Purchased vehicle from private party who reset check engine light before transaction

[ant23]

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

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: California

Last week I purchased a vehicle from a private party. I found the car through an online ad. When I first contacted the seller, I specifically asked if there were any mechanical issues with the vehicle, and was told that the vehicle was in good condition-no existing issues (I have this in text messages). The sellers online ad also stated the vehicle was in "good condtion" minus your outside cosmetic wear and tear.

Before purchasing the vehicle, I test drove the vehicle and everything seemed to be fine. NO check engine light and it was driving just fine. He also gave me a month old smog certificate which I am know assuming is fraudulant. Well, to my suprise two days into owning the vehicle the check engine light came on. I took it to two mechanics for a diagnostic and both told me that the catalytic converter was bad. They both stated there is no way this vehicle would have passed smog and that the vehicle would have been in this condition for quite some time.

At this point, I contacted the seller hoping for some answers. The seller told me in text messages that the check engine light had also come on for him recently, but he had his buddy reset it to see if it would go away. He also admitted that after resetting the light he parked the vehicle and did not drive it. So ofcourse it would only make sense that the light would reoccur after I actually put some miles on the vehicle (about 60 miles).

I contacted the seller and told him that he was deceitful in resetting the check engine light and not disclosing the issue to me. He told me it was not illegal and a normal practice. He repeatedly told me it was an AS IS sale and to save my money on court fees and just fix the car. I have all of this in text messages.

Now it looks like my only option is to take him to court. Is there anything legally I can hold the seller accountable for?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

As long as the smog cert is valid, the car sales are as is. You could try to take him to court for the cost of installing a new catalytic convertor but it would also require you pay professionals the judge would accept to testify in court. Then you might get the court to award some token amount for the cost to install an aftermarket CARB approved catalytic convertor. So basically, the cost to prove your case is about what you would be awarded and you would not guarantee you can collect for the catalytic convertor judgment. So in short, I would save your money on court fees and just fix the car. That at least guarantees you get your monies worth.

 

[Zigner]

About 2 months ago I had my 2004 smogged. It passed (with flying colors I might add...) 2 MILES after, the CEL came on.

 

[ant23]

About 2 months ago I had my 2004 smogged. It passed (with flying colors I might add...) 2 MILES after, the CEL came on.

I understand that this can happen and I was prepared to cut my losses and fix the car until he admitted he reset the light and the machanics I took it to said all previous codes the car was showing have been cleared.

 

[Zigner]

I understand that this can happen and I was prepared to cut my losses and fix the car until he admitted he reset the light and the machanics I took it to said all previous codes the car was showing have been cleared.

Too bad you didn't have the car inspected BEFORE you bought it.

 

[cbg]

My state is not yours. In my state, an inspection is due within 10 days of the car changing hands. If the car cannot pass that inspection, the SELLER is responsible for putting the car in passing condition. The only exception I know of is if a private party sells the car to a dealer. This is state law.

Given how stringent CA requirements are, I cannot believe CA does not have a similar law. You might want to check on that with an uninvolved third party and not directly with the seller, since he has a vested interest in convincing you otherwise. Ask a dealership, the RMV, or even a general practice attorney.

 

[Zigner]

My state is not yours. In my state, an inspection is due within 10 days of the car changing hands. If the car cannot pass that inspection, the SELLER is responsible for putting the car in passing condition. The only exception I know of is if a private party sells the car to a dealer. This is state law.

Given how stringent CA requirements are, I cannot believe CA does not have a similar law. You might want to check on that with an uninvolved third party and not directly with the seller, since he has a vested interest in convincing you otherwise. Ask a dealership, the RMV, or even a general practice attorney.

In CA, we don't have "inspections" - we do have a SMOG check requirement, and that requirement has been fulfilled by giving the buyer a valid SMOG cert showing that the vehicle passed inspection within the last 90 days.

 

[cbg]

Since there appears to be some question in the OP's mind as to the validity of the smog cert, I can't see that it would do any harm for him to ask a few questions of unrelated parties. What's the worst that can happen? The worst that can happen is that nothing happens.

 

[Zigner]

Since there appears to be some question in the OP's mind as to the validity of the smog cert, I can't see that it would do any harm for him to ask a few questions of unrelated parties. What's the worst that can happen? The worst that can happen is that nothing happens.

The Smog cert is valid insofar as the law is concerned. The OP believes that the seller's Smog check facility "cheated" on the Smog check, but has absolutely no proof. In any case, the vehicle is on record at the DMV as having a valid Smog cert because it's reported electronically - the paper copies are for reference only.

And, for the record, the CEL light can come on if the gas cap isn't on securely. Resetting the light doesn't mean that anything is wrong with the car. The OP should have had this car inspected prior to buying it, plain and simple. He will need to enjoy his new car.

ETA: You are correct, it will only cost the OP money now to have some unrelated parties look at the matter. I don't see any recourse, but if it will help the OP's piece of mind...have at it.