Legal Question in Consumer Law in Georgia

Can you think of an instance involving a private 2-party transaction, involving a used car, that the law would support injured party in seeking remedy due to misrepresentation of condition and viability of the car sold? This involves claims specifically made (and unsolicited) that certain repairs were made using brand new parts.

Since evidence now shows that these parts were not replaced, the stated repairs to address symptoms were never made either.

Car is now completely unusable due to the cause of symptoms which seller stated were attended to, and done so using brand new parts. Naturally, without the statement that new parts were used, we'd not have a way to determine whether seller's claim of making repairs were true or not.

In GA, any car sold between private parties is sold AS IS, and I understand that. However, I am wondering since during the transaction, explicit statements were made to represent and substantiate viability of the item being sold - and in-fact outright lies told in order to convince me of the viability - fraud occurred resulting in taking money in exchange for a car that was known to have a fatal problem. A problem that would in-fact make the value of the car 90% less than what was paid in the transaction.

Facts:

Seller purchased car from original owner who sold it because it had been established that the problems she was experiencing was very likely a fatal flaw: blown head gasket.

Seller purchased car in the parking lot of the repair shop that the seller had used for the lifetime of the car.

Seller was told that the car very likely had a blown head gasket.

Seller bought car anyhow and had it towed to his residence.

Seller then volunteered, when asked by me and my companions, why the car had a faint antifreeze odor, that he'd "just topped off the coolant." He then said, after acknowledging the comment from buyer that this particular BMW has a history coolant problems, he'd "taken care of EVERYTHING, including: new water pump, new thermostat, new axillary fan, new expansion tank." He then stated that "you won't have to worry, everything has been taken care of."

There is NO bill of sale. I was emailed a blank bill of sale with seller's signature and no other information.

Proper transfer of title did take place.

I took car this past weekend to the repair shop that had serviced the car the entire time the original owner had the car. I explained the situation and learned the facts regarding reason for original owner selling car, how the transaction took place, any interaction that occurred between second owner (our seller) and the repair shop.

Repair shop said, to their knowledge, our seller purchased an expansion tank, only.

Seller remains unreachable since leaving his house with the car the day I bought it.

What I know:

I used bad judgment during this transaction.

Bottom line is, the transaction is, by default, AS IS.

The seller knew the car had serious problems with cooling system and covered up the disposition of said problems by making false and misleading claims which suggested his knowledge of the problem, and the problem was resolved because the seller made the repairs using parts that have now been identified as NOT NEW. A direct contradiction to his claims.

So I bought a car that was represented as having a certain viability with specific parts installed (in brand new condition) during repairs to address a severe problem. Subsequently, my understanding of the potentially fatal flaw was that repairs were made to address this issue, and told I didn't need to worry - by the seller.

End of story? or do I have a reasonable claim to bring against seller in small claims court?

I'd really appreciate any insight into this. As it stands, I have a $7000 BMW sitting in the driveway, and it is now a paperweight. It was my only car and I have no means at all to get another car.

Thanks in advance,

Stephanie

Georgia


Asked on 7/28/11, 10:29 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
Glen Ashman Ashman Law Office also dba Glen Ashman Attorney

Based upon what you posted you have a likely weak case if not no case. One should not buy a used car from an individual without FIRST doing their own independent inspection by a mechanic and other research. To buy a car that actually has to be towed is a huge red flag, and under the "facts" you posted, you bought the car "as is". While an oral statement, if you could prove it, might arguably be fraud, how would you prove that statement, and how do you plan to convince a court that you were not aware of obvious major problems in car you had towed and bought anyway?

You can sue for anything. But given that you could have made inquiry at the repair shop before you bought it, I think you'd be at risk for a judgment on a counterclaim for frivolous litigation. Your facts are weaker than almost any used car case that I have ever heard. I think realistically you learned a $7000 lesson.

Read more
Answered on 7/28/11, 11:11 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Consumer Law questions and answers in Georgia