WRITTEN OFF BY CRACKED HEADLAMP!

[Steve Brookes]

Richard, just to confirm that no-one has accused you of lying about the car. We're trying to be helpful by pointing out that potential buyers will want to know why it is Cat D. As Ben said, it would be worth getting the information so that you can update the advert accordingly.

If it turns out to be stolen/recovered, it would be a bargain for someone at the price you're offering, leaving plenty of money to give it the bit of TLC that it needs.

 

[rbell]

Hello again.

As far as I am aware, there is no way of finding out why how they decide to catagorise individual vehicles. I have asked the same questions to the insurance companies (my suppliers) many many times before. I think it is just down to how the assessor is feeling on the day, I really do. I wish I could show you all some of the many, many 'mis-catagorizations' (in my mind anyway) that I see on a daily basis.

The car came to us as it is, bar for the headlamp. We have not polished it. We have not replaced the wheels. We havent even hoovered it out! It is EXACTLY as it came to us. There is NO signs of any previous repairs. Its just a cheap car.

Maybe it was stolen recovered? And the insurance paid out before it was recovered? Without contacting the previous owner (which under strict trade guidelines I am forbiden to do) I simply cannot answer your questions.

Like I have said before; Come and have a look, and make your own mind up, or call me! I will be more than happy to discuss the car with anyone.

My number is 07903 711860.

Kind regards,

Richard Bell.

www.bells-salvage.com

 

[smallspeed]

just had a look at your site.. is that aygo one of the ones from the top-gear car football match?!.. []

 

[ubertub]

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Go and look at the thing. there's no point in 'if-ing and but-ing'. If I had the spare brass i'd snap this up. Doesn't matter what the story is. If it's right on inspection it'll do.
Someone give me a loan... and a garage... and an alibi for the missus...

 

[rbell]

Good evening all.

The car is sold; We had four different people down to view the car on Saturday, and as a direct consequence of this we had two different people racing to get the money to me today, Monday.

Looks like I was right about people needing to view the car to make their own mind up.... And, may I add, the person who bought the car is more than a little bit of a 911 expert, and he said it has the making of a very nice car indeed.......

His gain I guess?

Once again, many thanks for all of your kind words and encouragement.........

Yours,

Richard Bell.

www.bells-salvage.com

 

[Stewart H]

Fair play to you Richard. The thing that intrigues me is why it was a cat D write off. It can't have been the headlight because nobody is going to put in an insurance claim for that because the repair would be a fraction of the excess. Surely as a purchaser, you must be able to find out the reason for the categorisation.

 

[rbell]

Maybe if they had made it a cat B (ie for parts only) it would have created far less headaches..........

Maybe if people would have come and viewed, they could have made their own minds up...........

Maybe if I had lied, and misled people by 'guessing' that it had been stolen and subsequently recovered then it would have generated more interest......

Maybe is a HUGE word it seems..........

Yours,

Richard Bell.

 

[fastlane]

It seems this car is for sale again. The pictures and wording are identical to the original PH advert:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1989-Porsche-911_W0QQitemZ290188608211QQihZ019QQcategoryZ9860QQtcZphotoQQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

[jason]

How strange. Not a very high feedback seller!

Is it just me who thinks 10k for a Cat D registered car (that no-one knows why???) with the wrong wheels and who knows what else is not that great a bargain?!

 

[smallspeed]

Im not trying to insight further comments from sellers and other forum users or start an argument (I seemed to rub some people up the wrong way with my comments thus far [] ) but it strikes me as weird that there's no story with the car other than the broken headlight at this stage; it just wouldn't get written off for that little damage alone..

I also think there has to be a way to find out how/why it was registered cat-d either through the categorizing insurer or through the DVLA who keep records of why it was categorized at the time.. I'm sure theres some form you can fill in and for a few quid get all the info and probably a copy of the inspection report on the car at the time of the claim..

I understand rbell wasnt allowed to do this due to constraints of his agreement with the insurers, but surely a trader would have the sense to spend a few quid and check up the background of the car before buying? if it was nothing bad, then why not share the info, and if it was why would they buy it in the first place?..

