Jump to content
SAU Community

Apparantley A Nismo Built Engine

R33-RB26DETT

By R33-RB26DETT,
in Victoria

 Share

Recommended Posts

Taso84 Mentor

Taso84

Posted
Posted
I dont think people need to go that far. No one lost heaps of money or any thing.

I remember sub zero when they where open in qld the place got shot up or some thing on those lines.

Maybe nobody lost heaps of money but the way i look at these things, if somebody tries to con/fraud you, just because they didnt get away with it doesn't make it less bad.

If you read the entire thread you will see that HArry is not lying, he simply put up a question asking his fellow SAU members to help him work out whether Jim was stooging him or not. Jim has blatently denied making a false claim even in the face of overwhelming evidence (ie his ad on car sales).

Allegations of what offer was made for the car and/or bad customer service are irrelevant and off-topic. Who cares what offer was made on the car and who cares if he treated a potential customer badly (which he has every right to do). The point here is the car is falsely advertised.

  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Taso84 Mentor

Taso84

Posted
Posted (edited)
Teach a dog a trick, does it make it smarter or is it the same dog who now knows a trick?

Ponder that.

The fact that anybody is seriously engaged in this off-topic discussion itself speaks volumes...

Edited by Taso84
alphabeatsco Enthusiast

alphabeatsco

Posted
Posted

just to add a bit of flame to this thread.

about 2-3 years ago, i was also in the same boat as Harry, nearly got stooged by this prick.

selling a dodgy s15 to me...luckily i was smart enough to stay away. The car clearly had leaks and when it came to question time. He was like which jap cars dont have accidents and leaks? its all good. LOL. this was like 24k car. If you look carefully, a while ago, on carsales, he's also trying to sell a 180sx.

That car was fully modified, with cage, removed airbags, etc. He still claims it's all road legal and he can put airbags and shit back on...

The car was on sale for like a year, last time i looked, it was still there.

R33GTRKid Experienced

R33GTRKid

Posted
Posted (edited)
Oh. So grammar and spelling is a measure of intelligence now? :blink:

In terms of this thread, looks like Jim has been caught out.

However, in terms of the deal with Harry, who knows who is lying.

And there is no legal case against Jim, not in terms of the actual deal, or advertisement anyway (i.e if he argues mistake.)

So no point trying to scare him in this regard, that said, his business reputation has obviously now been tarnished.

Mate STFU you have no idea, whether there is a breach of section 52 is whether the statement is misleading or deceptive or likely to be mislead or deceive the consumer, intention pays no part and the lack of intention to mislead or deceive is certainly not a defense!

So before you start saying there is no legal case to answer, ask a lawyer,and he will tell you this guy is f**ked in the arse if the ACCC got wind of it or if some else decided to commence legal proceedings against him. The relevant facts are:

1. his conduct was in trade or commerce,

2. it was false, it was misleading and that is that.

Loss is not even a factor!

PS I secretly believe Jim is gay, I have never EVER seen so many references to gay, poof, ask f**king etc in one thread from one poster!

Edited by R33GTRKid
Beer Baron Grand Master

Beer Baron

Posted
Posted

I'm all turned around on this. I can see it from jims point of view. he just mis-translated "thorn rose" as "full nismo S tune upgrade package from nismo omori factory". it happens to the best of us...

domo arigato mr robato.

N1GTR Grand Master

N1GTR

Posted
Posted
about my spelling , well i didnt go to uni , unlike you may did !

Wow this thread has taken off. Surely this quote is the best one though.

Not sure about Victorian schools, but in NSW we learn to spell during primary school, not uni.

Ronin 09 Grand Master

Ronin 09

Posted
Posted
Wow this thread has taken off. Surely this quote is the best one though.

Not sure about Victorian schools, but in NSW we learn to spell during primary school, not uni.

we're not quite as advanced as you are up there in NSW...

IOWNU Grand Master

IOWNU

Posted
Posted
Mate STFU you have no idea, whether there is a breach of section 52 is whether the statement is misleading or deceptive or likely to be mislead or deceive the consumer, intention pays no part and the lack of intention to mislead or deceive is certainly not a defense!

So before you start saying there is no legal case to answer, ask a lawyer,and he will tell you this guy is f**ked in the arse if the ACCC got wind of it or if some else decided to commence legal proceedings against him. The relevant facts are:

1. his conduct was in trade or commerce,

2. it was false, it was misleading and that is that.

Loss is not even a factor!

PS I secretly believe Jim is gay, I have never EVER seen so many references to gay, poof, ask f**king etc in one thread from one poster!

Generally speaking, when someone wishes to contest a legal issue, you attack the logic presented therein and not the person. The approach you have taken

makes you look unprofessional and undermines the credibility of your statement.

LOL. Mate, he has not sold any item, valuable consideration has not been exchanged for the benifit received (i.e the car.)

So what conduct was false and misleading? The provisions you refer to apply when a good has been exchanged, i.e if i buy a car with a expecting it to be a s-tune engine, but it turns out to be a standard engine. Key word= Buy, where a deposit can constitute the finalisation of the deal.

In terms of the add being misleading WITHOUT the provision of consideration, one can simply claim false advertising, in which case it is easy to argue mistake or error.

No need to ask a Lawyer, I am a final year law student and my dad an established barrister. :)

madbung Grand Master

madbung

Posted
Posted
The fact that anybody is seriously engaged in this off-topic discussion itself speaks volumes...

How is it off topic?

It's a response to people suggesting Jim is a moron because he has lower than average literacy skills.

The fact you've jumped in without reading and comprehending the posts preceding yours speaks volumes.

As stated earlier I'm not defending either.

My personal opinion is they're both knob ends for entirely different reasons.

Get over it, get on with it and stop whining like little bitches over a non-event.

SLED Grand Master

SLED

Posted
Posted

lol Jim has all of SAU wanting to stab each other now :verymad:

fyi, misrepresentation of a sale can be an issue if the sale does go ahead and the customer doesn't receive what was advertised, otherwise he can argue the ad was placed with errors.

I think we should leave the poor fella's grammar & grampar out of this.......I'm actually starting to feel sorry for the poor bugger :wub:

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...