Young man buys a car for 94 thousand dirhams and discovers that the seller has tampered with the odometer

The Al Ain Court of First Instance has ruled to reject a lawsuit filed by a young man who bought a car for AED 94,000 and discovered tampering with its odometer. The court noted that the plaintiff bought the vehicle from the defendant when it was used and that he should have inspected it before concluding the sale contract, especially since the attached certificate from the Drivers Licensing Department showed that there was an inspection that revealed tampering with the kilometer odometer.

In detail, a young man filed a lawsuit against another, demanding that he be obligated to cancel a car sale contract, return the amount, and oblige him to pay compensation in the amount of 20 thousand dirhams as a result of the fraud committed by the defendant, in addition to fees and expenses, indicating that he bought a vehicle from the defendant through the bank for a price of 94 thousand, and it became clear to him that he had been deceived by the defendant after he discovered tampering with the vehicle’s odometer, and reducing the distance traveled, without the defendant disclosing this at the time of sale.

For its part, the court explained in the grounds of its ruling that according to the Civil Transactions Law, “a sale is an exchange of non-cash property for cash property, provided that the item sold is known to the buyer in a manner that negates gross ignorance,” noting that the plaintiff is demanding the cancellation of the sale contract and the return of the amount paid, in addition to compensation for the material and moral damages suffered by him due to the malfunctions that the car suffered.

The court pointed out that it was evident from reviewing the papers that the plaintiff had purchased the vehicle from the defendant, and the defects for which he was demanding the cancellation of the contract were defects that could be observed, especially when purchasing the vehicle, as the plaintiff had purchased the vehicle from the defendant while it was in use and he should have inspected the vehicle before concluding the sales contract, especially since the attached certificate from the Drivers Licensing Department showed that there was an inspection that revealed tampering with the kilometer meter, but the plaintiff had purchased the vehicle without an inspection according to his statement, and thus he had accepted to purchase the vehicle in the condition it was in at the time of the contract and with the damages on which he relied to cancel the contract, and the lawsuit was filed without a valid basis, and the court ruled to reject the lawsuit and oblige the plaintiff to pay the expenses.