Surely we should be allowed to punch someone quite hard if they have misdescribed a vehicle?

After all the requirement to have an annual MOT test for pre-war cars may be scrapped following a meeting between transport minister Mike Penning and members of the All Party Parliamentary Historic Vehicles Group. Which is all fine and dandy, but the ability to at least slap someone who has promised on their Nan’s life that it has a full service history, when all they have is a Halfords receipt dated November 1993.

Talking to some friends who have made rather a lot of fruitless journeys recently, a punch in the face was the very least they wanted to do to the seller. In the age of the internet when we can view a billion pictures of a used car from every conceivable angle, these sorts of misunderstandings should never occur. Instead there are lots of people who just lie and others who aren’t clever enough to describe what sort of state a car is in.

Personally I have found that the car trade, because it is what they do can be relied upon to describe a car accurately. That’s why I have bought plenty of cars purely on telephone or emailed description. I turn up, pay and drive away and the only issue I’ve ever had was an iffy fuel gauge. But as most trade cars operate on fumes, it wasn’t an issue, or at least anything to throw a punch about.

Maybe I’ve been lucky, but I do think you can tell a lot from some ads, whether it is text speak or moody pictures. So I just wondered what epic journeys and even more epic disappointments you’ve had when chasing a used car?

And for those who may find a punch a bit extreme, surely a kick to the shins would suffice.