Buyer wants his cash back?

All great stuff thanks very much.

Anyone interested can have a look at the trouble I had to get a hearing date changed. I had a very blunt Deputy Court Registrar who for some reason could not give me a change of date even though I was to be out of the country at the time. Just do a search on the Real Estate forum with nzkiwi69 and date posted in the last year.

Fortunately that problem has been solved and I will be attending a teleconference hearing on the 13th of Feb.

One other thing. I don't know how this slipped my mind but when I bought the car I had the AA check done as you know.but the owner also asked if I wanted him to put a current WOF on the car.which I said please yes to. It passed without any issues.

So I now have one AA check and two good warrants on this car as well as the LTSA declining to take the complaint about the warrant I had done any further. Can't believe I forgot that first warrant.

Not much more to add at this stage. I have written my submissions. Only 7 pages.

At some point I will somehow put his 75 paragraph work of art here so you can read it for yourself. People close to me have read it and are amazed. I'll see if I can cut and paste a couple of examples.

Right here's an example.

When I advertised the car I said I owner it for around 2 years and the previous owner had it for 10 years. It turns out I owned it for 1yr1month and the previous owner only 7 yrs. This is now being used to paint a picture of how devious I have become.

Also the paint on the top half of the car was crazing. It is the original paintwork and my personal belief was that I felt it gave the car character. I used photo's that I had taken around the time of my purchase and put them on trade me. The Applicant is claiming I tried to hide the paint condition by using distant photos. However the photos I have clearly show the paint work.the trademe upload however reduces the quality and size of the photo's such that it is hard to see. A simple viewing of the vehicle would have solved that issue.

These two points that he includes in his submissions are not part of what he originally claimed. But now of course he is going for everything he can. Including loose wheel bearings and steering etc. He also foolishly emailed me to say he put some aftermarket wheels on the car.I wonder if they might have affected the bearings and steering!

Anyway have a read below.it is only a small snippet but indicative of the rest of the submissions.

37) Respondent's awareness of buyer sentiment is further evidenced by tailoring vehicle's past and present tenure to personal advantage. His approx one year ownership (13 months) quietly morphs to ???about 2 years??? with former owner's 7.5 years a similarly contrived ???10 years plus .??? These isolated white lies aren't anything major other than arguably markers to pervading truth parsimony and strategic intent.

38)However, at times one is obliged to give credit where it's due even in the face of audacious jaw-dropping perversity. Eg, to respondent, soon after taking possession, I diplomatically referenced car's paint work in that it was, ???beyond what I was expecting in terms of condition .???

39) The following is sheer magic, ???I hear what you say about the paint but it was oddly something I really liked about the car. It is what made her feel genuine,??? continuing with chameleon-like contradiction, ???It was suggested to me that to make it less obvious for not much money you could put a boot rack on the back and do a quick respray of the bonnet and arches down to the trim line. But I elected to leave it.???

40) Respondent's balmy shuffle is to seize upon interconnecting microveils often adorning, for eg, half-century-old Italian frescoes and, subject to Grand Canyon-like leaps of faith, apply the same old-masters phenomena to the car's scorched un-primed cheap-jack contemporary paint job.

41) The embolden notion that it's ???odd??? respondent should prefer severely crazed paint is one thing but, more to the point, the implicit notion the grotty crazed paint's new owners should find the oddity equally ingratiating. And if the latter should need help negotiating such manifest oddity, acquiescence is massaged by again evoking originality - poignantly prefaced in the feminine - ???It is what made her feel genuine???.

42) Like a veritable lie detector, problem pilfering disingenuous invariably encounter when excitedly setting traps for others is failing to notice those they're simultaneously setting for themselves. If badly crazed paint was what respondent ???really liked??? and, particularly, if he truly believed paint crazing made the car ???feel genuine???, and thus exponentially more desirable/valuable, he would've gone out of his way to emphasise the same in his advertisement, describing the point in no uncertain terms together with close-up value-adding photos. Besides, the fact that strategies were advanced to mitigate the paint crazing, to make it appear ???less obvious,??? suggests respondent found the unsightly damaged cheap-Jack paint-job just as off-putting and value-robbing as normal people.

43) But instead photos were taken at a distance that failed to take advantage of such a purportedly in

What a verbose douche nozzle.

I wish he would talk English! What a load of dribble. The fact is, he came and saw the paintwork and then decided to buy it and drive about for 8 months.
What has the grazing got to do with anything now! Using big words to try and sound clever will backfire and any savy adjudicator will see through all this. Best of luck.

I understand all now.

Maybe the douche is doing his thesis on "How I bought an old car & now I want my money back, after 8 months".

