260 or 289 - AC Cobra - KJP 123

And now for something completely different: reported in Daily Mail and Evening Standard.

Someone is taking DVLA to court for loss of value on a car that they bought. It is, or was, a 1964 AC Cobra for which he paid £250k. Now the DVLA say it was built in 2002 which means it is only worth £100k.

Against Him: £250k is cheap so it should have raised his suspicions and genuine cars are well documented. Did he take a chance which has backfired.

For Him: The DVLA had suspicions about its age some time before but did nothing. Rather damningly they had decided to investigate the registration once a new application to register was made.

Your thoughts?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5329921/Man-sues-...n

Edited by KJP 123 on 30/01/2018 at 23:29

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - skidpan

So instead of buying a geniune Cobra he bought a Fake Snake. Obvious to me he was greedy when he saw the low price and thought he could make a quick ££££££ or two.

To trap the uninformed (or just plain stupid) there are some incredible quality Cobra replicas available these days. Most are plastic but some have beautiful hand beaten alloy bodies and handling that is far better than the original.

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - Cris_on_the_gas

So both Mr Seddon and the DVLA have been duped. The DVLA who it appears were unaware of the issue until after he had purchased it.

Why doesn't he sue the vendor for mis describing the car correctly?

He is also winging about paying £300 odd a year in VED when clearly he has pots of money having spent £250k on a motor

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - nick62

He's either a complete plonker, or more likely as big a crook as the bloke he brought kit from?

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - KJP 123

Re what Chris said:

The DVLA who it appears were unaware of the issue until after he had purchased it.

No, they were aware before but chose to do nothing until next registration. Surely they must have realised that such a change would have a dramatic effect on the car’s value: I think that this is at the centre of his claim.

So both Mr Seddon and the DVLA have been duped.

Few facts are given so nothing is clear cut. It was “restored” in 2002: whether it is a 1964 or 2002 car might depend on what works were done. I have no idea what alerted the DVLA.

As to Mr Seddon, the purchaser, he should be able to put some reliance on the V5 but the car was suspiciously cheap. So did he just hope no questions would be asked?

Why doesn't he sue the vendor for mis describing the car correctly?

No details are given of vendor: trade or private, how long he has had car, whether he did “restoration”. His V5 said it was a 1964 car and no indication from DVLA that that might change so did he mis-describe? On the other hand, he was selling it cheap.

He is also winging about paying £300 odd a year in VED when clearly he has pots of money having spent £250k on a motor

Yes, arguing that it is no longer eligible for historic racing is one thing but this is so weak that it undermines rather than strengthens his case.

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - skidpan

He is also winging about paying £300 odd a year in VED when clearly he has pots of money having spent £250k on a motor

The buyer was either totally stupid or its another made up Daily Mail story.

If the car was a 1964 vehicle there would be no VED to pay, its excempt. This has been the case for over 20 years now and is common knowledge.

If it was a 2002 car (either a replica or kit) the car would have been through either an SVA or IVA test before registration and would cost £225 VED sibnce cars that have been suject to the tests ate taxed as cars registered before 2001 (but less than 40 years old).

What class VED is the owner paying, if it was on the usual sliding scale for a car with its likely emmisions it would be way over £300.Would certainly be over 255 CO2's thus £515 a year but cars like this do not go through type approval therefore its never going to happen.

I do wonder what the truth really is. Plenty of written off classic cars have been rebuilt using different cars in the past (some stolen for the purpose believe it or not) and I suspect this is the case here.

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - Cris_on_the_gas

No, they were aware before but chose to do nothing until next registration. Surely they must have realised that such a change would have a dramatic effect on the car’s value: I think that this is at the centre of his claim.

Surely if he had just purchased the vehicle then it would not need registration details changed just an "change of keeper" details update.

So was so much work done in 2002 that it needed the registration details changed and this was not done until the change of ownership was identified. If so sounds mightly suspect. Yeah I have got this motor, I have completely restored and rebuilt it, it's worth 250k, oh after you have brought it you need to tell the DVLA the new registration details. Much like in Only Fools and Horses poor old Trigger claiming he had the same broom for 20 years. On further questioning it turns out it had had 3 new heads and 4 new handles but was still the same brooom !

As to DVLA knowing such a change would have a dramatic effect, surely it would not be reasonable to expect that kind of knowledge from a DVLA administrator. How many millions of vehicles are registered so how would they be expected to have detailed knowledge of every vehicle history.

Interesting case but it would appear that he is trying to blame the DVLA for his own incompetence, stupidity or greed. Maybe all 3.

Edited by Cris_on_the_gas on 01/02/2018 at 09:59

260 or 289 - AC Cobra - KJP 123

Skidpan - I do wonder what the truth really is. So do I.

Plenty of written off classic cars have been rebuilt using different cars in the past

Yes, I write off a Lotus Cortina and put the parts into an ordinary Cortina bodyshell: Is it still a Lotus Cortina? Does it date from 1960 or 2018?

Chris

Surely if he had just purchased the vehicle then it would not need registration details changed just an "change of keeper" details update.

The DVLA were already suspicious.

So was so much work done in 2002 that it needed the registration details changed and this was not done until the change of ownership was identified. If so sounds mightly suspect. Yeah I have got this motor, I have completely restored and rebuilt it, it's worth 250k, oh after you have brought it you need to tell the DVLA the new registration details. Much like in Only Fools and Horses poor old Trigger claiming he had the same broom for 20 years. On further questioning it turns out it had had 3 new heads and 4 new handles but was still the same brooom !

I don’t know if the work done in 2002 needed a change in the registration but the DVLA thought it did. They just did not tell anyone. You simplify things too much. HMS Victory needing new masts and a rudder is still HMS Victory: a car like a ship is more than two parts.

As to DVLA knowing such a change would have a dramatic effect, surely it would not be reasonable to expect that kind of knowledge from a DVLA administrator. How many millions of vehicles are registered so how would they be expected to have detailed knowledge of every vehicle history.

No, an ordinary administrator would not have that knowledge. But someone senior questioned it and they should have more knowledge if they are to take these decisions.

Interesting case but it would appear that he is trying to blame the DVLA for his own incompetence, stupidity or greed. Maybe all 3.

I have to agree. Car too cheap: Buyer knew, Seller knew