To think this is a scam

[ncwtdnfs]

Posted here for traffic.

Says someone sells something, Going to use a kitten as the thing that was sold (making it up as could be outing)

Say the buyer comes back a month later saying they have since found out that the kitten needs medication and is now asking for half their money back and money for vets bills etc

Where would the seller stand?

This is made up but want to settle an argument. One person thinks the seller should pay the money, the other person thinks its stupid as going off that logic, if the kitten gets run over in 6 months time, is the seller supposed to pay to fix any injuries, once the kitten is sold it is the responsibility of the buyer?

Thanks.

I'd say its the buyer that is liable as the seller couldn't foresee that there would be issues (unless the issues were already present and the seller hid them)

'Caveat Emptor ' is what would be used in a legal situation. . (Buyer beware)

and if insurance was available then the buyer should have taken that out when they bought the item to cover other eventualities

The buyer would be responsible. The seller has no idea what could potentially happen in the future and has no control over it, so they’re not liable.

Assuming this kitten is sold via gumtree etc then it is buyer beware.

Buyer beware everytime

I bought a puppy once that after a week we noticed had walking dandruff aka mites.

We did call the breeders to let them know (who were adamant that none of their dogs had mites) but we didn’t bother trying to get money out of them as it was obvious they would fight us

Cost us £50 to treat my dog.

In this situation the buyer would have insurance.

It also depends on whether the seller was legit or whether the kittens were all poorly or likely to be poorly when sold.

If the seller knew that the kitten had cancer and didn’t declare it, then morally they’re in the wrong - but legally, I think they could argue that the seller could have taken the kitten to a vet for a check-up before buying. Just as if you bought a house without having a survey and discovered it had dry rot.

The seller has zero responsibility.

It depends if the kitten was ill when they were bought.

Seller is not responsible. Just like if I sold a car, I'm not responsible for any issues that occur in the future.

The seller has no further responsibility after the sale

Buyer is responsible.

I had this exact thing with a 2nd hand washing machine. We left it all connected incase the buyer wanted to try it out before buying. They didn't, despite us offering. They loaded it sideways on the back of their truck and didn't use transporting screw things which keep the drum in place. A few days later, she called wanting her money back and threatening to call the police. It worked fine before she left, so I have no idea what they washed, or what damage they did by transporting it the way they did. Not my fault in this case.

I had similar when selling a horse rug dryer. They didn't want to see it working, and although I'd said they would need a large van to transport it, they strapped it sideways to the roof rack.

I got a call from their number a few days later. I didn't answer, and blocked the number. They had completely ignored my advice, so if it was broken it was their problem. I'd used it as normal the day before they picked it up so I knew it was fine until they collected it. Not my problem!

For too many Judge Rinder lawyers on here. Caveat emptor does not always apply. Without knowing the item, it's impossible to answer your question. There are different statutes for whether you're referring to an good or a service. And different statutes for whether the sale was between a business and a business, an individual and an individual or a business and an individual. Certain goods have statutory warranties, some do not.
For example, a kitten sold by a private cat owner whose cat got pregnant is very different from a car sold by a car dealer. In answer to your question, your question cannot be answered with the information you've given. Anyone here who thinks they know the answer can't possibly know.

I guess it depends. If the buyer had something in writing that proved the seller had told them the kitten was completely healthy then maybe they could sue for fraud. Also according to consumer protection if the item l sold is not fit for purpose buyers can get a refund. Eg if a washing machine develops a fault after a l couple of weeks its sold as new and in good condition then a buyer can get a refund

Without knowing the item, it's impossible to answer your question. There are different statutes for whether you're referring to an good or a service. And different statutes for whether the sale was between a business and a business, an individual and an individual or a business and an individual.

This.

It depends on advertisement and the contract of sale and the advice given.
It depends if the item was new or used.
It depends if the problem was there before purchase and they have evidence to show this. It depends if it has been repaired before.

If you purchased a kitten with an inherent defect which later threw up a medical issue then you could sue the seller who knew this and with held the info. Some animals can not be bred from.

It depends on the particular information and the contract.

Nobody here can really give you an answer unless you tell us what the item actually is.

This is made up but want to settle an argument

Do you mean the whole thing is made up? If so then it's impossible to answer as it would depend on the specifics of an actual situations.

Buyer should have gone straight to vets on buying ‘kitten’ for a health check. This is pretty standard when buying kittens or puppies.

If passes vet check then all ok. What happens from that point it’s just down to buyer having appropriate insurance to cover any illness/accidents. Nothing to do with seller from this point.

If doesn’t pass vet check then that’s a different issue and would go back to seller at this point - but should be within a couple of days or purchase ideally.

Caveat emptor. The law is pretty clear I think? Unless one could prove that the sick kitten was fed Red Bull at the viewing to make it jump around healthily and the seller knew it was sick and didn't say? Not sure...

If the kitten is actually a washing machine and the seller is actually Currys, it would be a totally different scenario than if the kitten is actually a 15 year old Toyota and the seller is actually Bob at no. 34.

If the buyer discovers one off the kitten's legs had been glued back on, then I think they would have a case against the seller. If the buyer left the kitten by a gas hob and it partially melted then it would be down to the buyer.

Many years ago (35 or so) my parents bought a puppy from a breeder. Full pedigree and everything.

Shortly after, puppy got ill - hadn't been out beyond back garden so must have had virus on purchase. Turned out to be parvo. petairapy.com/canine-parvovirus-parvo-in-dogs/

Long story short, not only did v expensive puppy die but because the virus can live on surfaces for months the entire contents of the room she had been isolated in had to be burned, right down to curtains and carpet. All had to be dealt with via insurance - and that only covered the room, no cover for animal at all.

Breeder was very sorry for us (had to inform her as infection had presumably come from there) but there was no recompense. I think we may have been offered a discount out of goodwill if we bought one of her other puppies, but that wasn't a goer!

From that point on we only had rescue animals, and never a puppy.

Buyer is dependent on goodwill of seller.