Courts & Legal

Dealer ordered to refund R320,000 after selling faulty car as “excellent”

Published

3 hours ago

March 20, 2026

Chiraag

faulty car refund South Africa, Gauteng dealership case Midcity Motors, Consumer Protection Act vehicle sale, Johannesburg buyer car dispute, second hand car misrepresentation SA, National Consumer Tribunal ruling car, MIOSA complaint South Africa vehicle, used car accident history undisclosed, car mechanical faults consumer rights SA, Joburg ETC

Buying a second-hand car is always a bit of a gamble. But for one Johannesburg buyer, that gamble turned into a costly lesson, and ultimately, a legal victory.

The National Consumer Tribunal has ruled that a Gauteng dealership must refund more than R320,000 after selling a vehicle that was advertised as being in “excellent condition,” only for serious issues to surface after the purchase.

When “excellent” does not mean what it should

The case centres on Johannesburg customer R Prins and Midcity Motors 3, following a dispute over a vehicle that was marketed online as being in top condition.

According to findings presented before the tribunal, that description did not match reality.

After buying the car, Prins discovered several problems. The vehicle had no full service history, had previously been involved in an accident, and showed signs of mechanical faults.

He told the tribunal he would never have gone ahead with the purchase had the vehicle been advertised accurately.

A long fight for accountability

Prins moved quickly to challenge the sale, asking for it to be reversed. But what followed was a drawn-out process that stretched over two years.

Even after securing a favourable outcome through the Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa, the dealership failed to act on the ruling.

That delay ultimately escalated the matter to the National Consumer Tribunal, where the case was reviewed in full.

Tribunal finds clear misrepresentation

In its ruling, the tribunal found that the dealership’s advertising was misleading and violated the Consumer Protection Act.

More importantly, it concluded that the misrepresentation struck at the core of the sale agreement. In simple terms, the buyer did not receive what he had been promised.

Because of this, the agreement was declared null and void.

The tribunal ordered the dealership to refund the full purchase price of R323,950 within ten business days and to collect the vehicle at its own cost.

No discount for dishonesty

Midcity Motors attempted to resolve the matter by offering a price reduction of between 10% and 15%, arguing that the vehicle could still be used despite its issues.

The tribunal rejected this approach outright.

Allowing a discount in such cases, it reasoned, could set a dangerous precedent and encourage misleading sales practices rather than discourage them.

A warning to the industry

Beyond the refund, the ruling goes further.

The dealership has been instructed to stop advertising vehicles as being in “excellent condition” unless those claims can be backed by proper documentation, including verified histories and diagnostic reports.

This forms part of what the tribunal described as a stronger approach to ensuring accountability in the second-hand vehicle market.

The message is clear. Misleading buyers does not just harm individuals; it undermines trust across the entire industry.

What this means for buyers

While Prins was successful in having the sale reversed, the tribunal made it clear that it cannot award damages for additional losses.

This means costs such as storage fees or ongoing loan repayments fall outside its powers. However, the buyer is still able to pursue a separate civil claim using the tribunal’s findings as support.