CPA on Second hand Car Purchases

[Wasp_21]

Hello All.

I see there is reference in the CPA on sellers requirements in terms of the CPA, but I have not seen reference to the second hand car market. I bought a second hand bakkie from private individual. The vehicle was "fine" at purchase, i.e, it ran and drove well. I took the vehicle for COR, and it failed on so many points. It will now cost me R13,500 to fix in order to get through the COR, and obviously the safety levels. I have asked the seller to re-imburse me the R13,500, as the issues weren't disclosed before the sale, nor was there specification of "voetstoets", OR to take the vehicle back and re-imburse me the purchase price. Do i have a leg to stand on in either of these scenarios? Thanks in advance.

[spiderz]

What model / year?
Do you mind listing the issues?

[JStrike]

No, you probably didn't don't have a leg to stand on. You would have to show they he would have reasonably known about the problems when he sold it to you, and then failed to disclose.

[Wyzak]

The CPA does not apply to somebody who earns less than 5 million a year (basically an individual). Even if it is a small company you still can not take it to the CPA if it earns less than 5.

[Scooby_Doo]

CPA is only for business to customer sales nothing to do with individual to individual.

[xrapidx]

I'd say you're screwed.

always insist on having the car tested before hand - I'm in the process of selling my vehicle, and am actually arranging to have it AA tested now.

[nexxus]

If it failed so badly surely it wouldn't have passed any of the myriad of roadworthiness checks provided by the AA and the like?

[Wasp_21]

Ah, ok. So would then have to get all legal and so-on. Thanks for the advice.

Problems with the vehicle include replacement of:

Rear leaf springs / Front coil springs
Alternator
Shocks
Clutch

It's a 2001 Mazda Drifter.

[JStrike]

You probably wont get very far legally, as you should have got it tested before you bought it. As I mentioned, you would have to prove that a reasonable man would have known about the problems, and that he then sold it to you knowing about those problems without disclosing

[xrapidx]

Ah, ok. So would then have to get all legal and so-on. Thanks for the advice.

Problems with the vehicle include replacement of:

Rear leaf springs / Front coil springs
Alternator
Shocks
Clutch

It's a 2001 Mazda Drifter.

Besides the alternator - that could probably be claimed as wear and tear?

[xrapidx]

This raises quite an interesting question on my side... I've got a buyer who wants the car urgently, as in tomorrow, he wants to take it without an AA test that I want to do, and without me replacing the front tyres that need replacing... I'm concerned because I don't know if anything needs work on the vehicle... he's offering me just less than someone else, but then I'd still have to do the above test/tyres.... (obviously only taking it once the money has cleared and confirmed by the bank)
Not sure what to do..

[xrapidx]

Hello All.

I see there is reference in the CPA on sellers requirements in terms of the CPA, but I have not seen reference to the second hand car market. I bought a second hand bakkie from private individual. The vehicle was "fine" at purchase, i.e, it ran and drove well. I took the vehicle for COR, and it failed on so many points. It will now cost me R13,500 to fix in order to get through the COR, and obviously the safety levels. I have asked the seller to re-imburse me the R13,500, as the issues weren't disclosed before the sale, nor was there specification of "voetstoets", OR to take the vehicle back and re-imburse me the purchase price. Do i have a leg to stand on in either of these scenarios? Thanks in advance.

This might answer your question:

http://www.4x4community.co.za/forum/...ad.php?t=83347

[helloise]

i sit with a similar situation... bought a car from a person, DID ask that if there is anything wrong with the car he should tell me so that i know..he said no all is fine with the car. i also got a roadworthy certificate... 3 days later took the car for another roadworthy.. it failed miserably. i reported this to the correct government department and they are now investigating the situation. the roadworthy was done under imperial select, and the person who called for the roadworthy admitted that he called the test centre in advance to tell them to pass the broken cv boot!!!...the car also had a massive oil leak all the problems could not have arisen in driving a 100kms from when he did his roadworthy and i did mine...i am in the process of fixing those things(he did come down by R1000 which i used to fix the vc boot and oil leak BUT there are now another problem i was not aware of because he did not make me aware of it after i DID ask him about problems! AND he HAD to know about it because the car struggles to drive in the mornings(auto choke does not work properly)..how did he then get the car to go every morning without it hak vas soos 'n steeks donkie???? i still owe him R2000 on the car....to fix the rest of the roadworthy issues(after i had cv boot and oil leak taken care of) and the choke(big problem..no parts for this) is already R1500??

how now???
any advise please?
thank you

[somescrub]

If you bought the car privatly then the CPA does not apply.
Your potential case is against the company that did the roadworthy test.
The service they provided was faulty and hence you have a claim.
A certificate of roadworthy has to carry a minimum of 6 months validity under CPA, maybe more under other regulations.
good luck dude.

[AniV]

I am on the other end of the scale when it comes to second-hand car purchases, and would like a little advice.

I am looking at selling my 2002 Mazda Etude 1.6Si Hatch. It's a Code 3 (that's structurally and aesthetically in very good condition) and it has unresolvable mechanical problems.
I've been approached a few times by interested buyers and I've given them full disclosure of all the problems with the vehicle, and as much detail as possible on the unresolved issue.
How do I go about ensuring that whoever I sell the car to doesn't change their mind or ask for a refund after a period of time because of an issue with the car? Also, how long would a buyer have to come back to me if the car did not match what I advertised? I heard that because of the CPA there is no longer a thing such as "voetstoots".

All I can think of is to make the buyer sign a contract that protects us both - something along the lines of understanding all the mechanical issues that have been disclosed, accepting that I have disclosed all issues to the best of my knowledge, that the buyer will do the transfer of ownership within 1 month of the date of purchase etc. How legal would this be? What should and shouldn't go into a contract like that?