I'd be amenable to that usually, but not in the case of a person-to-person deal as described. If he'd been mislead by a dealership, I'd work with him to preserve the reputation and goodwill. Dealings between individuals depend heavily on "caveat emptor." It was the buyer's responsibility to make sure the car was what he wanted, not the sellers. There's no reason for Mark and his friends to make more of an effort to protect his interest than he was willing to put forth himself.

And honestly, I see as many 100% original 356s for sale as I do "rare" Guards Red 944s; some people have different ideas as to what constitutes "original" and "rare" and you have to make certain you're both on the same page before you pay. Spending close to $30k sight unseen is foolhardy, imo.

Emanuel

 

Glen,

I agree that a refund would be fair, if the buyer bears the expense of shipping the car back to Maryland. However, our representation of the car's condition was never made with any 100% guarantee. I made very clear that my knowledge of the car's condition was fairly superficial. The buyer was also aware of the fact that the true owner of the car is not 100% with his mental capacity. The owner was willing to give the buyer time to inspect the car, but the buyer rushed things. He should have made the effort to get the car inspected prior to purchase.

 

It's been like that. When the Kahn's are on the car I flip the avatar pic over and reverse it. Notice that the gas cap is on the wrong side on the Kahn pic.
The rear turn signals are still amber in that pic also.

The name change is a long story.

Sorry for the hijack.

 

Pete you are beyond my small brain. I was just happy I noticed the name change. I bet somebody sued you over 944Pete or you had a stalker.

I agree with epbrown. Whos to say the old dude with alzheimers wasnt describing the car as he knew it to be. Sometimes owners dont even know what they have. Even old guys with their mind going whove owned the car forever. And I agree again with epbrown that everybodys definition of terms is different. My definition is "fair condition" is most peoples "excellent/mint condition".

The bottom line though is as a consumer you have to show some personal responsibility for yourself at least a minimum level. I dont think this guy even did that. You dont read an ad in the classifieds for an E-Type Jag that says "Great car, great condition", and just call the guy up and say "its great right?" and he says, yeah, and when you get the car you find that it isnt great.

It doesnt sound like this buyer asked if all these things were original. I mean, he even complained about a side mirror not existing. Didnt he even see a photo of the car? And if he didnt ask for one, well, dang, the laws of bartering, accomodation, and compromise can only protect you so much before you have to show even the slightest amount of personal initiative to protectyour interests. I dont think thats too much to expect. I agree. Deception is wrong even when the law pretty much says "caveat emptor". That said I dont see purposeful deception here at all. If I knew I was buying a vintage 356 from a dude losing his skull jelly, you can bet Id be seeing for myself because Im not taking someones word for iit if they are losing their mind -- literally.

 

This is pretty much what I expected to be the case (and was going to ask if you did not verify).

Here is my take for what it's worth:

You represented the car to the best of your ability and represented yourself and the state of the seller accurately. With that disclosure there is risk to the buyer if they choose not to have anything independently verified. I don't believe for a moment that the buyer purchased the car based upon any false information.

Furthermore, what I personally believe happened is that the buyer rushed things trying to get the car before anyone else and accepted the risk that it was not as he hoped. I've done that before, for instance buying with a "buy it now" on eBay without verification of certain facts taking a chance that what I'm buying is not 100% to my expectation, but the deal being good enough that I wanted to be first. I've occasionally been burned and occasionally got a killer deal. That is the risk a buyer takes trying to be first. I 100% believe this is what happened. If the car actually was 100% as he hoped, it probably would have been worth twice what he paid (or more).

It's my opinion that the seller owes the buyer nothing and your honor is intact. The buyer took a chance and that's that. I assume he's fully grown and of legal age. He's a big boy and took a chance. He still probably got more than what he paid for. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

So what lessons have been learned here?

1. Do not buy a car sight unseen especially when it is a 40 year old car and you are spending close to $30k.
2. When speaking for someone else and lending a helping hand, always remember : "No good deed goes unpunished".
You helped this acquaintance out and now you are in a bit of a jam. What could you have done differently? Perhaps done your best to verify what he said was true and look at the car yourself. Granted, you did say you are no paint expert, but at least you could have looked...what if the car was an obvious respray (everyone knows what I mean..a truly ****ty job) and you spoke for this guy without verifying what he said? You would REALLY be up **** creek! However, when it all boils down to the nitty gritty, the buyer was a moron for buying the car without any inspection whatsoever. I forgot the greek saying for buyer beware so I will exit with this:

Carpe *******....

something like that...

 

I concur with Geo above.

However, reading the underlying tone in the buyer's email at the beginning of the thread, I have a feeling that this isn't over. Be prepared to get a complaint/summons in the mail.

 

I gotta say, i really agree with whats been said about this guy. He must be just as mentally distracted as the original owner of the car! National level concours???? Ok, this guy must have been out of his mind to not physically inspect the car!!!! There's stuff you look for that most people are not even aware of on their own cars!!! I hope he either just returns the car and lets you resell, end of story, or he keeps it and shuts up. I would hate to see this turn into a dilema. If he's not bright enough to inspect a 40+ year old car on his own, i doubt he would do too well at the shows anyways!

Rant off. Sorry you got stuck in this!

 

Paint that 36 years or 16 years old is probably hard to tell apart. And this is not any kind of proof.

If I remember correctly the hinges were mounted on the cars when painted. I'll have to dig through some books at home but if something like this makes him regret the buy he should've checked the car out in person.
We had an email exchange regarding now critical originality was to me with this purchase -- I have included it at the end of this message. My intent in purchasing the car was to show it in Preservation Class at a national level, which is impossible given the fact that the paint is not original.

What a moron.

 

Mark,

Not your fault. You did not intentionaly mislead anyone regarding the car. I have to agree with what has been posted, knowing that my definition of terms (such as "perfect paint, perfect interior, no rust, and small oil leaks") varies greatly with others' definitions of the same(I am talking about A-body Mopars here), even if a seller told me "car is 100% original as delivered" I would NOT take his word for it without inspecting the car myself or having it inspected. To buy any car in such a manner is foolish, to buy a car which you are planning to show at a national level in an extremely discriminating class in such a manner is asinine. Hope it all works out.

 

The guy took the risk in rushing things and he knows it. Buyer's regret is "too bad" here in Ca. since there is no "cooling off" period especially if the car is sold in "as is" condition". I can say I was told that enron is worth $1000 a share due to what someone told someone else but if I bought it, I got it. I wouldn't send $3000 let alone $30k sight unseen unless its something worth over $10k or more and that the parts are worth as much as I paid for it.

 

If the guy thought he was getting an original 356 for $30K, who was taking advantage of whom? If he can afford to risk not seeing the car for himself, he won't be hurt reselling it as is. Last of all, like Shabba said and I do frequently, "no good deed goes unpunished".

 

Hehe. Touche'.

 

I wouldn't take the car back. No way, no how. And I'm a firm believer in honorable with everyone. Honor has been served. He knew the score going into this. No, he didn't have intimate knowledge of the car, but he knew the conditions he was buying it under and elected NOT to have a PPI. I have zero sympathy for him. Hell, I bought my Infiniti G20 with a dead engine for $1,750 from St Louis and I had two people look at it and one sent me pictures before I bought it!

If this car was in the condition he ultimately hoped it was in, it should have been at the Barret-Jackson auction instead of the way it was sold (not that it matters to this discussion).

 

Thanks for all of the comments! I appreciate all of the opinions.

I'll update after the situation is resolved.

Mark