12.10.2026 17:13
The consumer who bought the car he had dreamed of for years was shocked to the core when he learned that the vehicle's mileage had been rolled back. The public prosecutor's decision of no grounds for prosecution, stating that the buyer could have checked the mileage records himself, was overturned by the Court of Cassation. The Supreme Court pointed out that the defense of 'If the buyer had checked' could not cover up the seller's fraud.
The Court of Cassation has issued a decision that closely concerns those who will buy second-hand cars.
THE VEHICLE'S MILEAGE HAD BEEN ROLLED BACK
Citizens who cannot afford to buy a new car are turning to the second-hand market. Despite all the precautions taken, from payment method to expert inspection, malicious sellers have been ruining the lives of citizens who have dreamed of 'buying a car' for years. B.D., who agreed with the seller company for a vehicle with 65,000 kilometers using the money saved from years of work together with his spouse, determined a while after the notary sale that the vehicle's actual mileage was 251,000.
THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE SAID "NO GROUNDS FOR PROSECUTION"
B.D., who could not get any result from his meeting with the seller company manager, went to the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office. A shocking response came from the Prosecutor's Office to the victim consumer who claimed to have been defrauded. The Prosecutor's Office decided that there were no grounds for prosecution, stating that the buyer could himself query the mileage records. When the objection to the decision made to the Criminal Judgeship of Peace was also rejected, the judgment became final.
THE FILE WENT TO THE COURT OF CASSATION
When the Ministry of Justice determined that there was an anomaly in the decision, it applied to the Court of Cassation Chief Public Prosecutor's Office for the reversal of the decision in the public interest. The Chief Public Prosecutor's Office sent the file to the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation. It ruled that not prosecuting fraud allegations against persons in the position of seller by saying 'the buyer's responsibility' was contrary to law.
THE DECISION WAS REVERSED
Pointing out that the decision was based on an incomplete investigation, the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation indicated that whether mileage rollback can be understood by a simple check, examination of inspection records, the vehicle's market value, and the vehicle's sales history must be examined before reaching a judgment. While the decision did not directly say "fraud has occurred," it did not find the reasoning that "the buyer could have queried" sufficient on its own. In its decision, the 11th Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, which ruled that in criminal investigations regarding sales of vehicles with rolled-back mileage, the file cannot be closed on the grounds that "the buyer could also have queried the past records, could have checked," stated as follows: "The documents related to the vehicle's inspection should have been obtained from the inspection station, the statements of the expert who inspected the vehicle on the sale date should have been sought, the vehicle's market value on the date of the offense should have been determined, and a report should have been obtained from a technical expert to determine in what manner and how the mileage rollback on the vehicle occurred and whether it could be understood by a simple check. While it was necessary to evaluate and determine whether the elements of the crime of fraud existed in the concrete case according to the result of the investigation; the reasoning that 'It cannot be said that the complainant's opportunity for supervision was eliminated in the incident, the act attributed to the suspect remained at the level of a simple lie, it cannot be considered as fraud, the legal elements of the crime of fraud did not occur in the incident, and the dispute between the parties arose from the delivery of defective goods' has been erroneous. It is contrary to law that, upon the objection made against the decision of no grounds for prosecution given as a result of the incomplete investigation, instead of deciding to expand the investigation, it was decided to reject the objection, and the request for reversal in favor of law has been found justified. The request of the Court of Cassation Chief Public Prosecutor's Office for reversal in favor of law has been accepted, and the decision of the 7th Criminal Judgeship of Peace has been reversed in favor of law by unanimous vote."