Just bought first tractor and got ripped off

[ruffdog]

When a private party wants you to sign a "as is" statement, get a mechanic to inspect the item or walk away.

 

[aczlan]

When a private party wants you to sign a "as is" statement, get a mechanic to inspect the item or walk away.

Any time I sell something, it says that its sold "As-Is-Where-Is" and it says that they are required to remove it from the premises right away.
Haven't had any complaints about it and I also use it when buying stuff for the farm.
I also put pictures of the item on the bill of sale, so there is no question about what is being sold.

Aaron Z

 

[Threepoint]

Every body always tries to say that an 'as is' sale means you, the buyer, are screwed no matter what, but this is not the case. There is such a thing as 'concealment' in the law, as in 'lying about, or failure to disclose, a known problem'.
[snip]

+1 on this. Selling a piece of equipment "As Is" and with "No Warranty" is not a defense against fraud. Also, statements made by the seller after the sale can absolutely be germane, because they may be probative of what he knew at the time of sale. Here we know that the seller affirmatively represented at the outset that the tractor was "in good condition". He also admits that he knew about the rewelding/brazing of the cracked housing prior to the sale and did not disclose it. We also know that the repair had been covered up with gasket maker and painted. If this appears to be recent, it allows an inference by a finder of fact that there was active concealment of a known material defect.

 

[jeff9366]

Caveat Emptor, Buyer Beware, is the common law principle.

In order to litigate this, it would start with a $4,000 attorney's retainer.

The Buyer could have the attorney juggle for awhile, but would not get anything except a supplemental closing invoice from the attorney. Buyer paid $8,000. Buyer has a tractor with some value.

The fact is, Buyer did not perform due diligence.

You can het and you can hut, but Buyer did not perform due diligence.

 

[LD1]

I agree that "IF" the information presented by the seller is accurate, then yes, the seller could be held liable for fraud. But prooving and collecting proves more hassle than its worth most times.

And what I mean by the "IF".......is yes, the OP has texts that proves the seller knew of the repair. But what we cannot prove at this moment......is weather the seller disclosed that information or not. And how to quantify if the repair significantly lowers the value......and being able to prove that the seller "though" it was significant.

For all we know, the seller could have verbally told the OP about the crack and repair. That is something that cannot be proven unless admitted in writing. A text of the seller saying something like " Oh I forgot to tell you about that". OTherwise the seller can simple say in court " I told him about that when he was looking the machine over" Then its sellers word against buyers.......and in that case, AS-IS will prevail.

It could also have been a repair that was made 10 years ago......and not been an issue since. Its a 14 year old tractor with a little oil drip, and a proper solid repair. Maybe the seller though it insignificant?

You have to PROVE that the seller intentionally tried to deceive the buyer, and PROVE that the seller though the damage/repair significantly effected the value, and you have to PROVE that the seller failed to tell (even verbally) the buyer of such repair.

ALL are very hard to prove, if not impossible based on the current information we have.

Now do I personally feel that the OP got deceived by the seller....absolutely. But my feeling/opinion doesnt matter in a court of law. It sucks.....but you have a steep uphill battle if you want to persue the matter in court and get a judgment in favor of the buyer

 

[Rock knocker]

In order to litigate this, it would have to start with a $4,000 attorney's retainer. Caveat Emptor, Buyer Beware, is the common law principle.

The Buyer could have the attorney juggle for awhile, but would not get anythings except a closing invoice from the attorney.

Why do you say that? I don't know about Fanning Springs, Gilchirst County, North-Central Florida, but almost the entire rest of the country has a thing called small claims court. For such a situation as this, that would be the appropriate place to sue.

 

[Rock knocker]

You have to PROVE that the seller intentionally tried to deceive the buyer, and PROVE that the seller though the damage/repair significantly effected the value, and you have to PROVE that the seller failed to tell (even verbally) the buyer of such repair.

ALL are very hard to prove, if not impossible based on the current information we have.

Unless the Judge reads the text message:thumbdown:

 

[SPYDERLK]

I'm just worried about the stress that area takes since the tractor has a front loader. The crack is about 4" behind the bell housing.

Do you see a crack in the weld? ... I dont in the pics. The leak may be just from some porosity within an otherwise strong fix. If so, you may just have a leak to stop. Forget JB weld either way. Nothing will give you enough strength, but if its just a leak look for oil tolerant sealers for tight porosity. -- Then do a clean up and fix in place. Do not use Brake Kleen because it leaves a difficult to remove residue in the metal that will degrade the adhesive as the casting warms up in use. Acetone or alcohol followed by thorough drying with a hair dryer will be much better.

 

[Midniteoyl]

Well, there are 2 things that can happen.. 3 if you count failing to prove anything.

IF the seller admits he 'forgot' or even didnt stress the problem hard enough (mumbled it..), he could be liable for repairs, or a partial refund to bring the price in line with the new value. As said, this is usually hard to prove unless you have documentation proving that you asked and the seller denied. In this case, the OP has the seller admitting 'he forgot to tell'. Thats a pretty big thing to 'forget'.

The other is IF you can prove, or the judge believes, that the seller intentionally misled the OP during the sale of the tractor in order to either sale something that an otherwise reasonable buyer would not have bought, or, to avoid having to sale the tractor at a lower price than other comparable tractors, then the OP could ask that ALL the monies involved be returned and the sale canceled. The judge also then can levy additional fines on top, depending on the law.

Of course, actually collecting on any rewards in your favor is a entirely different matter.

 

[roadhunter]

Unless the Judge reads the text message:thumbdown:

If only it were that simple.