I am new here but have a moral dilemna I want opinions on. I recently sold an old van to a nice couple of young guys who turned down my suggestion to get it checked by a mechanic before they bought it. I was honest in my knowledge of the car and what we had done to it. Nothing suggested that it would breakdown but it was 14 years old with 170,000 kilometres on it. Within one month the car stopped working and they were told it needs a new transmission, a $3000 job. They are poor young 20 somethings who scraped together the price I asked for the car ($1800). They have phoned me and although they know it is buyer beware and I don’t have any legal requirement to give them any money back, are hoping I will give them some money.
Should I and why?
No, you made an offer to get it checked. They are 20 somethings and sometimes they have to learn the hard way.
Although if you believe in karma then maybe…
Did they buy the van to tool around in or was it to start a new business?
Oh and g’day.
You are not legally obligated to give them a penny.
What you are morally obligated to is your business.
Apparently, you are asking a bunch of internet strangers their advice in hopes that we will agree with what you want to do.
So, what do you want to do?
I don’t want to sound cold-hearted, as those without money are always squeezed in situations like this, but they bought a used vehicle of uncertain credentials and then refused to spend the $100 extra to have a mechanic do a once-over on it. Honestly, i would have done that before I purchased the car. My personal response to this is a recitation of the facts, point by point, and then saying that the bill of sale specifies “As-Is” and “No Warranty Implied or Offered.”
Past that, assuming everything in your story is correct (e.g. you were upfront and honest with your knowledge, recommended a visit to a mechanic, etc) then you did all you could and gave them a price everyone thought was fair enough for the transaction to proceed.
At this point, the only reason to give them any money is to absolve yourself of your own feelings in the matter, whatever they may be. (whether is a sense of charity, responsibility, guilt, or other)
However, on the flip side I will give you advice: Admit to nothing in addition to what you said when you sold them the vehicle. Since you are using dollars and kilometers, I’m assuming that you are Canadian. Canadian laws (though varying by province) are similar to those of us yanks down south: they might be able to squeeze you in small claims proceedings if you admit, for instance, suddenly recalling a clicking sometimes when you were driving.
In this kind of situation, additional information can be twisted in court into saying that you did not provide all necessary information and defrauded them for their cash in exchange for your “junker” vehicle. Beware what you say and no matter how cordial they treat you do not go into “Friend mode” with them and start with small talk. That’ll usually get you in trouble when something slips out that they can use.
I would also recommend that if you do decide to give them money (without the legal system being involved) ensure that you have them sign a waiver of further responsibility on your part. This would be their second chance and you shouldn’t give them a third.
How likely is it that a mechanic would have detected a problem with the transmission a month before it failed?
I’m not sure how/whether it affects the answer to the OP’s question; I’m just curious.
^^^^
Good advice from Farin, IMHO.
Assuming all your info is correct, and you had no indication the tranny was about to fail, then them’s the breaks. Life isn’t always fair, and we can only control fairness with respect to the ethics of our dealings, not by trying to make up for everyone’s personal misfortunes. Ask yourself if these nice friendly folks would give you money back if the situation were reversed, or if you could even reasonably expect that they should.
OTOH, if you didn’t reveal everything you knew about the car, then you and your conscience need to have a discussion. 
Can you afford to give them the money?
If so, give! No you don’t “have” to, but only a jerk does only what he “has” to do.
No you’re not necessarily a jerk for not doing it (again, it depends not just on what you can afford, but a myriad of other factors impossible to go into in a context like this). But you can’t go wrong by being generous.
I’m assuming the OP isn’t particularly wealthy. If one is very wealthy, I’d argue one actually has an obligation to concern oneself with those less fortunate, but that’s a completely different discussion and the morality of the situation becomes a no-brainer. But what Farin and I both commented on was about what was ethical when neither party has a great deal of spare change to throw around.
Probably depends what the problem was. If he pulled the dipstick and it smelled like burnt toast, was jet black or half empty, then it needed to be looked at more closely (like pulling the pan and filter).
