Can Small Claims Court Rule to Reverse a Private Party Sale

**cenvally** · 05-05-2011, 01:27 PM

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: California
Hello. I purchased a used vehicle based on wording in an ad and what was told to me when I met seller. Cash. Next day found out multiple lies were told about ownership status and condition of vehicle. Seller has told me to pound sand. I puchased based on these lies. I want to reverse the deal, give back car, get my money back. Can I do this in small claims, or must I keep the car and ask for $$ only?

jk · 05-05-2011, 01:36 PM

from what I have found, Cal SCC allows for injunctive relief.

based on what you have stated, you have not shown where you would have a right to demand the rescission of the sale with the possible exception of the ownership issue. That is pretty simple though; if the seller did not have the authority to sell the vehicle to you, there is no option but to rescind the deal. If he had authority to sell it to you, it's yours.

**cenvally** · 05-05-2011, 02:02 PM

"if the seller did not have the authority to sell the vehicle to you"

Seller stated he was doing registered/titled owner a favor by selling car for him as a favor. After transaction details were realized the Registered titled/owner stated to me the Seller bought car from him days earlier. Looks like Seller wanted to dodge transfer fees?

add: What defines "authority to sell" in this case?

jk · 05-05-2011, 02:29 PM

Seller stated he was doing registered/titled owner a favor by selling car for him as a favor. After transaction details were realized the Registered titled/owner stated to me the Seller bought car from him days earlier. Looks like Seller wanted to dodge transfer fees?

Huh?

It sounds like the guy you bought it from was trying to do a pass through sale which is illegal unless you are a dealer. If the guy you bought it from had actually purchased the car from the titled owner, he must register it in his name first. If he was acting as the agent of the titled owner, then the paperwork would have to reflect that.

whatever contract, receipt, whatever you have to memorialize this sale; whose name is listed as seller; the guy you got the car from or the guy whose name is on the title?

**cenvally** · 05-05-2011, 02:44 PM

I think Sellers intent was to have records show he was not in the loop. I can PM more detail if you like, I'd rather not get too specific to the world at this stage. Either way, Thanks for the feedback.

jk · 05-05-2011, 02:54 PM

I don't do behind the scenes advice.

basically, what do you have that shows who you bought the car from? I believe California has some big fancy official sales document they at least suggest, if not outright require to be used. Was any such contract used?

did the titled owner fill one of these out (as required by law to be filed within 5 days of the sale)?

http://dmv.ca.gov/online/nrl/welcome.htm

basically, with this statement:

After transaction details were realized the Registered titled/owner stated to me the Seller bought car from him days earlier.

the person you bought the car from did not have the authority to sell it to you, at least in the manner as he did.

**cenvally** · 05-06-2011, 11:54 AM

Talked to a SCC advisor. Sounds like the answer to my initial question is yes as jk indicated. Will be filing against Seller and Owner. Any further input/tips on CA SCC appreciated.