987 > 981
- Thread starter BoxsterLL11
- Start date
It IS the same car.
I have fitted the gold wheel crests centre.
Have been in touch with the previous owner and am now up to speed with the problems he had over the last 3 months.
He had just had enough with the issues during his ownership.
I am not a happy bunny, OPC have obviously been economical with the truth.
Thanks to Pthornley for flagging this up to me.
I have fitted the gold wheel crests centre.
Have been in touch with the previous owner and am now up to speed with the problems he had over the last 3 months.
He had just had enough with the issues during his ownership.
I am not a happy bunny, OPC have obviously been economical with the truth.
Thanks to Pthornley for flagging this up to me.
malcolm e box
New member
It is being discussed on at least two different Porsche owners forums. Trying to hide any guilty party is pointless.dpoynton said:
Have had a word with the salesman this morning.
I explained I was made aware of the repair history over the last 3 months between two different forums.
My main concern is the apparent deceit exhibited by the OPC in that they informed me of a totally different scenario as to why the car was returned within 3 months of purchase. The explanation they gave was feasible but untrue.
These forums give us, the customer, more "power" in these situations.
The OPC should have considered their liability when presenting the car for sale to me.
Far better to tell me the truth and I could then make a judgement to buy or not to buy, based on that information.
For the very reason they have not given me the full facts & been honest with it, I too feel like giving the car back.
It has tainted my whole Porsche experience.
After all, I decided to buy the car from an OPC for the very reason most people buy from Porsche and not from some non-Porsche specialist "arfur daley" garage.
Watch this space.
I explained I was made aware of the repair history over the last 3 months between two different forums.
My main concern is the apparent deceit exhibited by the OPC in that they informed me of a totally different scenario as to why the car was returned within 3 months of purchase. The explanation they gave was feasible but untrue.
These forums give us, the customer, more "power" in these situations.
The OPC should have considered their liability when presenting the car for sale to me.
Far better to tell me the truth and I could then make a judgement to buy or not to buy, based on that information.
For the very reason they have not given me the full facts & been honest with it, I too feel like giving the car back.
It has tainted my whole Porsche experience.
After all, I decided to buy the car from an OPC for the very reason most people buy from Porsche and not from some non-Porsche specialist "arfur daley" garage.
Watch this space.
I don't think its 'name and shame' as you put it. Its a discovery of and reporting of facts in a public arena. The information has come to light through communications between owners and information that is the public domain.dpoynton said:
The OPC or any sales company must abide by trading standards and the purchaser also has rights to challenge the conditions of sale etc.
The OPC has a great opportunity to resolve the matter in a professional way and promote their reputation if they choose to do so, demonstrating their commitment to the brand and their customers.
I think it could be a 'win win' situation for both parties tbh
Jonttt
Member
BoxsterLL11 said:
Having read the original thread on "the other forum" before being directed to this I would be absolutely fuming if the OPC lied to me. I can understand them not disclosing what had happened but if you specifically queried why the previous keeper only had it for 3 months and they told you a lie that is totally unacceptable. Looking at the dates they must have sold the car to you within a few days of it being returned to them. I'd be looking for more than just my money back! Ps the invasive work they had to do to repair the leak and hacking the wiring loom would be enough for me to treat the car as effectively being cat D.
malcolm e box
New member
Correct but don't mention which East Midlands based OPC it is.dyllan said:
Apparently it has to be a secret.
Forum rule..Thou shalt not....
3.1.2 Name companies, or individuals, in relation to accusations of malpractice, fraud or other criminal or
civil offences.
You may not agree with the above but that is what you agree to when posting on this forum. Porsche and Porsche Centres do have access too.
The rule was introduced to protect the Club from libel action as it is the club and not poster who would end up in court. My suggestion, where this rule may be transgressed, is to PM or e mail the individual with any knowledge you may have. It is nearly always the case that we only ever hear one side of the story with the "accused" unable to respond. The "closed, members only forum" is not true on this particular part of the forum as it is not members only. Anyone who has signed up to the forum can view. Thank you for your understanding in advance.
3.1.2 Name companies, or individuals, in relation to accusations of malpractice, fraud or other criminal or
civil offences.
You may not agree with the above but that is what you agree to when posting on this forum. Porsche and Porsche Centres do have access too.
The rule was introduced to protect the Club from libel action as it is the club and not poster who would end up in court. My suggestion, where this rule may be transgressed, is to PM or e mail the individual with any knowledge you may have. It is nearly always the case that we only ever hear one side of the story with the "accused" unable to respond. The "closed, members only forum" is not true on this particular part of the forum as it is not members only. Anyone who has signed up to the forum can view. Thank you for your understanding in advance.
pauljmcnulty
New member
Just to add, it protects the person with a dispute as well.
In the event of any action being necesary it would potentially harm your case if you publically discuss the issue before taking it through the dealer's official complaints procedure. I'd suggest that the original poster removes the name of the dealership for their own protection.
I'd also remind people that not all fora are the same! Some are more "sue-able" than others, and a Club as large as PCGB has to monitor things more closely than a smaller forum. Pistonheads is the same. [
]
In the event of any action being necesary it would potentially harm your case if you publically discuss the issue before taking it through the dealer's official complaints procedure. I'd suggest that the original poster removes the name of the dealership for their own protection.
I'd also remind people that not all fora are the same! Some are more "sue-able" than others, and a Club as large as PCGB has to monitor things more closely than a smaller forum. Pistonheads is the same. [
]
dpoynton said:
if you look at my first post it states what I feel and that is that the behaviour by the selling party was outrageous.
nowhere did I state the name of the OPC or condone its mention.
when moderator pointed out to those mentioning the name I then backed him up
I don't see your problem with that
all the best
dylan
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
