Argument over condition of $65,000 Bentley ends in disputes tribunal ruling
Tuesday, 27 February 2018
An expensive gift from a son to his father turned into a legal nightmare for a Rotorua man.
Thomas Hayes had always wanted a Bentley, and in February 2017 he was delighted to receive a 2007 Bentley Continental Flying Spur from his son, Kerry Hayes.
His son, who lives in Dubai, paid $65,000 for the vehicle. He then had a friend check it out and deliver it from Auckland to Rotorua.
But what started out as a dream come true quickly soured, with the saga finally ending in the Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal early this year.
**READ MORE:
* The five silliest luxury car options
* Why the BMW 7-series is our top luxury car of the year
* Bentley reveals restyled Continental GT luxury coupe**
A week after Thomas Hayes received the car, things started going wrong, he said.
'The entire suspension needed to be replaced so we went ahead and did that. Then a lot more problems started to emerge.'
The car had a list of other issues, including two perished suspension airbags and a faulty transmission.
According to tribunal documents released this month, Hayes tried to return the car to the seller, Hitchcock Wholesale Limited, in Auckland.
However, managing director Alex Hitchcock refused to take the car back.
Before the disputes tribunal, Thomas and Kerry Hayes claimed the sale had breached a guarantee of acceptable quality.
Hitchcock did not appear in court to argue the Hayes' allegations. The documents said he claimed to have a chronic illness, but had not provided any evidence of that.
Hitchcock said on Tuesday he had bought the car from a dealer in Hamilton and had driven it a short time. He wasn't aware of any of the car's issues.
'I'm genuinely shocked. My own mechanic looked at the car before I bought it.'
Hitchcock said he believed he had done everything he could to check the Bentley prior to the Hayes' purchase.
But the tribunal's assessor disagreed, saying the faults found on the car were not what a purchaser would reasonably expect a 10-year-old luxury vehicle that had travelled a little more than 71,000km to have.
Hitchcock disputed that, saying Bentleys were not the same as a family hatchback.
'I don't agree it had excessive wear and tear. It's a very heavy, expensive car.'
The tribunal ruled in the Hayes' favour, finding the faults breached the acceptable quality guarantee.
Hitchcock was ordered to pay $68,275 to Hayes to cover the refund of the vehicle and the costs Thomas Hayes had racked up in getting its faults assessed, transporting and storing it.
Hitchcock was also ordered to pay $500 in costs to the Crown.
Hayes said the ordeal had put him off Bentleys, and he would not be buying a replacement.