Did I Just Get Legally Threatened By A Lawyer Over A Private Sale?

I recently sold a 2007 dirt bike that had been converted to be street legal using a cheap kit. It was registered, insured, and plated, so I listed it as street legal. The buyer inspected the bike, test rode it, and wrote his own bill of sale, which I signed. The sale did not include any warranties or guarantees. He paid $2,600, took it home, and that was that—or so I thought.

A few days later, he messaged me saying: * The bike wouldn’t start (I advised him to use the kick-start method in cold weather). * The blinkers and horn didn’t work (Pre-sale I had mentioned that I’d had problems with the taillight/blinkers before and even showed him where to check if they stopped working). * The bike was overheating and leaking coolant while idling in his driveway at 40°F (something I had never experienced before). He thinks the head gasket blew.

When he sent me videos, I was shocked—it had never acted that way when I owned it. I couldn't believe it was overheating in that kind of cold, while stationary.

At first, I tried to help troubleshoot, but soon he began accusing me of misrepresenting the sale and claimed I should have disclosed an overheating issue. He wanted $500 as a partial refund or that I take the bike back. I declined, explaining that he had the opportunity to inspect and test drive the bike, and any post-sale issues were his responsibility.

Shortly after I refused his refund request, he revealed that he is a civil lawyer and started citing Utah codes and case law, arguing that: * There was an “implied warranty” because the bill of sale didn’t say “as-is.” * He relied on my statements rather than conducting a full inspection. * He was “willing to roll the dice in court.”

I looked into the Utah law and case he referenced (Utah Code 70A-2-316 and Rawson v. Conover, 2001 UT 24), and they actually support my position, not his. They confirm that buyers waive implied warranties when they have the opportunity to inspect a vehicle before purchasing. Since he inspected and test rode the bike, any post-sale problems are his responsibility.

At this point, I offered $150 as a goodwill gesture to settle things and move on. He initially accepted—until he added a new demand. He would only take the money if I signed a confidentiality agreement, preventing me from discussing this with anyone, even my own family.

Since I had already discussed the situation with family members and saw no reason for a confidentiality clause over a private sale, I declined. That’s when his tone shifted.

After I declined the confidentiality agreement and refused to send any money, he escalated his threats: * He now feels “obligated to sue.” * He says the $150 is “the cheapest resolution I’ll ever get.” * He claims I’ll be hearing from him at some point. * He reminds me that he has 15 years of litigation experience. * He says he has six years to sue me under the statute of limitations.

I also looked up his name and he does appear to be a practicing civil lawyer.

At that point, I told him that I considered the matter closed and would not be engaging further. I have everything documented as all interaction pre and post-sale was over text.

Legal questions: 1. Does he actually have a case based on what he’s arguing? 2. If this goes to court, what’s the likelihood that a judge awards him anything? 3. Since he pushed for confidentiality, would a lawsuit backfire on him professionally?

I appreciate any legal insight