Cancelled Bentley Bentayga bought by a distance sale contract

Distance selling regulations were brought in to increase retail opportunities beyond the geographic limitations of the trading premises, but also while protecting interests of consumers from either mis-selling or mis-describing goods when buying online, and they have a 14-day cooling-off period.

These issues are at the centre of this case involving the purchase of a late model Bentley Bentayga from a prestige car dealership, which the customer tried to cancel soon after delivery, which was refused.

Our Instructions

Stormcatcher Law advised Mr A of his legal rights in relation to distance selling law and the 14-day cooling-off period, as well as car mis-describing and mis-selling.

It was clear from the advertisement, the sales invoice and the communications with the dealership that it was not aware of the rules around distance sales and misrepresentation.

We prepared a lengthy legal opinion by way of a letter for Mr A, setting out the relevant facts, laws and the information that they should have provided to the consumer, Mr A, before concluding a distance sale.

We also explained why it is the dealer could not rely on the Autotrader disclaimer regarding the accuracy of the vehicle description, and why they were liable for mis-describing the Bentley.

The facts

In December 2024, Mr A contacted the dealership in response to its Autotrader advert for the sale of the Bentley Bentayga for just short of £86,000.

The advert stated the Bentley had a full service history and the optional “City specification” and “Touring specification” packages.

During the discussions about the Bentley, the dealership confirmed the vehicle details and that it was in excellent condition inside and out.

They also confirmed they offered a home delivery service throughout the country, which appealed to Mr A, because he lived in the South and the dealer was based in Yorkshire.

Mr A agreed over the phone to buy the car and paid the purchase price.

However, soon after delivery, it became clear that the car was not in excellent condition and did not have the factory options it was advertised with, and Mr A requested a refund, which was denied.

Distance selling rights

Stormcatcher’s Mr Harmer successfully argued the dealership had failed to provide Mr A with the information it was required to provide him when concluding a distance sale, and failed to provide him with the cancellation rights.

This constitutes an offence liable on summary conviction to a fine and extends the right to cancel the contract beyond the standard 14 days.

Mr Harmer also explained the reasons why the dealership could not argue that the Autotrader disclaimer relieved them from liability, and that the liability arises from misrepresentation.

Outcome

Eventually, the dealership accepted the legal basis of Mr A’s complaint, refunded him the purchase price together with the cost of the road tax and Stormcatcher’s fees and collected the Bentley.

Conclusion

This case serves as both a lesson to car dealers on the importance of being up to date on the legal requirements when selling cars online or over the phone, and demonstrates the interaction of several legal principles which together strengthen consumer protection.