Broken Timing Belt ruined engine three days after purchase

[Zigner]

but it would pass inspection (presumably) when it was sold. The buyer failed to have it inspected when it would still pass inspection therefore, still, it's on the buyer.

Because of the lack of proper maintenance PRIOR to the OP buying the car, it is no longer running. Per MA law, the OP has 7 days after purchase to have this inspected at a State inspection facility. If it fails (and it will fail) THEN the OP has options towards resolving this with the seller, up to and including "undoing" the sale.

This is all ASSuming that the belt wasn't changed at the proper interval. What if the belt was changed 10,000 miles ago? We don't know, do we? But, it doesn't matter, as it wouldn't change the legal rights of the OP.

 

[Zigner]

Just - I appreciate the debate but I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one

 

[justalayman]

Because of the lack of proper maintenance PRIOR to the OP buying the car, it is no longer running. Per MA law, the OP has 7 days after purchase to have this inspected at a State inspection facility. If it fails (and it will fail) THEN the OP has options towards resolving this with the seller, up to and including "undoing" the sale.
.

No. It was running when it was sold so apparently the maintenance provided was adequate. It was after the sale the the lack of maintenance caused the damage.

If the damage occurred before the sale, I would agree with you.

Per MA law, the OP has 7 days after purchase to have this inspected at a State inspection facility.

what does that have to do with anything? That is a mandate that the buyer have it inspected within that time. It is not a mandate for the seller that the vehicle last at least a week.

This is all ASSuming that the belt wasn't changed at the proper interval. What if the belt was changed 10,000 miles ago? We don't know, do we? But, it doesn't matter, as it wouldn't change the legal rights of the OP

when the OP comes back and says it was changed no more than the manufacturers recommended replacement period ago, then we can deal with that. If he states it had been less than that period, then we can start to infer the buyer abused the vehicle lest the timing belt would not have broken.

 

[PaulMass]

WOW!

For those who provided useful information, thank you (again).