should a dealer have a VIC check done on a car that they know is on the " v car register"?

[stitche30]

Well I've had my a4 since new years day, about 2 weeks after buying it I got a letter from the dvla saying its subject to a VIC check before they'll issue a new V5. I phoned the dealer I bought the car off, who said he had no idea it had been a cat c write off, and the usual checks must of been mist before the car went on sale, which turned out to be a lie. So after a month of too-ing and fro-ing and several agreements to replace or refund me the money I paid for the car, all of which they have decided weren't going to work, I'm now left with the ball-ache of writing letters to the motor trading standards people and the dealers informing them of my situation and intent to inform the sheriffs court and file a small claims case against them to get my money back and compensation for having a car that I can't use because my insurance won't cover it untill the VIC check has been done.

So back to my original point.....

Is a dealer legally obliged to carry out the VIC check before they sell the car?


And yes before anyone asks, I did make a point of asking if the car had any accident history lol.

[mikeybutch]

How much did you pay?Is it worth getting legal advice?There cant be any obligation on the dealer to check but no doubt they did and are lieing.Did you use a credit card if so contact the company

[stitche30]

I only paid 800 for the car, its the 400 its cost me, so far and increasing by the week, getting to work and back that makes it worth the 65 quid for raising the civil action, they decided not to bring the car they offered as a replacement because it was too far for them to travel and would cost them for petrol and hotel etc, so its my only option now. For me to get a full refund, minus the extra money I've had to spend, I have to take the car back to them in coventry (1000-ish mile round trip) but I won't get any extra money for petrol etc. However they're prepared to collect the car if I pay all of the expenses for them to come up here....... not going to happen.

If they fail to appear in court, or send someone to represent them then they default the case and the courts make them pay any costs on top of what I claim for. (im double checking this with a solicitor tomorrow)

Any ideas of other ways to try and sort this out?

[mikeybutch]

Wow some problems.It will take weeks to get the claim through and I wonder if a Scottish one is enforceable here .Legal advice can be dear .If they can be relied on to give a full refund I would think about returning it but then is it insured?I am sorry to say I think you may be stuck with it cos some might say that you should have checked before going that far to buy

[phil miller]

simple answer is NO, the vic check is an MOT test but by the MOTransport, basicly they know what the damage was and make sure its been repaired properly, its not the big deal it seems, the fact the car cost £800 i would have thought the damage was prob only a dent in the wing or door and nothing to worry about, dont think id worry about court action, get it vic checked (ask the garage to pay for it) and then its sorted

[Alan G H]

I agree with Phil, get the car VIC checked, and try to get the seller to pay for it. A car of that value would not have needed much damage to be a write off, and, if you are otherwise happy with it, don't worry about it. You can book a VIC test by ringing VOSA on 0300 1239000. I think it costs about £45 or so.

[stitche30]

The information I got of the garage was it was rear ended about a month or so after the previous owner bought the car. He had it since July 01, do that makes it August/September 01. That means the car would of been less than 2 years old. If the garage offered it I may consider it but is want the car re-mot'd aswell because of a few things I've found with the car, eg maf disconnected, foil tape round the exhaust, spare tyre with a gash running almost the entire circumference. It'll need a fresh mot for the insurance anyway, if it passes the VIC check.

[NickPicks]

Sorry to sound critial, but did you not look at the car before you bought it?

Regarding the VIC check - this is a check to make sure the car hasn't been ringed - it's quite common if a car has been written off to make sure that someone hasn't stolen an identical one and jsut swapped the number plates. If I was in your shoes, I'd get the dealer to pay for the VIC, and then carry on. If the car was damaged that long ago, then it's obviously managed to pass MOTs since then so there shouldn't be too much of a problem with it being passed as roadworthy - it just need to be proven as the car it is supposed to be.

[Alan G H]

The information I got of the garage was it was rear ended about a month or so after the previous owner bought the car. He had it since July 01, do that makes it August/September 01. That means the car would of been less than 2 years old. If the garage offered it I may consider it but is want the car re-mot'd aswell because of a few things I've found with the car, eg maf disconnected, foil tape round the exhaust, spare tyre with a gash running almost the entire circumference. It'll need a fresh mot for the insurance anyway, if it passes the VIC check.

If the accident was ten years ago and the car has been in use ever since then the repairs must have been satisfactory.
Since a VIC check only becomes necessary when a vehicle changes hands, so the last owner must have been happy with the repairs to use it for that long.

With regard to the MOT, the spare wheel is not testable, the foil tape on the exhaust passes the test IF the exhaust is structurally sound, and the disconnected MAF is unlikely to badly affect the smoke (I assume it is a diesel).

Also, if you only paid £800, don't expect a Rolls Royce, you can pay a lot more than that for a pushbike!