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the car, or that anyones trying to slip someone a kipper, or that anyones lying, or that it wasnt written off for a cracked headlight along, or anything else that might offend (perish the thought in this time of political correctness [] ) but my initial impression from reading the advert(s) is that it looks fishy.. ..I personally wouldn't touch it with a barge pole but then I was wrong first time around and I hope for the sake of the new seller I am again..

ben

 

[zeb]

ORIGINAL: Zermatt Turbo

It seems this car is for sale gain. The pictures and wording are identical to the original PH advert:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1989-Porsche-911_W0QQitemZ290188608211QQihZ019QQcategoryZ9860QQtcZphotoQQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

...and at a cheaper price than it was advertised on ph..i dont get it [&:]

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

As has already been said - it looks bizarre. Given that the buyer MAY have negotiated the original 9750 asking price down a bit it still seems to be taking a risk opening the bidding at 9000 in the "hope" that someone might bid it higher. There is no mention of a reserve although that may not show until a bid is made.

Given that the car is a Cat D it strikes me that there are cars around for that sort of price that are NOT Cat D. I reckon an opening bid around 7K might be more realistic - but the seller is obviously not going to be in a rush to make a loss on it.

It is, indeed, very strange.

Dave

 

[rbell]

Good evening.

Firstly I would like to take the opportunity to assure everyone on here that we are a very genuine fully licensed and accredited salvage company, dealing in all manner of vehicles. Some are very badly damaged, some have no damage at all. There is no 'yardstick' to determine which vehicle is classified as cat A, B, C, D or X. I see vehicles that I feel should be cat 'A' as cat 'D', and visa-versa.

We purchase ALL of our vehicles direct from major insurance houses.

As far as I am aware, and after all it is my job and livelihood to be aware of such things, there is no way at all of finding out why vehicles are classified as they are. We are members of several trade organisations including HPI, and there is simply nothing or nobody to contact to ask any such questions. If someone is aware of some organisation that offers this service, then I would be very interested in contacting them indeed.

Even contacting the owner can be fruitless; After all, if a car has been stolen and missing for several months or even years, how does the previous owner know what state the car is in after this period of time? Even if it is damaged in a crash, the last time the owner see's it is disappearing down the road on the back of a recovery lorry. How does he know what repairs are needed? The answer is he doesn't.

The net result of this is that I buy the vehicles on face value, and I sell them on the same footing. I do not mis-lead customers in any way shape or form; Indeed, when customers enter our premises we let them approach us, and let them ask us about our vehicles. We do not 'sell' the car to the customer, the customer 'buys' it from us. What I mean by this is that the customer inspects the vehicle, assesses it for himself, and therefore makes his own mind up. Of course, if the customer asks us a question regarding a particular vehicle we will answer it to the best of our knowledge, but we don't guess. If we don't know the answer we say so. We have a very large customer base, which generates lots of repeat business. If we were untrustworthy, we would not be in business today.

Regarding the vehicle re-appearing on ebay I suggest that you keep an eye on it, because it will be getting removed just as soon as ebay gets the chance to review it. Ebay has strict guidelines regarding item listings, and this advert breaks many of these rules. Obviously this advert has nothing to do with our company. The car left our premises on Monday the 3rd of December to a VERY happy new owner.

I genuinely do not believe that the person that I sold it to will be re-selling it anytime soon. This, and the fact that the person I sold it to does not live anywhere near Northampton, leads me to believe that it is some sort of scam. I might be wrong, but I don't think so.

Yours,

Richard Bell.

www.bells-salvage.com

 

[rbell]

Hi again.

Just to let you know I have now managed to contact the new owner (who is still extremely happy with the car) and he is just as shocked as me to see it on e-bay.

Like I said, it would appear to be a scam.

Yours,

Richard Bell.

 

[smallspeed]

rbell, i just want to re-itterate that I wasn't accusing anyone of anything, just explaining that to me the car looks a bit fishy.. I appreciate that you were completely honest on your advert and the last thing you need to do is lie about the previous condition of the car, but you have to admit a 10grand plus car written off for what is likely a 250 quid part (if you brought from an OPC) and 1/2hr of labour does seem odd?.. I also have to bow to your greater knowledge regarding the tracing of vehicle history; my experience runs to doing an online HPI check when I buy a new car!

