judging by the fact you never mentioned it, it doesn't sound like he ever gave this guy a deposit... so why would the seller hold the car? if there's no deposit on the vehicle and someone walks up with the cash, you sell it - simple. you guys really don't have anything to complain about. Without a deposit, this guy had no idea if your mate was genuine.

L18_b110 - No! the buyer offered a direct deposit be made in his account but the seller insisted that there was no need for a deposit and that my mate shouldnt worry because the car is considered sold.

If someone was selling a car in Brisbane and you agreed on a final price and told you that a deposit was not required and insisted to you that the car is yours and come here to pick it it up wouldnt you be pissed off after spending $1000 on flights and transport ????? Geeze I know I would be and I can tell you now that the owner of 45USN is a DOG ASS !!! for doing that.

They had organised a date time and place to pick it up and then my mate gets a call the nite before and the owner says sorry. Well to me thats bull*%$it.

Yeah, buying cars can be a bitch...... You just don't know who you are dealing with, which is why I think people continue to buy from dealers - At least that way they KNOW the bloke is probably a crook.
But seriously - your mate should at least try to get some money back for the cost of the plane flight cancellation charges etc.
A while ago I had a run-in with a bloke who tried to sell me a 1200 ute with a -just-about-to-shit-itself- CA18DET, & when I pulled out (due to the stuffed engine) he kept my deposit ($400) - 8 months down the track I had my small claims hearing & got my money back!
I'll admit the court system is a long drawn-out process, but I got there in the end + learnt a bit about the legal system in the process.
The one thing that people kept saying to me though was "Caveat emptor", which means buyer beware & is more or less how private purchases should be veiwed.

A deposit is not needed for a legal contract to be binding. If there is a sense of completeness in the contract (ie. price, pick up arrangements/date etc) then the courts can enforce a breach of contract and provide a remedy.

Phone records are not needed either. There are many cases where they are not available. One thing that must be known is when the offer and the acceptance were made. (Not a specific time but more like who made the offer and acceptance).

Caveat emptor is more relational to the situation where you would have bought the ute Coops and then not got what you paid for. (In private purchases)

If you have any further questions just ask me. There maybe further facts such as conditions etc that could be of use.

The point is that this guy would likely be dog's dinner in a court of law as you cannot back out of an agreed contract like that. All telephone, letter, fax etc contracts are as good as a written one. Once acceptance is complete, a revocation is not possible such as the phone call the night before.

Cheers
Brock

Quote:

You cant prove nothing. Phone bills mean nothing.
The guy said it's good as sold. Well he didnt lie.

Oh by the way Frodaddy I am taking you to small claims court for the 35cent deposit I gave you on the Pink Elephant that you sold to me, which turned out never to exist.
By your logic I can already spend my 35cents as I have this one in the bag.

Frodaddy - It seems like you know heaps about this kinda thing a might have to put him in contact with you.

He should be getting back tonight, im not sure if he paid him a visit or not ......

An offer and an acceptance was definately made!!

When guys do business like this it really turns you off private sellers (the shonky ones anyway)!

Fortunately it is the minority of sellers who take on this mentallity..

Just WARN everyone cause it could happen to anyone!

This can easily be proved! The courts are faced with these types of contracts all of the time. There is even evidence of a trip made and transport for the car setup. This helps BUL33T's friend heaps in many ways in contract law.

I think you are out of your league here phunk. That logic you speak of is the law and it takes someone in the know to apply it as there are various mitigating factors.

I am currently studying law at uni and have done this section of contract law. It would be difficult for 45USN to argue his way out of an intention to create legal relations here as a reasonably solid agreement was had.

Quote:

Well there would be a breach of contract and maybe even misrepresentation if you could prove there was an existing binding contract. I doubt the judge would believe you though and did we have a mutually organised time for pick up, price etc?

Firstly Frodaddy I commend you on studying law at uni. Its a much beter career than working on cars and atleast you will make some money.
I have never studied law, so all my comments are just common sense.
Your comments seem to be trying to come across as lawyer jibba jabba. ( basically arguments that can go either way)
Example;
You say Bul33t's friend has a good case in court since there is evidence of trips made and transport organised. And 4susn would have a hard time arguing any of this.

But yet in my case with the pink elephant I would have to prove there was a contract.

So Frodaddy which is it?
In the morning I can go organise a plane ticket to NZ, I can organise a Zoo Keeper, I can organise a bag of peanuts and I can organise an old lady to shovel the elephant crap on the plane during the return trip to OZ. Arrange all that to next tuesdays date. Go to court on Thursday and walk out 35cents richer.

By your statements I could also say I gave you 35,000 dolars as a deposit instead of the 35cents.
In court you yourself would then have to prove no contract was made and no deposit was taken and I could then turn around and march straight back into court and sue you for false advertising on a pink elephant that never existed.

I recommend you keep studying law and be the best lawyer you can. But at the moment you still seem to be out of your league even up against an auto electrician.

Law isnt about just making arguing statements. Its about proving evidence to be factual. Plane tickets, a booked tow truck and phone calls ( although all real in Bul33t's case ) dont cut it as eveidence to me and I would like to see a judge to whom they did.

The way it was told to me, many many years ago, is that, "unless you have credible witnesses, a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's writen on." [& thats a quote]

Was my stepfather right? Well, without credible witnesses, he probably was.