Should I Get My Deposit Back if Used Car Differs Greatly from Description?

ngengerous on 17/09/2019 - 14:24
Last edited 19/09/2019 - 20:46 by 1 other user

Hey guys, just thought I'd grab a few unbiased opinions of a situation I've found myself in.

I found a 70s car I was keen to buy. it wasn't the greatest example - body was pretty rusted and the paint job was subpar - but according to the online ad "all driving components have been maintained and are in good working condition". It also advised that the engine and gearbox had recently been rebuilt, and the car was currently registered. This all sounded pretty good to me, and as the vehicle was in a different state to me, I organised to book a Stateroads comprehensive inspection to make sure I wasn't buying a lemon, and the buyer asked for a deposit over the weekend ($200). In conversation with the seller, he advised me that there were some "wear and tear" components which would need replacing.

Yesterday was inspection day, and I received the results - to bring the car up to roadworthy standards, EVERYTHING would need to be rebuilt or replaced. I asked how the driving components were - they were rusted and would all need to be replaced if I was to register the vehicle, bumping the potential cost up by a large amount. After hearing this, I decided I wouldn't be going ahead with the purchase.

Unfortunately I have already placed the $200 deposit on the car, which I would very much like to get back. It's my belief that the current state of the car differs greatly from what was described - "driving components are in good working condition" and advising me that some "wear and tear" components would need replacing before a roadworthy is not the same as being told that the ENTIRE car was in bad condition, and that everything would need to either be rebuilt or replaced.

Do you think I would be justified in asking nicely for my deposit back?

---

Update: I had a look back through my messages with the seller to gain some context regarding the deposit - turns out he did add the word 'unconditional' in a long message regarding the deposit, and I obviously didn't pay much attention to it.

Lesson learned, and time for me to move on and be more vigilant next time.

• 1
• 2

• • • 

      jackary on 19/09/2019 - 20:21

      and as the vehicle was in WA and I am in QLD

      And as you can’t read

      • 

        Pantagonist on 20/09/2019 - 07:50

        My mistake. That info has disappeared from the OP so I was relying on memory. I should have checked the revision history.

• 

  jonkvh on 18/09/2019 - 17:06

  ngengerous, I'd be looking at cars more into the 1990's but no later than early 2000's. Parts are just easier to get and some electronic components even back then are simple enough not to cost hundreds, except for high end models say, a Falcon as opposed to a Fairlane for instance.

  • 

    wheretobuychocettes on 18/09/2019 - 17:14

    +2

    Pro tip: Someone looking specifically for a 70s model car is probably less concerned with easy to find parts/serviceability/reliability and much more concerned with how the model looks, or the feeling it gives them, etc.
    There's just something about a lot of the 70s models that was lost in the 80s and even more in the 90s.

    While he may be on OzBargin, this particular post wasn't about finding a bargain or good value and was about his particular situation.

    • 

      johnno07 on 18/09/2019 - 21:42

      +2

      Celicas, in particular, only got uglier.

      • 

        Drj55 on 18/09/2019 - 22:07

        They lost me the front bonnet spoiler of the early 2000s.

• 

  OzBrogains on 18/09/2019 - 17:20

  You just fully subsidised the bloke’s groceries for a few weeks/months. Chalk it up as a life lesson.

• 

  Euphemistic on 19/09/2019 - 08:54

  It’s a shame the original post has been altered so much. Loses all context for future readers.

  • 

    ngengerous on 19/09/2019 - 09:05

    Now that the topic hit the front page, I'd rather keep it edited for privacy's sake - the original can still be seen through the revisions though, correct me if I'm wrong.

• 

  myusername on 19/09/2019 - 21:13

  -1

  did it actually differ?

  or is this your interpretation?

• 

  lint on 20/09/2019 - 10:08

  You're probably not gonna be able to get the $200 back if the seller doesn't agree to it, unless you take it to court, which frankly isn't worth the additional time and cost.

  Just chalk it up as part of the cost of buying a car, just like the inspection you arranged, and move on.

• 

  Dr Techno on 20/09/2019 - 10:35

  -1

  what car was it ? just wondering

• 1
• 2