I heard a similar situation on Click and Clack and was surprised to hear them say (paraphrased) “It’s only been a month, take it back, give them their money back, less a few dollars if you want) and go from there. Resell it for less money and tell the new people what the mechanic said, fix it and sell it for more money or scrap it but morally you have to take it back and you know that or you wouldn’t be asking” Their words, not mine.
Personally, I’d be awfully tempted to say “What do you want me to do about it? I told you to have it looked at, I told you it was buyer beware. It was fine when you drove it away and I have no idea what you’ve been doing with it for the last 30 days (and xxx kilometers).” Keep in mind, during that time they may have had a bad mechanic work on it, they may have been hauling a trailer, they may have been driving it far rougher than they should have been.
How about this, make a compromise, call them up and say 'I thought it over, you gave me $1800 for a working van and now you’re telling me it doesn’t work. You had it for a month and I have no idea what happened during that time. Bring it back and I’ll give you $1500"
Personally, I think that sounds fair. They’re out $300 for not taking it to a mechanic like you suggested. You’ve got your old van back and you can decide what to do next.
That’s assuming you still have the money and can afford to give it back. If you don’t that’s different.
ETA, there is a third option. Offer them some money to keep it. I don’t know what the magic number is, Split it (900)? Give them $1000 back? I don’t know, but if they keep it, then it’s really not your problem. But at that point I’d type something up. Do the math, figure out what they’ve given you and make a receipt with everyone signature on it. So, if you gave them $1000 back, make a receipt that says “Van, as is, $800” with the date and names etc. Then go to the DMV and get the title switched into their name ASAP.
Unless you misrepresented or omitted something, like the maintenance, when talking to them I don’t see how you have any obligation. If you buy a 14 year old vehicle with 100k miles on it and don’t have it checked out first then you take your chances.
Nope. That rhymes with Dope, and that starts with “D”, and that stands for Don’t.
Obviously the answer to this is going to depend on your particular moral standards, but must moral codes suggest that we have an obligation to help those less fortunate than ourselves. These guys entered into a transaction with you which in itself was morally unimpeachable, but which sadly has not worked out well for them. And of course it has worked out well for you; if they paid more than the van was worth then you received more than the van was worth. And you might feel that’s a windfall to you which is not wholly unconnected with the misfortune they suffered. Yes, there misfortune was probably caused or contributed to by their decision not to have a mechanic give the van the once-over, and they, not you, are responsible for the decision. But, equally, your windfall was equally attributable to their decision. And of course their decision was itself caused by their (relative) poverty, which is itself a misfortune.
In short, these guys have suffered a misfortune. You have benefitted, at least indirectly, from their misfortune. You have a moral obligation to help those less less fortunate than yourself, and that moral obligation is perhaps a little sharper in this situation.
You should buy them a horse
I agree with this. If it were me, and I could afford to help them out, I would. If I couldn’t, I would explain that I was very sorry but there was nothing I could do.
It’s cheaper to remove a used transmission from a scrapyard and have that installed rather than buy a new one.
Just another option.
If it had run maintenance free for the next 10 years would you feel like they had an obligation to give you a couple of thousand dollars for the excellent service they received out of your old van? If not, why should the opposite be true?
I think this is a good post. I don’t envy your position, motherofthyme. Hope it works out.
I feel for the guys who bought the van from you, and if you can afford to help them out, and you want to help them out, then by all means go ahead and help them out. It would certainly be a nice thing to do.
But i don’t think you have any more moral obligation than anyone else. Yes, you sold them the van, but you were honest about its condition, and you offered them the chance (actually, made the suggestion) to get it checked out by a mechanic before they made the purchase. They chose not to do this, and unfortunately they’re now left with a van that needs some fairly expensive repairs.
I’m curious.
If the buyers came up to you, explained this situation to you, and asked you to help them out with $500 towards the repairs on their van, what would you say? You say that “You have a moral obligation to help those less less fortunate than yourself.” Well, if these guys are less fortunate than you, don’t you have the same obligation? And yet the fact is that most of us simply can’t afford to help out everyone who is less fortunate.
