Good day I sold a vehicle privately 4 weeks ago. The purchaser…

Good day

I sold a vehicle privately 4 weeks ago. The purchaser has recently come back me (via a legal representative) accusing me of misrepresenting the vehicle and providing him with misleading information. I am not a dealer of vehicles; this was my personal vehicle.

Throughout my use of the vehicle, it was always very reliable. I had never experienced any problems with any mechanical aspect except for a slave master cylinder, brake master cylinder top kit and ABS wheel sensor which were all replaced during my ownership. At the time of sale, the vehicle drove very well (as it had always done in my possession); the engine was smooth and there were no abnormal noises or vibrations from the transmission. The oil and water consumption of the engine was always very low. The reason for sale was based on fuel consumption - otherwise, I had no reason to sell the vehicle.

In the sales advert, the engine of the vehicle was described as being in 'smooth, powerful' condition and the transmission (gearbox, transfer-box and differentials) as being in 'excellent' condition and that the vehicle did not need any work done to it. The basis for this description was the fact that I had never experienced any mechanical problems with the vehicle while it was in my possession (since August 2008, 132000km) and the excellent manner in which the vehicle drove. At the time of sale (April 2012), the vehicle had 188000km on the odo. A full service history was also stated in the advert. This included the original service history from new with agents as well as the service history performed by myself while it was in my possession.

At the time of the sale, the purchaser was given opportunity to drive the vehicle (~10km) and he pronounced himself willing to purchase the vehicle as he described it as being the best vehicle he had driven. He went over the vehicle thoroughly and said he was satisfied with its condition. The bonnet was opened and we observed the coolant and brake/clutch fluid tanks. The service history was discussed with him as was the fact that the last 50,000km was done by me. He was satisfied with this. I am a mechanical engineer by qualification.

A 'voertstoets' sales agreement was signed by both me and the purchaser (condition 'as is'). The price was negotiated, paid and he came to fetch the car from my work place. His wife drove the car ~200km home, with him in a second car. When I had driven the car that morning, it was in perfect driving condition with no indication of any abnormalities - just as i had experienced the vehicle for the duration of my ownership. He received the service history from me on the day of taking the vehicle (April 25th). It was sold with a full Certificate of Roadworthiness. During the Roadworthy test, no issued came out for attention.

I have now been advised (on May 23rd) by his legal representative that the engine needs to be rebuilt and the transfer case, replaced. I have been told that these are latent defects that I withheld from the purchaser and that he has the right to cancel the sales agreement. The options given to me are to purchase the vehicle back or pay for the repairs. It was stated that a sealant was used in the engine at some time to repair leaks in the radiator. If this was done it was before my ownership period as I had purchased the vehicle under the authorisation that the coolant had been recently changed and all of the transmission components serviced. There was no reason for me to change the coolant again during my ownership and the only servicing that was necessary on the transmission components was to check the oil levels (which was done by myself at frequencies greater than that recommended by the OEM). After the sale, the vehicle was inspected on 7th May (transferbox) and 15th May (engine condition) - approximately 2 weeks after delivery.

These accusations have honestly come as a shock, as in my opinion the vehicle was in a very good condition during my ownership and any damage of the transfer-box that required a replacement would surely have been apparent during my ownership. I do not believe that the vehicle could have been in such a poor condition to warrant the repairs stated. I still do not know what the actually issues on the vehicle are to warrant such repairs.

In addition, the purchaser had changed items on the engine since he took possession - for example, spark plugs (for which I know to be the incorrect items).

My questions are:
- am i obliged to repond to the e-mail sent by the legal representative, or should I wait for a document served to my person?
- how strong is the case of the purchaser?
- should I respond personally to the purchaser legal rep, or should I do it via my own legal representative?
- What should my next step be?

Many thanks
David