quality

they say the best action is to try to get money back to pay for repairs
or to ask for a full refund
they told me not to drive the car any more until resolved

they said it is best to write to them rather than ring
and have standard pre written letters at their website

i am awaiting a possible call from them again and they have taken the dealers details for their database etc or possible action

.......

i have called grasmere garage about a rough written estimate for repairs
they said £1000 maximum for skimming / gasket and cambelt etc
and have asked me to take it in for a checkout so they can put it all in writing....

I mentioned the blue liquid acid test we did and do you remember it only went yellow when the water came p-ing out ....this could be why it went brown/yellow

grasmere have said they want to do this check again and in anycase need to find out why the sensor is faulty and what has caused the gasket problem if there is one
i take it into grasmere on tuesday

why not pop around my place and we could have another Tea and do another blue liquid test?? or maybe meet up for a pint after tuesday...

This is going to be a real problem for me doing this in writing...what a hassle!!

oh by the way the orange light came on again for 2 minutes and then went off while i was driving back ???

i am assuming that the engine repair plus the body repair will total £2k
+i need a new hood
so we were right it is 2k refund we need to get back from the dealer..

Richard True Blue

[TrueBlue]

PS FIRESTARTER: HERE IS A BOX OF MATCHES FOR YOU
(I AM A WELL TRAINED SORT OF DESIGNER)

[Enright]

Damn - didn't see that lot coming.

So what are you going to do - try to get the money out of them to turn it into a good one, or tell them to take it back and stick it where the sun don't shine?

(I'd do the latter just to teach them a lesson)

[dapinky]

True Blue - I decided it was about time i had my 2 p's worth on this one!

Undoubdably I know a lot less than many people on here about elans (not all, but many!), and if Clemo thinks there is a problem, then even without seeing the car I'd bet my pension on it (i can afford to lose £30 )

However, now that a diagnosis of the state of affairs has been conducted, and we are left with a series of facts, I can throw myself into the 'conversation' with (a little bit of) authority.

There are a number of things which have concerned me throughout the 'story' so far, many of which could/will have a good explanation, but to a suspicious/cynical bugger like me, leads to some questions.

Firstly, was the car sold with any 'official' warranty? If not, the seller (as a trader) has a number of legal obligations - The first one is (as you know) the Sale of Goods Act.

Two bits of the Act may apply - obviously the item is not fit for purpose, so you are entitled to redress for this.
There is also something known as 'Loss of bargain' which basically means that, even if they offer to refund the original purchase price, you can actually claim the market price for a similar (but legal/roadworthy/none bent) item. You need to base your claim on the fact that you were offered something at what you considered to be a good price, and took advantage of the free market economy to grab a good deal.

Nowhere in the Act does it say anything about 'buyer beware' (or even the posh Latin version of caveat emptor).

Now, this may seem all well and good, but the 'Sale of Goods Act' only gives mere mortals (members of the public) Civil redress, which is a double-edged sword. On one hand the level of proof needed for success is 'on the balance of probability', so as long as your argument is better than the other guy, you will win. On the other hand, it is a lengthy process to get to a County Court, and legal fees can outweigh winnings - there is no absolute right to get your costs awarded against the loser. Often a well worded letter and a spirit of compromise gets things achieved in a better and quicker way.

Having got the wishy-washy Civil Law out of the way, we come onto my specialized subject, Criminal Law.

There appear to be a few angles of attack from what I understand, so I'll deal with them in no particular order (cos I aint that bright to do it any other way).

Section 75 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 makes it a specific offence to sell (or offer to sell) a vehicle (includes a trailer) in an unroadworthy condition. There is no mention of an MOT certificate in this part of the Act, and just because there is an MOT on the car, it makes no difference, and certainly does not guarantee ‘roadworthiness’. I have brought quite a few successful prosecutions under this section, and although it is a higher standard of proof (‘beyond reasonable doubt’) it is quite easy to prove with an ‘expert’ witness examination (your local Old Bill, or VOSA will provide the necessary report FOC if they think there is any chance of success). It doesn’t matter how much mechanical knowledge the seller has or hasn’t got, it’s a purely objective test – it’s either good enough or it isn’t! Do not be put off with the usual phrases of ‘Sold as seen’ or ‘sold without warranty’, ‘Untested’ etc etc etc on any receipt you have – they aint worth the cost of the ink, let alone the paper they’re written on!

