under the sale of goods act, anyone who claims that a car is built or ready to do something, ie like be a good drift chassis (which we see alot on here) is bound to those words.
and if it turns out the chassis is somewhat rusted or not suitable on demand to what the seller has said, then the buyer has the right to have the contract void in court, under implied terms; suitability.
and since it will most likely go to small claims court, it would not be very hard, maybe a bit timely.
long story short, if you say your car is capable fo soemthing, you have to be sure without a doubt. this goes for any prodcut sold where money is exchanged, not inlcuding the sale of land.
caveat emptor (buyer beware) will not hold up in court.
im aware of caveat emptor, and i know its the buyers responsibility to satisfy there needs when purchasing an item, but what im stating is that if the seller specificly states that somehting is good to do this or that, like for sale threads we have here, then it has to stand up to that without a shadow of a doubt, ofcourse it veries from situation to situation.
you dont necessary have to have it in writing either
oral contracts can be brought to court aswell there just harder to prove.
and signing a contract truly means absolutely nothign in law.
theres quite a few loopholes to get away from a signature, that are used in every day situations, its not even funnny.
Oral contracts in car sales hold actualy little to no legal standing in a court. A written contract is legaly binding and only can be broken if a term of the contract breaks a law (such as ussurious intrest rates ect). You can say that the car would be a great drift car and it will not matter how rusted the chasis is. When buying a used car it is the buyers job to ensure the vehicle meets their standards. If the car is being sold in a as-is situation with no warrenty implied by the seller then your out of luck. Sorry but the loophole stuff mentioned as well does not have any standing in court. You sign a document and the contract meets the legal requirements then you are bound to it unless the seller breaks one of the terms listed.
Long story short you MUST get it in writting if you want it to be a term and condition of sale.
not loop holes to say, these are legal things like pleading non est factum, ect ect ect
buyer beware can be put aside at the courts discretion
and it doesnt matter if its sold as is with no warranty ect ct ect ect
my law prfessuer made it clear to us that a used car dealership is thee perfect example.
i walk onto a dealership and say i need a car that will two “x” ammount on wight and the dealer says he has what i need.
then it turns out to be guttless, i can argue implied tersm to a sale of goods contract in court and have the contract void ab nitio (void from the beginning)
buyer beware does not always hold up. if ones is not an expert on the subject matter, or atleast does not know what there looking for, then they will not be held liable to this rule.
more then likely the judge will use equity and not common law to make a decision.
precidence is then out the window and the judeg is fre to rule with discretion.
also, the dealer does not have to say anything for implied terms to a contract to apply.
they apply no matter what. and the point at hand (suitability) falls under implied terms.
except one thing, the ministry demands car safety certification… as long as it passed that it is considered “safe” to use in any legal manner on the streets, explicitly telling someone it can do illegal things or at the minimum unsafe usage (like racing) is irrelevant
a seller could in theory be held accountable if the buyer crashes the car racing due to a defective tie-rod or something, but it’s highly unlikely the court would accept the buyer’s ignorance especially when the car passed 2 safety examinations, anything like this would be very tough to prove as any part can fail at any time without warning
now if the mechanic lied or missed something, there can be recourse, likewise if any documentation is fake you can rightfully sue and possibly get your money back, but then maybe just force the seller into bringing the car into compliance (as sold/agreed)… there are buyer protection laws regarding misrepresentation, in some jurisdictions even a cooling off period applies where the buyer can demand to cancel the purchase
but even with misrepresentation there has to be a record written or recorded, otherwise there’s no way to determine who’s right when the parties disagree
in your scenario, if the buyer taskes it out on the track and then later crashes it, he would have a very hard time prving it was because o something besides his own negligence or lack of skill.
if he did manage to win a case, the defendant would certainly have a good case for contributory negligence and the plaintiff
say that buyer finds out the car he just bought is not good for racing because one of the frae rails is soft or cracking ro soemthing, before anything further is done. he can have the contract void.
he might not win, but its an option he can certainly take.
and for the car ebign safetied, this is something that the ministry demands.
if you want to look at the ministry as a form of law then theyre simply an administrative tribunal. they ultimately have to answer to a higher power.
again tho, im stressing that the law of suitability is an implied term, meaning is applies no matter what, given any situation, anywhere, at any time.
matty, there are some great points you brought up, and this is a very interesting discussion.
I agree with the fact that if a seller writes down that their product ABC is capable of XYZ, then yes, the seller is bound to make sure that the product is capable.
The problem with a contract stating that “this car is capable of drifting” is that the term “drifting” implies a variety of behaviours. The onus would be on the plaintiff to prove that the car can’t drift. Unless that car has one wheel, I don’t know how you could do that. Unless you are using concrete definable terms, it will be very hard to nail it down.
When I have to create a contract, one of the the first things I do is create a glossary, and try to make sure every item is definable and measurable. Then when both parties sign off, it is understood that the glossary forms part of the contract. This creates clear terms of reference for both parties.
man i wish i knew this info when i was a noob and just bought my 240sx. This one is all rusted to shyt, i m scared of talking it to the track cuz i think the chasis will split into a million pieces. I was a really stupid noob when i bought this shyt. Good thing i 've wised up now, and learned to trust no one.