Lawyer said it was a tiny chance of winning.
Here is the deal. She brought the car $ 7000. The ad said "looks/runs excellent." My friend checked out and it looked pretty good. On the test driving day, the brake had something wrong. She told the seller and the seller told her that the seller would lower the price for her to fix it. The seller also disclosed the car previously had been in an accident and already fixed, no else other problem that they noticed of. My friend brought it immediately and the seller went ahead to get it to the mechanic shop to fix it for her brand new brakes pad and disk, in addition the seller did lower the fee for fixing brakes for my friend too. Now, my friend noticed that something's wrong with the radiator leaking oil after several days. The seller went ahead and checked it out for her. They told her that the old radiator they brought from shop that way, the radiator didn't leak but has some oil inside the radiator spilled out. The seller told them that wasn't transmission problem because if it would then transmission oil would be shorten and she wouldn't make it to home in 2 hours when but they did.
Now the car has radiator problem. My friend wanted money back because she accused the seller didn't disclose to her the radiator had problem while she believed the car ran excellent. The seller was willing to pay for new radiator but the seller told her the radiator was not leaked, just the old radiator had some oil in there.
Can my friend still successfully sue the seller for not disclose?
She didn't inspect the car.
The seller didn't give any warranty.
Answer by UNCOLA
Have you ever heard of the saying "buyer beware".
Your friend should have done her due diligence and had an independent mechanic check out the car before she bought it. Now she is SOL
Answer by Censored
You'd need a damn good laywer. Did the friend specifically inquire about any problems before hand? Did the friend have it inspected before purchase? That would be important. It also sounds like the seller didn't know about the radiator problem as the friend described it.
There's always a chance of winning, but would it be cheaper to pay for a lawyer, or just fix it?
Answer by Sway
Good grief, I can understand making a few grammatical errors, but this is ridiculous.
Answer by Flower
The seller has done more than he has to to help your friend. Your friend should have had a mechanic inspect the car thoroughly before she bought it. All car sales are As Is unless seller offers a warranty. Your friend should have seen the red flag when the brakes were not right before she bought it.
Answer by Shih Tzu
She can try. Haven't you ever heard the phrase "Buyer Beware"?
Answer by laughter_every_day
You said she DID inspect the car. She looked at it and drove it and noticed problems. She was free to bargain for a car that had a warranty, but not required to do so. The law allows her to buy a car in an unknown condition, with no warranty and no promise that there are no other known problems. Cars are cheaper that way, but they come with a risk. That is her choice. In order to prevail you would need an actual fraud -- a statement that the radiator is in perfect condition -- before buying the car.
BTW, there is no oil in a radiator.
Answer by Top Source
The seller offered to fix it.
And, according to the seller, there's nothing wrong w/ the radiator. Does the car show symptoms of a defective rad?
She could have the name-brand dealer, ie Ford car: Ford dealer, inspect it.
It's hard, or impossible, to sue w/o suffering damages.
If the case is weak enough, she could be liable to the defendant/seller for triple damages for bringing a frivolous legal action.
The fluid in the radiator is referred to as coolant or antifreeze. There can be oil in the coolant if there's a defect in the transfluid cooler, or its lines, which some vehicles have in the radiator.
Add your own answer in the comments!
Orignal From: Why can't my friend sue the car seller?
Post a Comment