Buyer beware?

[Jam2]

https://24hrnews.co.uk/2018/01/30/man-sues-dvla-for-150000-over-sports-car-logbook-change/

[Exowner]

Does anyone have more details relating to this post. Surely some 'due diligence' was undertaken before parting with 1/4 mill????

[rstainer]

A VRD (aka logbook in the UK) is not by itself proof of provenance in any jurisdiction that I know of. As this car's absence of 1964 provenance as a vehicle is a matter of record it would be surprising if Mr Seddon's claim is successful.

RS

[Jam2]

I would have thought that even a couple of years ago, a Cobra at little more than Ace Bristol money should have raised a question.  And selling it on because the cost of the annual road tax was too high sounds a bit lame.

[rstainer]

See http://mk1-forum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21318 for further discussion. Believed constructed in 2005, CSX 2620 has neither a period nor an ISO 3779 compliant VIN. The car's registration pre-withdrawal was PTF 47B.

RS

[rstainer]

Justine Thornton QC unsurprisingly concludes that:
"I am not persuaded that the DVLA owes a duty of care to Mr Seddon. The DVLA was performing its functions under a statutory regime designed to raise vehicle excise duty. Mr Seddon chose to rely on the car registration document for a purpose of his own – the purchase of a historic car. Analogous case law does not permit a duty of care. In entering into a private commercial transaction for the purchase of the car, Mr Seddon could have taken steps to protect himself against the loss he subsequently incurred."

The loss, fortunately, is Mr Seddon's, not the taxpayers. Please email me if you want the full Judgment.

RS

[Clive Austin]

Has there been any update in respect of this issue?  I am wondering if it has an impact on the MKIII Continuation cars.