I’m betting that the OP isn’t rolling in cash. I could be wrong, but most people who sell old vans for $1,800 probably aren’t doing so just to make room for the new S-class Mercedes. If the OP has less money and financial security than you or me, don’t we have as much obligation to help out her customers as she does? After all, everyone has conceded that she did nothing wrong in conducting the transaction itself, and your basic position is that people are obligated to help those less fortunate.
Again, i’m not saying that the OP shouldn’t help out. But if she does, it will be true philanthropy. If she were a dealer, or someone who habitually made extra cash by buying and selling used cars, i’d be more inclined to saddle her with some moral obligation here, but that’s not the case.
The morals of the situation aren’t straightforward. Taking your story at face value, that you were completely honest with them and they turned down having a mechanic look at it, there’s still a few things here to consider.
First, I’m not a car guy, nor do I know how you drove the vehicle or it’s maintenance record. At the same time, you don’t know how they treated the car in the time since you sold it to them. What is the likelihood that the transmission was near end of life already? If so, I suspect a mechanic, with some context of the maintenance record and examining it, may well have known. OTOH, not being intimately familiar with the expected life of that transmission is, maybe it had been driven and maintained well and was long lived, or maybe it was driven hard and was unexpectedly shortlived or maybe it was right about due. These are things that complicate buying a used vehicle. Assuming you did a reasonable job maintaining it and they had an idea of where it was in it’s maintenance, then that’s something that should have been factored into the cost.
For instance, I’ve seen sellers with cars that in general ought to go for a certain amount but have had recent work down, like a new engine, new transmission, new tires, etc. ask for a little more because of that sunk cost. I’ve also seen ones that admit they need some major maintenance ask for less. I’d say that if all the maintenance was honestly represented and they were aware of it, then there’s no ethical obligation on your part, unless you come to realize you were mistaken. If not, I’d argue you do have an ethical obligation.
I would, suggest that they didn’t have it reviewed puts some of that on them. Similarly, that you don’t know how they drove it could put more of it on them. However, it is possible that your honest representation of how it was maintained and driven by you was misunderstood, as they maybe are more cautious or whatever, in which case I’d say you do bear some responsibility for the miscommunication, informed consent and all that.
OTOH, it seems to me that they’re not really blaming you for the situation, they’re more appealing to your humanity. If you trust that they didn’t mistreat the car, that it was likely going to fail regardless of who owned it, and what it’s worth in the condition of needing a new transmission, do you feel like the amount that you received for it was fair? For instance, maybe it isn’t worth all that much less even with needing a new transmission, especially if one can get one from a junkyard and install it inexpensively. If that’s the case, maybe combined with their not getting a mechanic to look at it helps even that out some, or not. At the same time, I feel like there is, or at least should be, a moral weight assigned to a well intentioned and honest deal, as it seems this was, so you shouldn’t be unfairly hurt either.
So that said, I don’t think you have a specific obligation, and I think it’s all going to be a matter of how you weigh it all up. As far as the car goes, either you can let them keep it, and keep the current value, or you can take it back and give them back the current value. And then with the rest, you can divide up based upon what you feel is the distribution of responsibility for the fault in the car and adjusted with your level of compassion.
Speaking for myself, in your situation, let’s just assuming it’s worht something like $1000 now, in which case I’d probably work out that they should have paid for a mechanic, not your fault and with the weight of the buyer beware, that probably adds an additional value of 2-300, then basically split the rest. In short, with those rough numbers, I’d probably offer them to either keep it and give them about $300 or give it back and give them about $1300.
nothing much to add from above except…
$3000 (CAD, i assume) for a transmission repair “sounds” like the 20-somethings need to find a better mechanic. (or they’re trying to rip you off). naturally not knowing all the facts, it’s impossible for me to tell.
To second the others, original poster has zero moral, ethical obligation. If poster wants to be a ‘nice guy’ (to some, perhaps a chump/rube to others?) then by all means refund the money.
there is no right answer----though i’m very wary of our cherub buyers----they’re either idiots or scammers. (Hanlon’s razor strikes again.)