i traded my car for another car and we both signed the titles over but now he is asking for his vehicle back because according to him its no good but i clearly stated the cons of the vehicle and he test drove it can he get his car back or is it legal ...

Jurisdiction: 

Area of Law: 

Question: 

i traded my car for another car and we both signed the titles over but now he is asking for his vehicle back because according to him its no good but i clearly stated the cons of the vehicle and he test drove it can he get his car back or is it legally mine

Selected Answer: 

DakotaLegal's picture

 

 
Someone having “buyer’s remorse” usually isn’t enough to reverse a deal. So, the odds are that the trade is done and ownership settled. Now, having said that, there’s always a chance that the other person may still take you to small claims court, and claim you (somehow) “misrepresented” the trade. You’ll need to show up in court if you are sued, even though they seem to have a weak case, and make several points in your defense, which should protect your rights to keep the bargain. You can get more familiar with the way a small claims court suit would work, here… http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/.
 
Defending Against Charges of “Misrepresentation”
 
California has some protections for “sales” of used cars, under the Song-Beverly Consumer Protection Act. There were also new rules requiring vehicle history, effective on July 1, 2012: these rules, though, probably do not apply to your private, non-dealer trade. First, because the trade was apparently between two private parties---which means I’m making the assumption you aren’t a licensed used car dealer. Second (even if you are a dealer), the transaction was a trade rather than a sale. If there’s any dispute that you may be a used car dealer, you can review those rules here: http:// law.justia. com/codes /california/2010/civ/1792-1795.8.html. Finally, it’s fair to note that the lack of a written agreement showed that you were both taking what you got without any promises except good title.
 
I’d keep a careful balance with both showing there was no misrepresentation, and that you both shared the same risk. Besides, with all the technology available today, the idea of being careful with what you purchase is just good sense. For example, you might note that National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVTIS) can be used to track the history of every vehicle that’s sold. This makes it easier for anyone to check what they are getting.
 
Being Sure You Didn’t Make Any Special Promises
 
Since small claims courts tend to be more informal, they sometimes are also more flexible in terms of what’s “fair.” For example, it’s possible that you might be accused of taking advantage of the other person: are they elderly, or have a physical or emotional disability? To anticipate this possibility, you might be able to have a witness who watched the transaction and can testify that the person had no apparent difficulty in understanding and accepting the trade.
 
Showing Fair Trade
 
Since there did not seem to be any question in the other’s mind about a fair value, you can also illustrate this by getting some written, business records showing a basically fair trade. It does not have to be your position that it’s a precise trade: maybe, for example, your vehicle was worth more, even with the supposed “deficiencies” or problems. It is even possible that your own purchase has not worked out so well: you might have an expert available if you go to court to show the costs you’ve invested in the car you got. The difference is, you’re aware that a deal is a deal.
 
 


  • Finally, you’ll want to contact California DMV and make sure that the other party files for a transfer. Sometimes, a party will try to refuse to take title. Check to be sure the paperwork has been done properly to complete the transfer: http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr32.htm.

All Comments

DakotaLegal's picture

 

 
Someone having “buyer’s remorse” usually isn’t enough to reverse a deal. So, the odds are that the trade is done and ownership settled. Now, having said that, there’s always a chance that the other person may still take you to small claims court, and claim you (somehow) “misrepresented” the trade. You’ll need to show up in court if you are sued, even though they seem to have a weak case, and make several points in your defense, which should protect your rights to keep the bargain. You can get more familiar with the way a small claims court suit would work, here… http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/.
 
Defending Against Charges of “Misrepresentation”
 
California has some protections for “sales” of used cars, under the Song-Beverly Consumer Protection Act. There were also new rules requiring vehicle history, effective on July 1, 2012: these rules, though, probably do not apply to your private, non-dealer trade. First, because the trade was apparently between two private parties---which means I’m making the assumption you aren’t a licensed used car dealer. Second (even if you are a dealer), the transaction was a trade rather than a sale. If there’s any dispute that you may be a used car dealer, you can review those rules here: http:// law.justia. com/codes /california/2010/civ/1792-1795.8.html. Finally, it’s fair to note that the lack of a written agreement showed that you were both taking what you got without any promises except good title.
 
I’d keep a careful balance with both showing there was no misrepresentation, and that you both shared the same risk. Besides, with all the technology available today, the idea of being careful with what you purchase is just good sense. For example, you might note that National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVTIS) can be used to track the history of every vehicle that’s sold. This makes it easier for anyone to check what they are getting.
 
Being Sure You Didn’t Make Any Special Promises
 
Since small claims courts tend to be more informal, they sometimes are also more flexible in terms of what’s “fair.” For example, it’s possible that you might be accused of taking advantage of the other person: are they elderly, or have a physical or emotional disability? To anticipate this possibility, you might be able to have a witness who watched the transaction and can testify that the person had no apparent difficulty in understanding and accepting the trade.
 
Showing Fair Trade
 
Since there did not seem to be any question in the other’s mind about a fair value, you can also illustrate this by getting some written, business records showing a basically fair trade. It does not have to be your position that it’s a precise trade: maybe, for example, your vehicle was worth more, even with the supposed “deficiencies” or problems. It is even possible that your own purchase has not worked out so well: you might have an expert available if you go to court to show the costs you’ve invested in the car you got. The difference is, you’re aware that a deal is a deal.
 
 


  • Finally, you’ll want to contact California DMV and make sure that the other party files for a transfer. Sometimes, a party will try to refuse to take title. Check to be sure the paperwork has been done properly to complete the transfer: http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr32.htm.