Certainly a valid consideration.Originally Posted by nissannewby
I do have all the original quotes and invoices for the engine conversion indicating new crate engine as part of the vehicles service history documents that I got with the sale back in October, the only records missing were the ones from the car service mob over here in NSW that reported on the engine issue in Sept 20, 6 weeks before I bought it to to take over the build. No evidence to suggest the engine was otherwise was documented...so very hard to say that it was not a new engine to begin with, or even a manufactured rebuild. The full cost was paid at the time of conversion, indicating the engine was not one of the second engines advertised in stock at 1/5 of the cost paid in conversion.
The case for court will simply be...the engine and vehicle condition was represented by the seller as mechanically A1 and perfect with warranty (despite the seller knowing otherwise and mis representing the condition for financial advantage),and accordingly, subsequent contract for sale at market value for defect free car was entered into.
Engine status quo was advertised and contracted for sale to myself as new (5 months and 15000 kms since install) and under warranty, any other factors are irrelevant in court decision making. The smoking gun in this case is the notification by the car service centre here in NSW advising the previous owner of the defect 6 weeks before the sale. This document and corresponding statements form the service centre, has also been corroborated and verified with the car service center, and these records can be further subpoenaed into evidence if needed for further court satisfaction.
The court case is a future me problem, but we have all the documentation to support our case beyond reasonable doubt (99% proof), and we only need to show basis of probability (51% proof) to get a result in our favor.
Considerations otherwise such as questioning the original engine status quo is basically defense lawyer technicality tactics, that are actually irrelevant to the case at hand..as the case will be about fraud for engine condition misrepresentation, and is not dependent of engine history.
I do get what you are suggesting, but I have no proof that this is the case, but the thought of having to buy another new engine even at discounted price for an engine with low mileage and age advertised as under warranty.... is truly vexxing...in fact I can not express how fucking annoyed I actually am,,, as things like suggesting "blowing up houses and shooting folks" would be inappropriate to discuss, as that is third world order thinking.
I guess the seller is fortunate we don't live in Rio or many if the other places were this kind of retribution occurs daily for lesser slights, thus the legal approach is the solution to the problem.
In fairness to Brunswick Diesel, they have assisted here, in what is a shitty situation, all because the last twit decided to mask and hide the defect and and on sell to rip some poor bastard off for top dollar, instead of pursuing warranty claim and repair.
If the truck had been priced 15K less with the defect declared before sale, well, that would have been a different story, basically I would have taken in another one for ongoing project, or, if I did buy this one at a lower price, with known defect, I would be right onto warranty repair before spending all the other dollars on it.
So at least this repair option will save me close on 7 grand at stumps, with the assistance from BD.
Anyhow, the next step is getting the new plant fitted and paying the bill to the fitters. Once that is done onto the next step.
Reply With Quote