Nedbank MFC Auction House - Beware before buying they are ********** in their listings

After my previous Hello Peter complaint Sharon Mace from MFC got back to me and after explaining to her my issues said she would investigate. She now got back to me after 3 days stating that the response by Vernon Isaacs stands, MFC will do nothing in the regards of refunding or credit note. I purchased a motor vehicle from Nedbank Auctioneers online. The other vehicles advertised online stipulated what was wrong with them which is required by law (Also the fact that MFC stipulated what was wrong in the notes for other vehicles, makes this a precedence that this was the norm by MFC). When I received the car, the following faults were not disclosed resulting in ********** misrepresentation by the Bank. 1) When the engine is on it makes a terrible sound, 2) The car has been sprayed badly and there are paint splashes all over the car. 3) The windscreen is cracked. 4) The headlights are missing the globes 5) When you drive the car, the gears slip out from first and second. 6) It stated online that it has a full maintenance and service book, but all the pages have been stamped in advance. Anyone can fill it in whether serviced or not. The car could not possibly be roadworthy, but it has been licensed last month. MFC has **********ly misrepresented the car and has obviously *******ly obtained a roadworthy certificate. When Nedbank’s MFC representative Vernon was contacted he was not interested in doing anything about it. Saying the original deal stands. We are now forced to take legal action, and we will investigate how it is possible to roadworthy a car that could not possibly pass a test at the licensing department concerned. CPA: Section 41(1) prohibits a supplier from directly or indirectly expressing or implying a false, misleading or deceptive representation concerning a material fact to a consumer. Even a failure to correct an apparent misapprehension on the part of a consumer may amount to a false, misleading or deceptive representation. A contravention of the section could lead a court to make an order to money or property to the consumer or to compensate the consumer for losses or expenses suffered or incurred, in terms of section 52(3). Section 41 is reinforced by regulation 24(m), which prohibits an auctioneer from knowingly misrepresenting the value, composition, structure, character or quality or manufacture of the goods put up for sale at an auction. Section 115 (2) provides in a roundabout way that a person who has suffered loss or damage as a result of prohibited conduct may institute a claim in civil court after obtaining a certificate from the Tribunal to the effect that the conduct complained of was prohibited or required by the CPA. A supplier may also, in terms of section 112(1), have an administrative fine imposed upon it by the Tribunal in respect of prohibited or required conduct. The purchaser may institute the actio empti where there is either an express or tacit warranty given in terms of the agreement. Other grounds for institution include the warranty by the seller of the presence of good or the absence of bad characteristics in the thing sold; where the seller concealed the defect.13 In van der Merwe v Meades 1991 2 SA 1 (A) 3 the court held that the purchaser had to prove that the seller was aware of the existence of a latent defect at time of conclusion of the contract and concealed it dolo malo (with the intention to de*****). The purchaser will in these instances be entitled to use the actio empti even if a voetstoots clause is present.