Keeping the $100 was not a good idea. Maybe agreeing to split the cost would have worked but, given the the prospect wanted the car in exchange for the $100, that my not have been possible.
Printable View
Keeping the $100 was not a good idea. Maybe agreeing to split the cost would have worked but, given the the prospect wanted the car in exchange for the $100, that my not have been possible.
The vehicle is surely a bargain at $800, more so once discovered that it was a Ser II instead of an A. I feel offering half the deposit back was fair, the prospective buyer is, as was put so politely previously a "horse trader" IMO.
I would say with complete certainty the son (16/17ish) would have bugged the absolute bejesus out of him until he gave in and bought it for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimace
1960 ... 1966 ;) .... it's an old second hand 60's car ...
Normal folks drive the 150k's to inspect their find ..... If he was gonna be that FUSSY ... Why didn't he ASK for the serial numbers in the first place // after-all HE KNEW WHERE TO LOOK for it ... and went straight for it
No misrepresentation at all .... as far as I'm concerned ... that was a shark at work
Next time ... always make it the purchasers responsibility to remove the car
Mike
I would have offered the $100 deposit back but then charged $150 for transport... :angel:
Any reason you have the fire extinguisher on standby to take a photo? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by B92 8NW
That was my rationale too. Relative to its age 6 years is proportionally very little, and it would be very difficult to distinguish a 1960 model from a 1966 model just by viewing it externally. I purchased it in good faith with a correct engine number and an incorrect chassis number as advertised and registered. If I'd advertised a VA Discovery and it was actually an MA Discovery I'd be the first to rectify the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike 90 RR
Did you have to hire a trailer to get it there?
I borrowed it from my friend 15km from me.Quote:
Originally Posted by abaddonxi
Diana is correct. You cannot be held liable if you didn't knowingly deceive somebody. You can look it up in the Fair Trading Act (Vic) 1999 and TPA.
I've decided to be fair and offer $44.19 back, that is less my fuel costs.