I know how crazy insurance companies are; i got hit up the backside at a pedestrian crossing by a 40yr old on the way to the hospital to see her kid who had just been rushed there from school in an ambulance.. She claimed I stopped sharply for no reason, it went to court, and as a 17yr old (at the time) the judge ruled that I was an imature driver, needed to learn how to drive safely, and the accident was my fault!.. (I got fined for verbally abusing the judge, AND my insurance appointed lawyer)

As for the scam, I had a similar thing with the car I brought; it was on ebay and I had made a lot of enquiries with the owner (including asking for a buy it now price; he wanted to let the auction run) and was lined up to buy, then suddenly an extra line appeared in the advert with "contact me at this email address for buy it now price".. Turns out someone messed with the advert; i contacted them (on behalf of the seller) and basically they had a buy it now about a grand over what they thought it would make/they could get it for so they could sell it on for a profit.. I bet its something similar going on with this, and I would contact ebay (and possibly get the new owner to do the same) to make sure its stamped out; last thing you want is something stupid like a clone causing trouble..

Im glad the car found a good home and hope to see it around sometime soon; its always nice for a car to go to an enthusiast..

ben []

 

[RSGulp]

ORIGINAL: RSGulp

"Unfortunately the car is classified as a cat 'D' car, having suffered extremely light damage. The only damage that it had, believe it or not, was a broken headlamp glass. This has now obviously been replaced."



not [&:]

I admit my post looks like I didn't believe your account of the car. I really wasn't accusing anyone of lying and apologize Richard if it looked that way.

I just didn't and still don't believe the car was written off due to only a headlamp lens being broken. Unfortunately as you've already stated, the only people who know the true story are the previous owner and the insurance company. I can't help thinking even if the car was stolen-recovered it would surely have had damage to a window/door lock/ignition switch when it was stolen - unless it was car-jacked or the keys stolen in a burglary and the car wasn't recovered before the insurance money was paid out - and I'll bet if it was stolen the previous owner was probably pleased to accept the cheque and not have his car back.

As an aside I think it's a real shame that this car now has the shadow of a Cat D Write-off hanging over it for the rest of its life. [&o]

 

[Porker993]

"Stolen/recovered" would seem to fit the bill.

Maybe this is what happened :

1. Car is stolen
2. Owner accepts an insurance payout,
3. Car is recovered by the police a few weeks/months later
4. Car automatically becomes the property of the insurance company,
5. Insurance company disposes of the car as a Cat D loss to cover their losses.

Who knows ?

 

[Mark Elder]

ORIGINAL: Porker993

....

5 Insurance company disposes of the car as a Cat D loss to cover their losses.


Who knows ?

Yes,who knows? But an insurance company does not have to "Categorize" a car. It can just sell it. Or am I wrong? But you can see how some non-enthusiast insurance clerk would take a random click of the mouse and taint a car.

 

[rbell]

ORIGINAL: marke2

ORIGINAL: Porker993

....

5 Insurance company disposes of the car as a Cat D loss to cover their losses.


Who knows ?

Yes,who knows? But an insurance company does not have to "Categorize" a car. It can just sell it. Or am I wrong? But you can see how some non-enthusiast insurance clerk would take a random click of the mouse and taint a car.

Sorry, but you are wrong. EVERY vehicle that passes through an insurance company is classified; These are a, b, c, d or x. Catagory X is mainly, but not solely, reserved for stolen recovered vehicles with NO damage.

Yours,

Richard Bell.

 

[rbell]

ORIGINAL: RSGulp

ORIGINAL: RSGulp

"Unfortunately the car is classified as a cat 'D' car, having suffered extremely light damage. The only damage that it had, believe it or not, was a broken headlamp glass. This has now obviously been replaced."



not [&:]

I admit my post looks like I didn't believe your account of the car. I really wasn't accusing anyone of lying and apologize Richard if it looked that way.

I just didn't and still don't believe the car was written off due to only a headlamp lens being broken. Unfortunately as you've already stated, the only people who know the true story are the previous owner and the insurance company. I can't help thinking even if the car was stolen-recovered it would surely have had damage to a window/door lock/ignition switch when it was stolen - unless it was car-jacked or the keys stolen in a burglary and the car wasn't recovered before the insurance money was paid out - and I'll bet if it was stolen the previous owner was probably pleased to accept the cheque and not have his car back.

As an aside I think it's a real shame that this car now has the shadow of a Cat D Write-off hanging over it for the rest of its life. [&o]

Apology accepted!