You must be careful to differentiate between ‘unroadworthy’, ‘unfit’ ‘dangerous’ and the equally upsetting, but not altogether illegal, duff cars which are better described as ‘cosmetically challenged’, scruffy and plain old knackered!

Remember that since the RTA 1988 was written, emissions tests have been absorbed into the Act, therefore, if the engine is knackered to the extent that it can’t pass an emissions test, the vehicle is ‘unroadworthy’ for the purposes of Section 75.

It is important to fully document your actions all the way through the process, eg It wouldn’t help your Criminal or Civil case if you suspect a problem, but still use the car (and even worse, if you publicise the use on a public forum like LEC) – this obviously, doesn’t preclude reasonable use – like going to another garage or place of inspection – but if you put it on a racetrack or went for a scenic drive, your chances diminish!!!!

Keep a list of all reasonably incurred costs – it’s all recoverable at court! Includes taxi fares, fuel use, experts’ reports (They can get expensive!), loss of use, hire of other transport etc etc.

Perhaps the fact that the car was delivered by trailer and not driven down to you could be used in the argument that the dealer knew it was dangerous (even if not the actual case, it can often cast a bit of doubt!)

Then we come onto my favourite one – the one that gets most (if not all) traders reaching for their cheque books:-

Fraud

Before the beginning of this year, it would have been difficult to actually prove any sort of illegality in the dealers’ actions or omissions, as different sections of the old Acts were subject to different ‘rules’.

However, since Feb 2007, the ‘Fraud Act 2006’ has applied, and basically, he is in the $h1t if he has done, or failed to do, or omitted to do (or say) something which he has a duty to say/do/disclose in any words or actions.

By stating that the car is good, he has committed fraud. (section 2)
By providing the wrong service record, he has committed fraud. (section 2)
By removing (or selling with it removed) the CEL bulb, he has committed fraud. (section 3)

It is important to remember that for the offence to be fully made-out, there is no need for anyone to actually be deceived (unlike the old Act), just that there is an act or omission with intent to cause gain or loss. The gain or loss does not need to succeed, so long as the intent is there.

All offences under the Act are indictable (Crown Court), and therefore arrestable.

As a trader, should he be convicted of fraud, he will be shafted by everyone – not only will he (probably) get a custodial sentence, he will be banned from owning, running or holding office in any Limited company, PLC or partnership for at least 5 years. He will be banned from trading in the EU, Commonwealth, USA and many other places for 8 years. He will lose any reputation he currently has, and could end up bankrupt!!!

As the Act is new, the Police and CPS are still taking on lots of ‘test cases’ to see where the judiciary are going to draw the lines with it, but at the moment, most are getting to court.

PS – just in case I come across as a barrack-room lawyer, I have been a Police vehicle examiner (both Forensic and Accident) for 15 years, I am a qualified MOT tester and VOSA examiner, I spent 10 years as a Traffic cop (some of which was spent at the regional school, teaching). Since then I have been involved in the investigative side of Policing, including lots of Fraud and Finance jobs, (currently, I’m on the Major Crime Investigation Unit).
So, although some might say I’m an opinionated gob-shite, there are some things I do know a bit about!

Good luck.

[Enright]

Just a snippet of advice TrueBlue: PRINT THAT OUT!!!

[TrueBlue]

Dave - thank you for that that is VERY helpfull!!!!!!!!!!1

so should i or can i call the police...i think i should ??

see below the letter i have written so far from the trading standards template
i rang trading standards earlier....

