Approved used cars shock
● Compensation possible for misadvertising of one-owner cars
Advert ruling means some buyers could claim a refund
MOTORISTS who have unknowingly bought ex-fleet, ex-business or ex-rental vehicles from approved-used dealers through misleading adverts could be entitled to between 25 and 100 per cent of the purchase price back in compensation, leading lawyers have told Auto Express.
Damon Parker, head of litigation at law firm Harcus Sinclair, said a recent ruling by the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) now means owners have a “viable case” against approved-used dealers that failed to inform them the car they bought was once run by fleets, rental companies or businesses.
In October this year, the Advertising Standards Agency ruled on behalf of Auto Express reader Ashley Rumbold from Cambridge, who’d complained about two advertisements on Alfa Romeo’s approved-used website. The cars were advertised as having had one previous owner, but it was later discovered both were ex-fleet vehicles.
The ASA said: “If a dealer knew that a vehicle was ex-fleet, because it had previously been used for business purposes, then that was material information likely to influence a customer’s transactional decision.”
The ruling required the approved-used dealer and Alfa Romeo parent group Fiat Chrysler Automobiles to ensure future adverts do not omit misleading material. A Fiat Chrysler Automobiles spokesman told Auto Express it has already introduced interim measures to inform buyers that cars on the company’s approved-used site may be former fleet vehicles. He added: “In the long term, there will be a change to our online systems so that individual vehicle pages will enable the retailer to flag the status of each vehicle advertised for sale.”
An ASA spokesman said the organisation is now communicating the message to the rest of the automotive industry: “We are telling advertisers they must include information that they do not currently always include; specifically, if a car is ex-fleet or ex-hire or similar. We’re telling them they need to change that aspect of their advertising. If they need to put in place new functionality on their websites to achieve that, then they will need to do so.”
However, the ruling also means that approved-used dealers could be liable to pay refunds to owners who’ve bought ex-fleet or rental cars advertised as being privately owned. Parker said: “The ruling confirms our position that this is a viable claim for people who find themselves misled by dealers.”
The practice of omitting ownership details is in violation of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 act. Parker added: “The interesting feature is that the way damages work for breach is that, where you can’t say what the difference in value is [between the market price for a privately owned car and an ex-fleet, business or hire vehicle], you then look at percentages.” These vary between 25 and 100 per cent, depending on how severe an omission was made, and how much difference the information would have had on the sale price.
An industry-wide litigation suit would be tricky, though, according to Parker. “It’s difficult to put a number on the exact number of people affected by this, so we will have to look at the cases on a case-by-case approach,” he said.
Reader Ashley Rumbold has started a campaign ( www.usedcarscandal.co.uk), where drivers who know they’ve been sold a vehicle that was falsely advertised can find out more.
“We are telling advertisers they must include information they do not currently always include“Advertising Standards Agency spokesman