Message Forums

The argument is that the

Dealer should understand industry towing best practice.

Dealer should have appreicated that buyer was a towing virgin.

OP sought advice from dealer and was reliant upon dealers expertise.

So, the Supply of Goods and Services Act will assist OP in his claim.

Fingers crossed

Phil

"thats old that rule was in the 60s" the guy later went on to say we let them go out at 100% "

If that is their standard they are poor representatives of the profession. Just hope that the man at the top does not conduct his business in such a cavalier manner.

All the best

Phil 

p.s .....extra thoughts......

In addition to the provisions of the Supply of Goods and Servcies Act, you may also have some joy under the Misrepresentation Act. The argument here would be (based on the limited facts in this thread) that the Dealer, with its specialist knowledge, deliberately mislead you into buying the van by stating that you could tow the van with your car. Now the dealer may argue that such a statement is legally correct (assuming that the weights are as stated in this thread) and so has no liability. However, it is not as simple as that under the Act and case law.

It is established law that if one party claims specialist knowledge on the topic discussed (which clearly the Dealer had and you didn’t), then a court will hold a statement of opinion by that party as a statement of fact (your friend may like to look at the principles in the case of Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon in 1976)

Going on from that position, it is also established law that if (in this case the Dealer) fails to include information in his statement (that your car can tow the van) which would significantly alter your view abaout towing with your car (i.e the 85% rule and principles behind it), then that failure creates a misrepresentation under the Act ( see the case of Krakowski v Eurolynx Properties Ltd )

Normally the remedy for Misrepresentation would be recission of the contract to put you and the Dealer back into the position you would have been in had you not been mislead. So, you give them the van and they give you your money back. However, s. 2(2) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 does give the court a discretion to award damages instead of rescission.

The damages you are after would be any extra you may need to find to get an appropriate Tow Car. You really need to work out what car you need, (don’t go over the top) the cost, the value of your car and the difference you need for the purposes of any discussion with the Dealer.

All the best

Phil