Sold car, engine damage 5hrs later

[jmargelo]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Pa

I sold my highly modified car and five hours later the new owner called complaining of a knocking sound and poor performance. It was determined that the crankshaft bearings were severely worn. The engine only has 8,000 miles on it after being built by a performance shop. I made the buyer fully aware of all modifications to the car before he purchased it. I was not aware of any damage to the cars engine prior to selling it, and I had the car at the same shop the previous week to have an oil leak fixed, timing belt replaced, and general inspection of the engine. The engine had a 1-year warranty from the shop that has not yet expired.

The car was taken back to the same shop by the new owner, and the shop is charging him $1,800 to fix the engine. The new owner is threatening me with a lawyer to force me to pay the bill. Is this an empty threat, or will I likely have to pay the bill if I am taken to court? Who is responsible for the bill?

Thanks,
Joe

 

[LK.]

If a court determines that the seller knew about the problem before the sale, then the seller is responsible.

There is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that will indicate to a judge that you knew the engine had issues. Oil leaks, timing belt replacement, and overall inspection are not the sort of thing that one would find on an engine with "only 8000" miles on it, yet you had all of this done the week before it sold.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

If a court determines that the seller knew about the problem before the sale, then the seller is responsible.

There is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence that will indicate to a judge that you knew the engine had issues. Oil leaks, timing belt replacement, and overall inspection are not the sort of thing that one would find on an engine with "only 8000" miles on it, yet you had all of this done the week before it sold.

Excuse ME?????
Would you like to try that again?

 

[LK.]

Nope. I'd rather watch you correct me. That's more fun.

 

[jmargelo]

Excuse ME?????
Would you like to try that again?

You are saying he is wrong, so what is the correct answer?

I spoke with the shop that did the work yesterday, and they said there was no indication of this sort of problem with the engine last week and that there is no way I could have known about it. They also said that this could've been the result of excessive engine speed and abuse of the engine.

Because there was no sign of this problem before and it happened suddenly, I am inclined to believe that the engine was severely abused by its new owner during the short time that he had the car. To me, this thought puts me in the clear, but I would like the opinion of someone more familiar with law.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

You are saying he is wrong, so what is the correct answer?

I spoke with the shop that did the work yesterday, and they said there was no indication of this sort of problem with the engine last week and that there is no way I could have known about it. They also said that this could've been the result of excessive engine speed and abuse of the engine.

Because there was no sign of this problem before and it happened suddenly, I am inclined to believe that the engine was severely abused by its new owner during the short time that he had the car. To me, this thought puts me in the clear, but I would like the opinion of someone more familiar with law.

And THAT is the point. The buyer had every opportunity to have the complete car checked by his own mechanic and walk away if there had been something wrong.

Once the car is out of your control, you cease having legal liability unless the buyer can prove fraud. In the case of fraud, we're not talking about 'must have been something wrong' but an overt act such as rice in the transmission fluid to help the transmission run smooth for a short time.

Remember the term "Buyer Beware". It will serve you well

 

[jmargelo]

Thank you!!