Second-hand car 'mileage' fraud was rejected by the Supreme Court: The decision was overturned unanimously

B.D., who made an agreement with the seller company for the vehicle with 65 thousand kilometers with the money he and his wife had saved, determined that after a while after the notary sale, the real mileage of the vehicle was 251 thousand. Unable to get any results from his meeting with the vendor company manager, B.D. went to the Public Prosecutor's Office.

A shocking response came from the Prosecutor's Office to the aggrieved consumer who claimed to have been defrauded. The prosecutor's office decided that there was no need for prosecution, stating that the buyer could query the mileage records himself. When the objection made to the Criminal Court of Peace against the decision was rejected, the decision became final.

"AGAINST THE LAW"

When the Ministry of Justice determined that there was an anomaly in the decision, it applied to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office of the Supreme Court of Appeals to overturn the decision in the public interest. The Chief Public Prosecutor's Office sent the file to the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals. It ruled that it was against the law not to prosecute fraud allegations against people in seller positions by stating that it was the 'buyer's responsibility'.

Pointing out that the decision was based on incomplete research, the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals said; He pointed out that whether the mileage reduction can be understood by a simple check or not, a decision cannot be made without examining the inspection records, the market value of the vehicle and the sales history of the vehicle. While the decision did not directly say "fraud has occurred", it did not find the justification "the buyer could have questioned" sufficient on its own.

THE DECISION WAS REVERSED UNANIMOUSLY

In the decision of the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, which ruled that the file cannot be closed in criminal investigations regarding vehicle sales with reduced mileage on the grounds that "if the buyer had also questioned and checked the past records", the following was stated:

"The documents regarding the inspection of the vehicle should have been obtained from the inspection station, the statements of the expert who inspected the complainant's vehicle on the day of sale should have been consulted, the market value of the vehicle on the date of the crime should have been determined, and a report should have been obtained from the technical expert to determine how and how the mileage reduction on the vehicle was achieved and whether it could be understood with a simple check. According to the results of the investigation, it should be assessed and determined whether there are elements of the crime of fraud in the concrete case; The justification that 'it cannot be said that the complainant's ability to control the incident was eliminated, the action attributed to the suspect remained at the level of a simple lie, it was not considered possible to be accepted as fraud, the legal elements of the crime of fraud did not occur in the incident, and the dispute between the parties was due to the delivery of defective goods' was erroneous. The decision to reject the objection instead of deciding to expand the investigation upon the objection made against the decision stating that there is no need for prosecution as a result of an incomplete investigation is contrary to the Law and the request for reversal in the interest of law was deemed appropriate. The Supreme Court of Appeals Chief Public Prosecutor's Office's request for reversal was accepted, and the decision of the 7th Criminal Judgeship of Peace was unanimously annulled in the interest of law.