I sold my car privately and later received a letter from the buyer's solicitor as detailed below. Please advise where I stand legally under Australian Consumer Law. I thought it case of buyer bewares.
[Redacted by Moderator - Removed Law Firm's Letterhead]
8 October 2014
Registered Post ·
[Redacted by Moderator - Removed Addressee]
Dear Mr [Redacted by Moderator],
RE: 2011 TOYOTA KLUGER KX-R
We act for [Buyer - Redacted by Moderator].
We are instructed that our clients purchased a Toyota Kluger 2011 Toyota Kluger KX-R, VIN
[Redacted by Moderator] ("the Kluger"), on or about 13 September 2014.
We are instructed that the following chronology of events occurred in respect of the Kluger
1. 9/9/2014. The Kluger was held out in var sales advertisement to have "full service history" and
be in "pristine condition".
2. 9/9/2014. The clients agent Mr [Redacted by Moderator] viewed, and test drove the Kluger and you
confirmed no issues with the motor or the vehicle in general.
3. 9/9/2014. Mr [Buyer - Redacted by Moderator] spoke to Mr [Unknown Person - Redacted by Moderator], agreed on sale price of
$29,750.00. No disclosure by Mr [Unknown Person - Redacted by Moderator] as to faults with motor.
4. 10/9/201.4. Deposit paid of $4,750.00.
5. 11/9/2014. Final payment of $25,000.00 paid.
6. 13/9/2014. Mr [Redacted by Moderator] collected the Kluger from you and drove from Hinchinbrook to
7. 14/9/2014: Mr [Redacted by Moderator] started the Kluger that morning and smoke bellowed out from same.
As a consequence, [Redacted by Moderator] rang you, to which you denied any knowledge of the car being faulty.
8. 15/9/2014. Mr [Redacted by Moderator] telephoned Quans Automotive who advised that they had serviced the Kluger on 29/4/2014 (39,917kms), and again at approximately
44,100kms (which is not evidenced in service history) at which time you requested that the engine
9. 15/9/2014. Mr [Redacted by Moderator] again rang you to which you again denied any motor or smoke
issues in respect of the Kluger and claimed that the vehicle had been sold in its condition and
"it's yours now".
10. 18/9/2014. Mr [Redacted by Moderator] took the Kluger to Windsor Toyota for a diagnosis. Annexed hereto
and marked 'A' is a copy of Windsor Toyota diagnosis dated 18 September 2014. Please take note of
the engine issues and costs to rectify as particularised in the diagnosis.
11. 26/9/2014. Our client spoke to Lander Toyota who advised that the Kluger had its first service
with them (which does not appear in service history) and they hadn't seen it since.
12. 29/9/201 4. Our client spoke to Peter Warren Toyota who advised that they had inspected the
Kluger in June 2014 and had advised you at that time, the motor had issues in that is was blowing
smoke and was sludged up and in need of urgent repair.
We enclose a copy for your reference of your car sale advertisement of the Kluger whereby you hold
the Kluger out to have "full service history" and be in "pristine condition". From the above
chronology you would understand our client's view that this was not the case.
Our client's allege that you have engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct to obtain a financial
advantage. It would seem clear from the above chronology that you were aware of the issues with the
Kluger prior to and at the time of its sale to our client. Our client requests that you reimburse
them in the sum of $10,010.00 being the damage and loss you have incurred them as particularised in
the quote as set out by Windsor Toyota to rectify the issues.
We suggest that you obtain independent legal advice in relation to the contents of this letter and
we look forward to hearing from you, or your solicitor, within fourteen (14) days. Please note that
if we do not receive a response, we anticipate instructions to commence proceedings against you
without further notice.