Private Used Car Sale

[Murphysmommy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

Seller in Michigan; Buyer in Massachusetts. Sold 1960 Austin Healey that needed reconditioning. Buyer signed bill of sale which stated vehicle was sold "as is". Buyer picked up vehicle. Two days later, buyer left voice mail & email asking seller to call. Two additional days after that, buyer sent email advising seller that the engine was seized up. Buyer never started vehicle when he picked it up. He asked if the car ran & seller said that the last time the car was started was the previous summer. Buyer now demands that seller pay for new engine and is threatening a lawsuit. Buyer insists that if this matter goes to court that seller would have to go to Massachusetts & would have to pay all court costs & attorney fees. Also insists that the "as is" clause means nothing due to lemon laws.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

 

[justalayman]

lemon laws don't apply to 40 year old cars.

then entire transaction took place in Michigan plus the defendant lives in MI so MI is where the suit should take place. Doesn't mean the buyer could file in MA. Defendant would have to argue MI has jurisdiction.

depending what you said about the engine, it could be considered misrepresentation but unlikely though.

 

[cyjeff]

I wouldn't worry.

Austin Healey engines seized up when the car was NEW... anyone buying a 40 year old car that hadn't been started in months AND was told needed reconditioning should have been prepared for a long and expensive overhaul.

Let him sue you.... no lemon law applies (as you have been told) and he has to come to you.

 

[racer72]

That car is 50 years old. And British. The buyer expected a miracle.

 

[cyjeff]

That car is 50 years old. And British. The buyer expected a miracle.

Wait until the buyer finds out he needs metric tools.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Massachusetts has a lemon law for used cars. If the car does not pass the Massachusetts Safety inspection, the buyer can return the car.

This only applies to cars intended for immediate use.

OP should tell the seller to simply return the car.

 

[cyjeff]

Massachusetts has a lemon law for used cars. If the car does not pass the Massachusetts Safety inspection, the buyer can return the car.

This only applies to cars intended for immediate use.

OP should tell the seller to simply return the car.

Car was sold in Michigan.

 

[justalayman]

since the purchase was in Michigan, the MA laws won't apply but if they did:

The Used Vehicle Warranty Law protects consumers who buy used vehicles from a dealer or private party in Massachusetts. (M.G.L. c. 90 §7N 1/4) The law requires dealers to provide consumers with a written warranty against defects that impair the vehicle’s use or safety, and requires private parties to disclose any known use or safety defects.

Private Party Sales:
The Used Vehicle Warranty Law applies differently to a vehicle purchased from a private party than it does if purchased from a dealer. Under the law, a dealer is anyone who sells four or more vehicles in a 12 month period.

The Used Vehicle Warranty Law requires private party sellers to inform buyers about any and all known defects which impair the safety or substantially impair the use of the vehicle. The law applies to all private party sales regardless of sales price or mileage. If you discover a defect that impairs the vehicle’s safety or substantially impairs the use, and can prove that the seller knew about the defect but failed to disclose it, you may cancel the sale within thirty days of purchase. The seller must refund the amount you paid for the vehicle, less 15 cents per mile of use.

he didn't know the engine was seized so there is no recourse based upon the seized engine.

 

[CraigFL]

Wait until the buyer finds out he needs metric tools.

maybe Whitworth???

 

[cyjeff]

maybe Whitworth???

I used to have a buddy with an old MG. Basically, he was gapping the plugs every weekend. Became part of his weekend chore list.

And the AH's are the "value" brand for MG... at least in 1960.

To expect a 50 year old car that was a mechanic's best friend when NEW to work out of the box is just foolish.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

since the purchase was in Michigan, the MA laws won't apply but if they did:

he didn't know the engine was seized so there is no recourse based upon the seized engine.

The Used Vehicle Warranty Law protects consumers who buy used vehicles from a dealer or private party in Massachusetts

It could be argued that "in Massachusetts" refers to the consumers being protected rather than the dealer or private party.

Either way, my point is that the remedy is rescission, but requires the buyer to deliver the car back to the seller.

the seller can simply say: "Under the Mass law, you are free to return the car, and I'll return your money". Then the buyer has to transport the car from MA to MI, which is not an inexpensive proposition.

Also, the law only applies to cars intended "for immediate use". Since the car was sold "needing reconditioning".

My point was to point out that there is no way the seller is under any obligation to rebuild the engine.

To summarize:

• Seller did not know the engine was seized
• Auto was not intended for immediate use
• Car was sold AS-IS
• Buyer is a moron for transporting the car all the way from MI to MA without trying to turn over the engine.
• Worst case is seller must issue refund AFTER buyer returns the car to MI.

Just throw a metric breaker bar on the pulley and break it loose. It probably wouldn't hurt.

 

[justalayman]

do you have a citation for that "immediate use" thing. I saw nothing in any source that suggested anything similar.

The Used Vehicle Warranty Law protects consumers who buy used vehicles from a dealer or private party in Massachusetts

It could be argued that "in Massachusetts" refers to the consumers being protected rather than the dealer or private party

.

Huh?

