OLG Zweibrücken: Normal wear and tear in an older used car does not constitute a defect
The seller of an older used car with high mileage is not liable for repair costs if a defect occurring shortly after the purchase is due to ordinary age- and mileage-related wear and tear. This was decided by the 6th Civil Senate of the Pfälzisches Oberlandesgericht Zweibrücken (Palatinate Higher Regional Court of Zweibrücken) in a judgment dated 19 December 2024. The proceedings were conducted under case no. 6 U 19/20; based on the information currently available here, it is not known whether the decision is final.
The decision concerns the distinction between a material defect and wear that the buyer must accept in used vehicles. The key issue is, in particular, what condition a buyer may expect in view of the vehicle’s age and mileage.
Purchase of an eight-year-old car with high mileage
The buyer had purchased an eight-year-old used Mercedes Benz ML 420 CDI. At the time of purchase, the vehicle already had mileage of more than 200,000 kilometres.
Engine damage a few weeks after delivery
Approximately four weeks after the purchase, after around another 7,000 kilometres had been driven, the vehicle broke down with engine damage. The cause was a leak in the cylinder head gasket. The buyer then sought damages from the seller for the repair costs incurred.
Lower court dismissed the claim
The Landgericht Landau in der Pfalz (Regional Court of Landau in der Pfalz) dismissed the claim by judgment of 20 March 2020. The proceedings there were conducted under case no. 3 O 37/18. The buyer appealed against this decision.
The appeal proceedings ended with the judgment of the Pfälzisches Oberlandesgericht Zweibrücken dated 19 December 2024, whose finality is not evidenced here. Around four and a half years therefore elapsed between the first-instance judgment and the decision of the Oberlandesgericht.
No material defect in the case of ordinary wear
Seller was able to prove absence of defects upon delivery
The 6th Civil Senate upheld the decision of the Landgericht. According to the findings of the Oberlandesgericht, the seller had proven that the vehicle was free from defects at the time of delivery.
It is true that the cylinder head gasket was in a condition that later led to the leak. In the court’s view, however, this condition amounted to ordinary wear and tear. Such wear and tear does not automatically constitute a defect in a used vehicle.
For legal reporting purposes, the decision is recorded in particular with reference to the following provisions:
-
§ 437 No. 3 BGB (German Civil Code),
-
§ 434 para. 1 BGB (German Civil Code),
-
§ 281 BGB (German Civil Code).
Expert opinion as the basis for the decision
Age- and mileage-related wear
The Oberlandesgericht based its assessment on an expert opinion obtained by the court. According to that opinion, the vehicle’s failure was attributable to the leak in the cylinder head gasket, which occurred shortly after the purchase as a result of the existing wear.
The Senate assessed the specific wear of the cylinder gasket as a typical sign of age- and mileage-related wear. In the court’s view, with an eight-year-old vehicle with mileage of more than 200,000 kilometres, the buyer had to expect such wear. Mileage of this magnitude did not make corresponding wear unusual.
Buyer expectations depend on age and mileage
In distinguishing between a defect and wear that must be accepted, the court relied on the buyer’s legitimate expectations. In the case of used vehicles, these are substantially shaped by the relationship between age and mileage.
The older a vehicle is and the higher its mileage, the more the buyer must expect natural signs of wear in individual components. According to the decision, this also applies if the wear was not yet outwardly visible at the time of purchase.
No general duty to point out natural ageing processes
Limited durability of individual parts need not be explained separately
The Oberlandesgericht also made clear that the seller has no duty to point out natural signs of ageing and the limited durability of individual vehicle parts where signs of wear have occurred but are not visible.
The decision thus follows the principle that, in the case of used goods, the condition of a new item cannot be expected. However, the specific condition in the individual case always remains decisive, in particular taking into account age, mileage and the nature of the item concerned.
Significance beyond the purchase of used cars
Relevance for contracts concerning used goods
The decision directly concerns the purchase of a used motor vehicle. However, the decision may also be important in connection with the sale of used goods in general, for example refurbished technology, household appliances or second-hand goods.
The same question of demarcation is at the centre: When is there a material defect, and when is it merely ordinary wear and tear that a buyer must expect under the circumstances? Especially in the case of used items, this distinction can be of considerable importance for warranty rights and claims for damages.
Contract law classification by MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte
The decision of the Pfälzisches Oberlandesgericht Zweibrücken illustrates that the contractual allocation of risk when purchasing used goods depends heavily on the specific condition owed under the contract. For companies, dealers, investors and high-net-worth private individuals, such questions may become relevant in particular in purchase agreements, warranty provisions and the structuring of liability standards.
Anyone wishing to clarify legal questions relating to contracts for used goods, warranty rights or claims for damages can find support from MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte in the area of legal advice in contract law.
