FILE PHOTO.

Image Credit: pexels.com

An Okanagan man is on the hook for $5,000 after he misled and was untruthful about the condition of a used Volkswagen.

According to a March 3 B.C. Civil Resolution Tribunal decision, Scott Angus MacDonald sold Julie Le Gall a 2009 Volkswagen Tiguan in July 2021 after he described it on Facebook Marketplace as a "great little SUV, in great shape, super reliable, runs great and great in the snow."

He wanted $9,800 for the vehicle but settled on $9,000.

However, a week after Le Gall bought the car she discovered an oil leak.

Le Gall then took the Volkswagen to Elite Auto Centre in Kelowna where MacDonald had purchased the car and had it serviced.

They replaced a vacuum pump for $650 but said the SUV needed another $2,000 of work.

Months later with oil still leaking she took it to Vernon Volkswagen who quoted $4,500 to fix the leaks by replacing various parts.

She eventually went ahead with the repair at the cost of $4,161.

READ MORE: Multiple minor fender benders net B.C. woman $740,000

However, at some point, she found out the car's engine had been replaced six months before she bought the vehicle.

She then took MacDonald to the online small claims court arguing he'd misrepresented the condition of the vehicle and that he pay for the repairs.

The small claims court often sees disgruntled car buyers attempting to sue sellers with little success.

"The principle of 'buyer beware' generally applies to private purchases of used vehicles," the Tribunal said. "This means that buyers assume the risk that a vehicle might have significant defects. There is no common law duty for a seller to disclose known defects."

However, the Tribunal points out that a seller "cannot actively conceal or misrepresent" defects.

Le Gall argued MacDonald had misrepresented the fact that the engine had been entirely replaced six months earlier.

In the decision, Le Gall says she asked about issues with the engine and MacDonald replied "no."

MacDonald disputes this and says he was "not questioned much at all" about the car’s history.

"Faced with conflicting evidence from the parties, it is impossible to know with certainty what happened," the Tribunal ruled.

READ MORE: Kelowna gold panner sued over YouTube content

The Tribunal then weighed up who was being truthful.

"Le Gall’s evidence is more consistent with her messages to Mr. MacDonald. From the beginning, she showed a serious interest in obtaining the maintenance records and receipts. She asked for these things a second time when Mr. MacDonald initially did not address her questions," the Tribunal ruled. "I find it unlikely that Ms. Le Gall would not have asked any questions about the engine."

The Tribunal goes on to say that MacDonald didn't respond to a message about the oil leak and only got back to Le Gall months later after she sent him a formal letter asking for compensation.

"For these reasons, I find Ms. Le Gall is a more credible witness," the Tribunal ruled.

The Tribunal said MacDonald "misled" La Gall by "concealing" the information that the engine had been replaced.

MacDonald argued that the new engine had less mileage on it, but provided no evidence to support this.

"He did not explain why he did not provide this information. I find he should have been able to obtain it, given that he described Elite Auto Centre's owner as a 'close family friend,'" the Tribunal ruled.

The Tribunal ruled that the reason he didn't give out the evidence is that it would not help his case.

Le Gall also tried to get information about the new engine from Elite Auto Centre, which did the work. However, it wasn't forthcoming and refused to be involved.

"In the absence of any other explanation, I agree with Ms. Le Gall that Elite Auto Centre likely refused to provide the information because it would not help Mr. MacDonald, with whom Elite Auto Centre’s owner had a close relationship," the Tribunal ruled.

READ MORE: B.C. mover sued after billing for 8 hours travel for 1 kilometre move

It said MacDonald's had misrepresented the condition of the vehicle.

The Tribunal ordered him to pay $4,981 to cover the repair costs Le Gall had already paid, plus $300 in fees and interest.

To contact a reporter for this story, email Ben Bulmer or call (250) 309-5230 or email the editor. You can also submit photos, videos or news tips to the newsroom and be entered to win a monthly prize draw.

We welcome your comments and opinions on our stories but play nice. We won't censor or delete comments unless they contain off-topic statements or links, unnecessary vulgarity, false facts, spam or obviously fake profiles. If you have any concerns about what you see in comments, email the editor in the link above. 

News from © iNFOnews, 2023