Regardless, the transaction apparently took place in Michigan so Ma cannot enforce their laws on a Michigan sale. The laws of MI apply so the buyer has no recourse because here in Mi, an as-is sale is an as-is sale.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

do you have a citation for that "immediate use" thing. I saw nothing in any source that suggested anything similar.

Chapter 90: Section 7N. Voiding contracts of sale

Section 7N. Notwithstanding any disclaimer of warranty, a motor vehicle contract of sale may be voided by the buyer if the motor vehicle fails to pass, within seven days from the date of such sale, the periodic staggered inspection at an inspection station licensed pursuant to section seven W; provided, that the defects which are the reasons for the failure to issue a certificate of inspection were not caused by the abusive or negligent operation of the motor vehicle or by damage resulting from an accident or collision occurring after the date of the sale; and provided, further, that the cost of repairs necessary to permit the issuance of a certificate of inspection exceeds ten per cent of the purchase price of the motor vehicle.

In order to void a motor vehicle sale under this section the buyer shall, within fourteen days from the date of sale, notify the seller of his intention to do so, deliver the motor vehicle to the seller, provide the seller with a written statement signed by an authorized agent of such inspection station stating the reasons why the motor vehicle failed to pass the safety or combined safety and emissions inspection and an estimate of the cost of necessary repairs. The buyer shall be entitled to a refund of his purchase price unless the buyer and seller agree in writing that the seller may make the necessary repairs at his own cost and expense within a reasonable period of time thereafter. This section shall apply only to motor vehicles purchased for the immediate personal or family use of the buyer.

Huh?

Regardless, the transaction apparently took place in Michigan so Ma cannot enforce their laws on a Michigan sale. The laws of MI apply so the buyer has no recourse because here in Mi, an as-is sale is an as-is sale.

This is Massachusetts - they like to make laws to protect us from ourselves and everyone else. As an example, the new data protection law applies to anyone who has protected information about any Massachusetts resident. According to the seminars I went to, Amazon.com has to comply with the Mass statute (including devloping a data security plan) because they have my credit card number.

Massachusetts also tried (and failed) to get a New Hampshire tire retailer to collect sales tax from Massachusetts residents.

It wouldn't surprise me for the car buyer to sue in a Massachusetts court and have the court apply a long arm statute to the MI seller because he "supplied things" (a car) in Mass.

Massachusetts Long-Arm Statute
Mass. Gen Laws. ch. 223A, § 3
§ 3. Personal Jurisdiction Based Upon Acts or Conduct Within Commonwealth.
A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a
cause of action in law or equity arising from the person's
(a) transacting any business in this commonwealth;
(b) contracting to supply services or things in this commonwealth;

 

[justalayman]

Chapter 90: Section 7N. Voiding contracts of sale

Section 7N. Notwithstanding any disclaimer of warranty, a motor vehicle contract of sale may be voided by the buyer if the motor vehicle fails to pass, within seven days from the date of such sale, the periodic staggered inspection at an inspection station licensed pursuant to section seven W; provided, that the defects which are the reasons for the failure to issue a certificate of inspection were not caused by the abusive or negligent operation of the motor vehicle or by damage resulting from an accident or collision occurring after the date of the sale; and provided, further, that the cost of repairs necessary to permit the issuance of a certificate of inspection exceeds ten per cent of the purchase price of the motor vehicle.

In order to void a motor vehicle sale under this section the buyer shall, within fourteen days from the date of sale, notify the seller of his intention to do so, deliver the motor vehicle to the seller, provide the seller with a written statement signed by an authorized agent of such inspection station stating the reasons why the motor vehicle failed to pass the safety or combined safety and emissions inspection and an estimate of the cost of necessary repairs. The buyer shall be entitled to a refund of his purchase price unless the buyer and seller agree in writing that the seller may make the necessary repairs at his own cost and expense within a reasonable period of time thereafter. This section shall apply only to motor vehicles purchased for the immediate personal or family use of the buyer.

do not those first 5 words say "as is sales are as is"?

and yes, I see the immediate use. I have to wonder how that has been interpreted though. If it needs any work to be roadworthy, it cannot have ever been considered for immediate use. That would just be common sense. As such, it would remove any vehicle that in fact is not roadworthy at the time of sale as long as the buyer acknowledges the fact it is not roadworthy at the time of sale.


as to the long arm statute:

(a) transacting any business in this commonwealth;

obviously not applicable as the sale was in MI

(b) contracting to supply services or things in this commonwealth;

since it was delivered in Mi, then again, this is not applicable.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

do not those first 5 words say "as is sales are as is"?

I read it as meaning "even if you specifically state no warranty... you're still stuck with this"

and yes, I see the immediate use. I have to wonder how that has been interpreted though. If it needs any work to be roadworthy, it cannot have ever been considered for immediate use. That would just be common sense. As such, it would remove any vehicle that in fact is not roadworthy at the time of sale as long as the buyer acknowledges the fact it is not roadworthy at the time of sale.

Yup. That's pretty much it. It leaves open a way to sell a parts car, or a car in need of repair, as long as you inform the buyer that it needs work (like OP did).

as to the long arm statute:
obviously not applicable as the sale was in MI
since it was delivered in Mi, then again, this is not applicable.

Yup. I agree. I was arguing "stream of commerce" again.

Note to self: "Stream of commerce is a losing argument".