All you have to do is sit still and keep quiet until this dickhead has put his point of view forward (which is probably going to take a very veeery long time), then the adjudicator will ask you, "Did you mis-represent the car in the advertisment or make any untrue claims regarding it, to the best of your knowledge"!.
You will say, "No".
He/she will ask the buyer, "Did you inspect the car or arrange to have it assessed before purchase!"
Buyer will say, "NO".
Adjudicator will look at the evidence leading up to the trade taking place. Which will be entirely based around the trademe ad, and will say, "Caviet emptor is a real thing, you loser. Get a law degree if you want to really understand the crap you talk".
Result = you win.

It just gets better and better lol

NZkiwi69 Could I make just one suggestion to you other than the odvious don't say a word in defence.
I'd recommend making it clear you will be claiming costs against this dweeb

Cant wait to hear the outcome of this. Its a load of crap. You must win if there is any justice out there. He will probably hang himself when he gets there.

I would suggest that if this chap received the car and had serious issues with it, it would have been appropriate to raise them immediately.So far down the track is just a joke.Your responsibility for fair contribution to that transaction has long passed.

Keep us posted I like real life psycho stories.

Oh , and poster #1.
Dont for get to ask "I'm sorry, could you please repeat the question". (bet he cant).

Well i happen to agree with the verbal dialogue.
Clearly beyond any doubt the paint is an issue.
After all- the man expected a pristine virgin-
Alas he forgot to ascertain the YEAR of the article.
Reality is - he bought an older SECOND HAND motor vehicle
NOT a new **virgin* with
*Pristine appointments* and
Well ya know all nice and tight and new.
no make up needed cosmetically to cover any defects.
LOL

I'm just hoping you get an intelligent adjudicator OP. I've seen too many cases where it should be clear cut, but the adjudicator wants to make it fair for everyone.

I couldn't agree more, I've seen cases where the adjudicator gets right out of his/her depth. Do not presume the decision will be made by someone who knows something about classic cars.

I thought that too.
Some old nana adjudicator (no offence to adjudicators in general) might be intimidated by his vocabulary, which is why I'd ask him to 'dumb it down a bit' in person.
P.S. If it looks like it's not going in your favor, plead ignorance. After all, you couldnt understand what it was he wanted, could you!

Speaking from experience get as many third parties involved even the WOF inspector or AA inspector pay them the hourly rate to attend the hearing if you can.

Any intelligent person who happens to "have a way with words", knows to use a more simple word if more suitable. This person seems to be relying on intimidating someone by his so called superiority in use of language and. if that is the basis of his case, then the bottom line is he simply doesn't have one.

You poor person what a numpty that guy is problem with NZ now is people think that they can do things like request their money back after nine months use of a 1968 classic car brought sight unseen with wof and reg with a previous AA check from a private seller

Far out! I had to google some of the words to find out & understand what they meant.I must have been the only one cos all you lot never mentioned anything & made out like you understood it all.lol

"Respondent's balmy shuffle"Thats cool.I'm gonna use that one in the future.

I wasn't going to but things are now getting somewhat bizarre.

I have been requested to submit my info to the court and cc the applicant. He replies directly to me.

With this reply I requested to place it with my submissions and also requested that he stop emailing me directly. He has since emailed me again. I will post that one later.

Right now I am heading to the police to see if they can get him to stop. It's not threatening but is becoming fairly serious abuse.

Here's the first one.

Can understand your desperation but 'fraid MTA can't save ya Phil. Besides being bound by a different standard of proof they actually suggested pursuing claim via Disputes Tribunal or MTA mediation process and so obviously didn't consider their automatic time-determinate even remotely relevant to adjudicating relevant claim. No, all the straw clasping, histrionics, short-story telling and cloying martyrdom don't count for nought where you're headed. It's a domain of forced judiciousness 'n sanity where defrocking beguiling sleight-of-hand manipulators are par for the proverbial course. They strip away all the additives, sauces, condiments etc and leave you with the natural organic raw ingredients. (How do you like ya burgers Phil:) And not only do they care not a jot for irrelevancies such spousal fashion sense they tend to wonder why someone would seek to obscure simple key imperatives amongst a litany of unmitigated obfuscating nonsense.

Now wot to do with this email .!! How can it perhaps be manipulated to advantage .! See wot I mean! Instinctive. Dendrites already formed in the cerebellum. Absolutely tragic.

Cheers
G

Goto the police and media with this even FAIRGO might be intrested put this guy in his place once and for all.Dont mess around with him as he's obviously quite vindictive and has lots of time to waste.

Am I reading that post right! He says "seek MTA mediation"! If so he's more full of it than I thought. MTA are only available to mediate on sales between MTA members and the buyer. MTA don't do any "non MTA dealer" mediation let alone private sales. They are not interested in private sales. They recomend the public buy from MTA Dealers only. This guys nuts and his ranting e-mails can only be good for you at a tribunal.