..............
13TH July 2007
Attention: Max & Mark or the legal proprietor
Powerhouse Car Centre
Ramper Road, Saundby, Retford
Nottinghamshire DN22 9EX

Dear Max & Mark or the legal proprietor
Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) Vehicle Lotus Elan SE Turbo -H319 RHB) Delivered to me on 7/7/07
On Friday the 6th July 2007, I bought the above mentioned Lotus from you for the sum of £4,995.00 which is faulty.

After Inspection by members of the Lotus Owners Club and by an approved Garage.
Some of the Problems that have been brought to my attention are:
1. It is unlikely that the car has had a full service, due to no water or coolant fluid. and 2. The Engine Management Warning Bulb is missing.
3. The car has collision body damage which has been poorly repaired, which include body panels that are out of line.
4. The Vehicle interior and construction is also poorly fitted with missing screws.
5. It is clear the mileage Counter has been tampered with and it is clear from the wear of the pedals and seats that this vehicle has done many more miles – (Your disclaimer does not affect my consumer rights).
6. The Service History book is assigned to a different vehicle altogether and not described before purchase.
7. One of the tyre's is worn to the point that a mechanic has questioned its eligibility of its recent MOT Certificate.
8. We do not consider the car to be 'A very good example 'with full service and 12 months MOT'' as advertised
Due to the dangerous possibilities of points 1 & 2 (not having water or warning light bulb), I have lost faith in your companies credibility to be able to correct these issues with any warranty. I therefore request a full refund or full payment of repairs to the value of £2,000.00., Being that the car is only worth £3,000 at the most, in its current state as sold. (around 40 miles only have been accrued to take the vehicle for inspection)
Please note that I have been in touch with The Trading Standards Authority and I am fully aware of my Consumer rights and can confirm that we will need a reply please within seven days, failure to comply will result in further Court action by myself and Trading Standards.
Yours faithfully

[TrueBlue]

also Dave
the powerhouse have not put their adress on the used car invoice receipt
it just has a stamp with powerhouse and the phone number
trading standards told me this is illegal..company/trading law etc

should i call the police or are u are they flying over nottingham in their helicopters already??

i think maybe now i could easily get a full refund!!!!

[GeoffSmith]

Nice one Dave. I was going to give you a prod to see what you thought, but you beat me to it. Clemo reckons it's been clocked as well so the mileage tallies with the service history.

Richard, it's up to you how you handle it but it makes my blood boil that unscrupulous b***ards can do this to people. I am certain this is not an isolated incident and, as I said to you, it could have been with someone a lot less able or to afford to resolve things. It seems that you have a very good case for getting your money back at the very least, but I'm sure they will continue to defraud other people. If you do decide to take a stand, it will take some determination to do the job properly and not be brow beaten into accepting a potentially lucrative offer.

I hope I speak for everyone on LEC that if here is anything that we can do to help you, you only have to ask.


Geoff

[dapinky]

The choice is yours, really.

Devon & Cornwall Police are a law to themselves (no pun intended). They may want to take action, they may tell you its a Trading Standards issue, they may tell you to sod off!!!!

Either way, it wouldn't hurt to drop a few points into the letter, certainly concerning the Road Traffic Act, if not the Fraud Act (never tell a fraudster that you're onto him )

If you do go to the Old Bill, they may have more interest once they realise that they won't have to do much work, as the garage is out of their area. (I've just done a job for Kent police [e-bay fraud] - all the work, none of the glory )

A couple of web sites which may be worth a look:-

Road Traffic Act 1988

Road Traffic Act 1991 (it's section 16 which gives the relevant ammendments)

Office of Fair Trading

[dapinky]

While i was writing that, you asked a couple of other things:-

Criminal law = reasonable knowledge

Civil law = poor knowledge

Company Law =

(sorry, I know nowt about it, but it sounds good to me)

[GeoffSmith]

Nice premises!

