MB ebay buyer being taken to court

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Were it not for the random nature of someone specifically asking for evidence of the service history I would have said it was a scam, but it's hard to see what the hook would have been had that event not happened. To me the claimed losses look excessive, but it'll be interesting to see the result of the court case...
 
Saw that thread earlier, sounds like the eBay seller is bent
 
The highlight for me was referal to the case "Arkell vs Pressdram".

I used to read Private Eye pretty regualrly when I travelled to London, it always made me chuckle.
 
Interesting, to say the least. It seems a little off. It's just poor quality customer service and a poor sales pitch. The seller potentially mislead the customer by describing the product incorrectly - Not a leg to stand on. I would sit back, allow the claim to come in then counter claim for loss of income if affected in such a manner. However The sellers means of claims seems a bit under handed a it doesn't look like it will go through anything other than an on line court.

I'll have to keep an eye on this. Personal interest.
 
I've had personal experience of Money Claim on line, from both sides.

It's very easy to tie someone up for at least a year by replying on time with reasoned arguments.

I've had two issued against me and both were nonsense. I am insured against this via my combined business insurance.

One got paid as it was simply cheaper to pay than defend (by my insurers) the others got told they were being silly and go away...and surprisingly they did.
 
Its a good read. Need to look into the money claim thing... got some people to stick.

The whole thing is very strange though. Is it possible for the 'friend' to be able to track back through the plate changes and check the servce records against the chassis number? Also, if he can get the chassis number can he not do an MOT check which should throw up any dodgy mileage...

m.
 
Mudster, I have to agree with you. It seems to be a very nasty process, it appears that it is too easy to waste someone's time with the system.

What was the process like? Is it as bad as what it appears to be on line?
 
What was the process like? Is it as bad as what it appears to be on line?

It's quite simple actually if you have the ability to emotionally divorce yourself from the whole process.

If you find a way of doing that, let me know, as I take it all very personally and get quite aggravated about it.

Fortunately you have a good few weeks to respond to each level, so I can put it down and deal with a week later when I've clamed down and had time to think of the exact wording of the response.

I like the system, unfortunately some people use it instantly rather than reasoning like normal people.
 
So just like anything else then. It is (wide) open to abuse.

I suppose it can be a vital and powerful tool if used correctly.

Thank you Mudster.
 
I've had personal experience of Money Claim on line, from both sides.

Perhaps you could answer something then, please?

I thought the point of MoneyClaimOnLine was that the whole process was normally carried out on line, with written submissions.

Yet the thread referred to talks about having the proceedings moved to the defendants local court. Does that happen often?
 
If it's as effective as a CCJ the OP has nothing to worry about. (Waste of time and effort) Also is there not something about full and honest disclosure prior to sle, not 100% on that but at the back of my mind is a niggle.
 
The OP has to see it from the sellers view.. He made no contact to ask for all this before winning. He asks for service info after he has won the bid... come on... this is all that is needed to clone a car - fake stamp and black book...

If the buyer had actually gone to see the car and the history didnt stack up then he has a case.

At the moment, i cant see what the seller of the car has done wrong apart from be cautious and a little OTT on a ebay buyer who he has every right to think is a tyre kicker.
 
Reminds me a bit of the drug deal near the beginning of Scarface :D

'You got the service history?' - 'I got it close by...'

You got the money?' - 'I got it close by...'

Such a load of wasted time, money and effort on both sides over some minor details. Completely OTT and out of hand, waaay over-reacted to by both parties.

Life is too short for stuff like this IMHO.

Will
 
Perhaps you could answer something then, please?

I thought the point of MoneyClaimOnLine was that the whole process was normally carried out on line, with written submissions.

Yet the thread referred to talks about having the proceedings moved to the defendants local court. Does that happen often?

Initially it all takes place on line. If everybody responds in the allotted time then it progresses to mediation or court appearance. Only at that stage can you then apply for the case to be transferred to a local court to you.
 
The seller sounds like a c0ck IMO.
 
Link no longer working on Pistonheads- thread removed

From what I gathered last night, and I didn't trawl through the whole saga, the pertinent point in the seller's description was that the car had some MB history and some specialist indy history. The buyer on the other hand puts his case that because MB couldn't confirm a fsh on the car, he has a right to back out of the deal.

The sellers' effusiveness certainly didn't help matters once the ball got rolling, but christ, don't bid/buy till you've got all your facts. I certainly wouldn't buy a car unseen at that price, especially a V12 600; I'd want to see a car, with documentation before buying it.

After having had a buyer press the buy it now button, car unseen, then for them to turn up and be quite rude and dismissive of the car's condition (for minor faults I'd made clear in the advert- a ding in the bonnet and stone chip in the windscreen) and offering £500 less took the biscuit. I politely declined the offer and sold it the next week for the asking price.

I think it comes down to reasonable people, neither were in this case, and it snowballed from there.
 
The buyer asked for copies of the service history for him to check validity and discuss with the garages in question to check validity.

Buyer refuses to provide information unless buyer provides a £250 deposit.

Sounds obstructive.....if I were selling a car I'd make the information freely available unless I was hiding something.

I stand by my c0ck assumption.


eBay is an auction site, you bid for an item to buy, however if the item is not as described then you walk away. The buyer is asking for proof that the car has the service history described in the advert and would simply like a quick phone call to each dealer (main and specialist)to confirm these are valid. Is that unreasonable?

The seller refuses to provide the information until £250 has been paid - the car has then been relisted immediately on a one day auction and sold of a few thousand less than the original sale. The seller is suing for the difference.

IMO - and this is my opinion, the seller had a friend or relative buy the car on the second auction, is still in possession of it and is trying to make a fast buck by suing the original bidder for the difference between the original sale and the later fictitious sale.

The whole thing stinks. You don't immediately initiate litigation after being asked for simple proof the vehicle is as described.

C0ck.
 
Last edited:
Reminds me a bit of the drug deal near the beginning of Scarface :D

'You got the service history?' - 'I got it close by...'

You got the money?' - 'I got it close by...'

Such a load of wasted time, money and effort on both sides over some minor details. Completely OTT and out of hand, waaay over-reacted to by both parties.

Life is too short for stuff like this IMHO.

Will


Scarface, the Short Version.

NSFW.!!! Unsurprisingly, it contains bad language.

YouTube - scarface short version
 
There were doubts about the cars history (but then it had had, I think, 6 owners in 7 years) and the seller threw the shutters up when the buyer started asking questions.

It looks dodgy anway, and that was re-inforced when the buyer did some Googling and the seller turns out to have a history of fraud.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom