Buyer from Offerup Wants to sue me for selling used tires that got blown out on the road, am I liable?

[yrre8]

The tires still had 40 to 45%% treads left when I sold them, they are 7-year-old winter tires which I only used them for winter months. He said I sold him tires that are old without disclosing it. His car rim got damaged because of it and wants to bring an attorney for damage. This was done in a cash deal.

Tires get blowouts regardless of new or old for many different reasons (wrong tire pressure, defective installation, wrong size for the vehicle, hit something, etc). It's been 9 days since he purchased them, I don't know what was done to the tires and how they were used. I did my best and showed the tread life in each tire photo in the ad. Upon picking up the tires, he also had the opportunity to examine the tires over before paying.

Do any experts here have any suggestions?

Thank you so much. Also, I am in Washington state if that matters.

 

[Zigner]

He's not going to pay an attorney to sue you for a couple of hundred bucks in damage.
People threaten to sue all the time. Actually following through is much more rare.

 

[zddoodah]

Transactions like this are, by default, on an "as is" basis. Unless you gave the buyer a warranty or you misrepresented any facts regarding the tires, he has no viable case.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

And every tire sold in the US has a date code on it.

 

[zddoodah]

And every tire sold in the US has a date code on it.

Something that I'm guessing is not known by 90+% of the population and which, if you don't know it, won't be readily apparent since it's a code.

 

[yrre8]

Something that I'm guessing is not known by 90+% of the population and which, if you don't know it, won't be readily apparent since it's a code.

I am not sure if he knows or he even cares when he bought the tires from me. Now, he's seeking for damage because of it. He had the opportunity to inspect the tires. He didn't ask about the dates of the tires and I didn't disclose it. Does that really matter in this case? He also shorted me $20 than the agreed price when he picked them up! Looks like he tried to play dumb, but I didn't care much and just took the offer.

 

[Zigner]

I am not sure if he knows or he even cares when he bought the tires from me. Now, he's seeking for damage because of it. He had the opportunity to inspect the tires. He didn't ask about the dates of the tires and I didn't disclose it. Does that really matter in this case? He also shorted me $20 than the agreed price when he picked them up! Looks like he tried to play dumb, but I didn't care much and just took the offer.

Just a nit-pick. He didn't short you anything. You agreed to accept a lower amount. You could have turned him away.

 

[adjusterjack]

Agree with the others. Hope you still have the photos from the ad.

Here are some options.

Say no. Then shut up and stop talking to him. The more you talk the more he'll escalate and bother you until you succumb.

If you can't bring yourself to stop talking, tell him to bring you all the tires (dismounted) for inspection. Chances are, he won't. But if he does, you'll have the opportunity to photograph them and then say no and send him packing.

 

[zddoodah]

I am not sure if he knows or he even cares when he bought the tires from me. Now, he's seeking for damage because of it. He had the opportunity to inspect the tires. He didn't ask about the dates of the tires and I didn't disclose it. Does that really matter in this case?

As I wrote previously, you could only be liable if you gave a warranty (I'm assuming you'd have mentioned that if you did) or if you misrepresented facts about the tires. You said the buyer is claiming you failed to disclose the tires' ages. Unless Washington has a unique law relating to the sale of used tires, that is not a valid legal claim. However, if it were a valid claim, then the fact that this "date code" exists could be relevant if it was something that people generally knew about or the "code" was something obvious. It's also something that could be relevant if the buyer claims you made an affirmative misrepresentation about the tires' ages.

Here are some options.

Say no. Then shut up and stop talking to him.

IMO, this is the only sensible option. Just ignore him. If he escalates things, then you can deal with it.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Besides, it is fairly well known (or should be) that the rubber of the tire degrades over time whether they've been used or not. That itself would pose an increased risk of blow out for 9 year old tires, even if they'd never been driven on. As zddoodah stated quite well, unless you gave him a warranty or misrepresented a material fact the buyer doesn't have a good case. In at least most states you'd have no affirmative duty to disclose the age of the tires, but of course could not lie about the age if the buyer asks you about it. Sometimes people get unlucky and something they buy breaks soon after they buy it. Without a warranty, that's just a risk you take buying pretty much anything. Sounds like your buyer was unlucky and while it sucks for him, it's not your problem to fix.

 

[Zigner]

Sometimes people get unlucky and something they buy breaks soon after they buy it.

Very true. A brand new tire could have a blowout 5 minutes after you leave the shop and it wouldn't necessarily indicate that the tire was defective.