[TrueBlue]

oh thanks guys this is just so helpfull and supportive
its so nice to meet such nice people
i guess it wouldnt have happened if i hadnt been honest now in my older age

i am so happy i hereby post a smiley s**t postcard for i and i to use
ive got them (printed postcards) in my boot
and look forewards to getting loads printed for my new elan that i pray i will get with no problems

[TrueBlue]

goeff:that must be the owners house or something??
i remember when i spoke to max on the phone at one point he said 'ive got to go theres a 'police man'(which he may have said what sounded to me like a sarcastic voice) standing in front of me'

makes me feel a bit edgy about wether anyone would be able to track him/them/it down - legally or otherwise

[GeoffSmith]

Be positive - he's not working out of a rented railway arch. He's unlikely to do a runner.

[clemo]

having spent 4 hours this morning with richard it is with regret that i had to inform him of my finding .. this is just my opnion (open forum) so read as that...

my main concern as we know is that richard was told as a matter of fact ... the car has a service history book with service stamps sold under the pretence that it was for this car..

it is not.. clearly not... original page filled in by jct100 for a red se with vin number..

serviced by a reputable company till 95.
then all service entrys thereafter insinuate that it is for the blue car.. tipex milage correction in book. then 2 further stamps from a penned in garage/service which carries no address or phone number ( so no way to check) then a large service interval of 5 years or so . with off road or somthing like that writtern in the same handwriting and blue pen as the next 2 service's done 2 years apart from each other..

now i would prehaps guess that the service book is from a scrapped car in 95 .. this could be checked as it has the red car vin number in it.
but from there onwards hand writtern in serves no true purpose. and as for the last 2 stamps buy powerhouse they were done on the same day.


it was then explained to richard (days after the sale) that the log book was lost and they used this one instead.. what jct in 1995 didn't just order up a new book.. they were still in production in 95!) but no.. without even marking the book ****NOW ABC123*** please read as xxxmileage.



the condition of the car is worse than the project car a sold to alywin and that had done 160 thousands odd miles and in comparisson alywins is quite tidy..

now i understand that some cars do have quite a hard life.
but ..
excessive wear on the foot pedals, gearstick, carpet edges(holes) seats worn , arse string all on the floor, dash screws chewed, and or replaced with incorrect screws.

the binnicle cover had been replaced with oversize screw (from the dash i think) the instrument panel itself has been removed with all rear screws chewed. the bottom line of bulbs had been removed , seat belt light and ENGINE MANAGEMENT light. missing

upon putting the bulb back code 14 shows.
not suprised as it has had no water in it. i could only feel air even when squiching to bottom of the bottom hose. refilled water. left car to cool.

upon start up a major eruption in the header tank . this i could see had happened before filling though as the header tank was heavily and freshly discolored with brown silt .
however my head gasket tester did not turn yellow .. it didn't have a chance as the brown sludge had erupted into it..
(mike.y mentioned the intermediate stage of early head problems before and this ring true to his posting)

as for the rest.. sad to say poor.
hood canavas straps missing.
rear tyre if not illigal then major advisory (my mot man would not let it go)
front end panels beyond lotus friday car. the front has had a fairly big knock . been repaired. also popped out on the top of wing in an "elbow effect" from where the front has been hit.

he was also told that the switch (aftermarket maplin switch) was for the aircon?? what aircon.

minor nothings.
no lip spoiler,
the interior mirror has been ripped of leaving a nasty hole in the glass ( not through but very strange)
overspray everwhere,
roof frame repaired badly and not locking out.
8 prevous owners not the 2 as told.
no previous mot's ( to verify mileage)
roof and rear bumper held on with rivits..
brakes worse than usual/mine.

that being said it does drive in a straight line !

it is sad that richard has been led to belive that this was a great car.

by richard own admission he prefers not to argue and i feel this may help the seller walk all over his.

any advise is greatfull received.
i have said that i will help him as much as possible on this and as some of you may know .......
i quite like a vocal challange !!!



my .. what a long posting.. i hope you didn't get borred..

clemo

[dapinky]

makes me feel a bit edgy about wether anyone would be able to track him/them/it down - legally or otherwise

Everyone is traceable

I would be surprised if the garage would argue over returning the £5k with the apparently overwhelming stack of evidence - the only question then to remain, is how much extra 'compensation' they should make available to you!

(even if they refund you totally, they have still committed the criminal offences and it would not preclude any prosecution)