On 08 Feb 15, I agreed to sell a car to King Street Breakers, and that we wished to retain certain parts, notably the engine, for which we had a buyer and the means to remove the engine from the vehicle and the KSB site. Though no actual price was agreed it was agreed that the price would mutually acceptable.
On 09 Feb 15, the car was duly delivered but subsequent calls made to agree to collect parts or agree a price were dismissed. After some delay, we were notified the engine had been removed against the initial agreement and was available for collection. KSB reneged on the agreement made to agree a price for the car and continue to prevent our access to it to collect parts or indeed remove it.
When our parties arrived to collect the engine, they were intimidated and were charged £380 for the engine, which was paid under protest. Part of this intimidation was that the car had been lifted on top of the shipping container which acted as the site office (we have a photo).
On inspection, the engine was found to be incomplete missing the ECU and turbo. The lack of ECU renders the engine inoperable. The engine was a 1.4Tfsi – not just a 1.4 – the turbo forms part of the engine.
My question is what grounds to I have pursue this through the small claims court? As it stands we are £380 down with no car and only part engine. Does the Theft Act apply - if not what perhaps?
I seek: either return of the car, our asset, complete and as delivered and the improper charge of £380.00 or £1500 covering the cost of replacement engine parts (including ECU, turbos etc) and other parts identified on 08 Feb 15.