From: Andy Cap on
On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:15:22 +0100, Michael Hubert Kenyon
<enemabandit(a)virgin.net> wrote:

>Rob Graham wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd get the previous owner to demand recompense, warranty or no
>> warranty, present owner or not, or 'see you in court'. If the garage
>> gets out of this then it's a pure technicality. They are absolutely liable.
>>
>> Rob Graham
>
>They are absolutely NOT liable. You cannot pass on a warrenty unless it
>is agreed by all parties beforehand.

From: Miffed on
Andy Cap wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:17:46 +0100, Michael Hubert Kenyon
> <enemabandit(a)virgin.net> wrote:
>
>
>>> Why can't the original owner claim, on the grounds that he has had to recompense
>>> the purchaser, which he should do anyway because he sold him a pup?
>> Because the car doesn't belong to him anymore. If I sell a car I can't
>> pass on a warrenty from the guy who owned it three owners before me can I?
>
> I don't see why that is relevent. He has sustained a monetary loss due to
> someone else's negligence

He has not! He has no more contract with the fitter than he has with the
petrol filling station the previous owner used. His contract is with the
previous owner who as a private person he will have no comeback on
whatsoever. Any legal action would be doomed to fail.
From: Andy Cap on
On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:13:03 +0100, Miffed <verymiffed(a)tiscali.net> wrote:


>He has not! He has no more contract with the fitter than he has with the
>petrol filling station the previous owner used. His contract is with the
>previous owner who as a private person he will have no comeback on
>whatsoever. Any legal action would be doomed to fail.

The original owner will have had to compensate the purchaser for the essential
work and will thus be out of pocket due to the garage's negligence. I can't see
how that is not the case and he must therefore have a claim against the garage.
It is not a warranty issue but purely a monetary one.


From: Michael Hubert Kenyon on
Andy Cap wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:13:03 +0100, Miffed <verymiffed(a)tiscali.net> wrote:
>
>
>> He has not! He has no more contract with the fitter than he has with the
>> petrol filling station the previous owner used. His contract is with the
>> previous owner who as a private person he will have no comeback on
>> whatsoever. Any legal action would be doomed to fail.
>
> The original owner will have had to compensate the purchaser for the essential
> work and will thus be out of pocket due to the garage's negligence. I can't see
> how that is not the case and he must therefore have a claim against the garage.
> It is not a warranty issue but purely a monetary one.
>
>


The current owner has no more contract with the fitter than my Aunty
Flo'. It is up to the previous owner (who did have a contract with the
clutch fitter) to ask the fitter if they will help but as he is no
longer the owner of the car any gesture would be one of goodwill not
legality.
From: Peter Parry on
On Wed, 26 May 2010 12:18:48 -0700 (PDT), "Robert D."
<robertdale(a)guerillamail.org> wrote:


>My question is: as they incorrectly fitted the new clutch, as
>confirmed by 2 independent garages who know the work would not be
>carried out by them even before they found the problem, are the
>original fitting garage liable in any way for some/all costs?

They might be - but not to you.

No contract exists between you and the original garage so you cannot
demand money from them.

The only route would be for you to sue the person who sold you the car
and then for them in turn to sue the garage that did the work.
However, it was a private sale. As such there are no "implied terms"
about quality which you would get in a consumer contract. Therefore
the chances of successfully suing the previous owner are low.

Basically, you have little chance of getting anything back from the
person from whom you bought the car and none whatsoever of getting
anything directly from the original garage .