Porsche 911 UK Enthusiasts Online Community Discussion Forum GB

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Unrecorded GR 996 GT3 via Copart; LX53NRN Updated!

rigsby99 said:
Cunno said:
If it has no CAT status then it's probably no different to 50% of the cars on the market except that the forum jungle drums know about it's history. Sort of explains why when it rained at Oulton people put there toys away, as accident how ever small would be all over the forums and the car would become worthless.

Do agree that the original seller at 74k was taking piss and if car was priced and advertised correctly would of probably been sold by now and would of been at Oulton having some fun.

Saying cars worth 20k less even though it has no cat status is incorrect IMO, how many of us truly know our own cars history if bought used?

Agreed, at least you know it has new bumpers!

But we don't know what rear chassis damage there may have been, or if it was repaired properly if there was
 
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
Cunno said:
If it has no CAT status then it's probably no different to 50% of the cars on the market except that the forum jungle drums know about it's history. Sort of explains why when it rained at Oulton people put there toys away, as accident how ever small would be all over the forums and the car would become worthless.

Do agree that the original seller at 74k was taking piss and if car was priced and advertised correctly would of probably been sold by now and would of been at Oulton having some fun.

Saying cars worth 20k less even though it has no cat status is incorrect IMO, how many of us truly know our own cars history if bought used?

Agreed, at least you know it has new bumpers!



But we don't know what rear chassis damage there may have been, or if it was repaired properly if there was


Which is why you have any car inspected
 
rigsby99 said:
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
Cunno said:
If it has no CAT status then it's probably no different to 50% of the cars on the market except that the forum jungle drums know about it's history. Sort of explains why when it rained at Oulton people put there toys away, as accident how ever small would be all over the forums and the car would become worthless.

Do agree that the original seller at 74k was taking piss and if car was priced and advertised correctly would of probably been sold by now and would of been at Oulton having some fun.

Saying cars worth 20k less even though it has no cat status is incorrect IMO, how many of us truly know our own cars history if bought used?

Agreed, at least you know it has new bumpers!



But we don't know what rear chassis damage there may have been, or if it was repaired properly if there was


Which is why you have any car inspected

I would have it inspected, but I would expect any seller to have been up front about its history before the inspection found it had been whacked, whether repaired to a decent standard or not
 
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
Cunno said:
If it has no CAT status then it's probably no different to 50% of the cars on the market except that the forum jungle drums know about it's history. Sort of explains why when it rained at Oulton people put there toys away, as accident how ever small would be all over the forums and the car would become worthless.

Do agree that the original seller at 74k was taking piss and if car was priced and advertised correctly would of probably been sold by now and would of been at Oulton having some fun.

Saying cars worth 20k less even though it has no cat status is incorrect IMO, how many of us truly know our own cars history if bought used?

Agreed, at least you know it has new bumpers!



But we don't know what rear chassis damage there may have been, or if it was repaired properly if there was


Which is why you have any car inspected

I would have it inspected, but I would expect any seller to have been up front about its history before the inspection found it had been whacked, whether repaired to a decent standard or not


And why should a seller pre judge or prejudice an inspection when the car only suffered minor / superficial damage. He could quite reasonably be unaware, after all the car was not categorised.
 
rigsby99 said:
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
917k said:
rigsby99 said:
Cunno said:
If it has no CAT status then it's probably no different to 50% of the cars on the market except that the forum jungle drums know about it's history. Sort of explains why when it rained at Oulton people put there toys away, as accident how ever small would be all over the forums and the car would become worthless.

Do agree that the original seller at 74k was taking piss and if car was priced and advertised correctly would of probably been sold by now and would of been at Oulton having some fun.

Saying cars worth 20k less even though it has no cat status is incorrect IMO, how many of us truly know our own cars history if bought used?

Agreed, at least you know it has new bumpers!



But we don't know what rear chassis damage there may have been, or if it was repaired properly if there was


Which is why you have any car inspected

I would have it inspected, but I would expect any seller to have been up front about its history before the inspection found it had been whacked, whether repaired to a decent standard or not


And why should a seller pre judge or prejudice an inspection when the car only suffered minor / superficial damage. He could quite reasonably be unaware, after all the car was not categorised.

It's about openness and honesty, nothing to do with the car being categorised
 
I am going to offer him 45k as see if he tells me to @&)& off
 
Rigsby99 - Do you have a vested interest in this car? Have a relationship with the owner/seller? Or do you own a car that is in a similar situation?

Your ferocious defence of its situation seems a little excessive and very committed.
 
I have no problem with Raby not mentioning the car's history in the advert, as long as it's disclosed when asked by perspective buyers.

For instance there's a 6RS currently on the market that was crashed and subsequently repaired by Manthey. No mention of this in the advert. Again no problem with that as long as the fact is disclosed when asked.

LX53 is possibly on SOR and still owned by the 'Brighton lady' who originally tried to sell it here a couple of years ago.

There are only ever 345 official UK cars (mk1 & 2, exc RS), so it's not that difficult to find out a car's true past.

As for the price, well the market clearly doesn't think it's worth mid-7s or even mid-6s.

Worth quoting what Nick said in Feb 2017 as he summed up the whole issue.

NXI20 said:
You are completely missing the point: it's not that it's been crashed & repaired, it's that it's being misrepresented as an undamaged original paint & panel car. If the seller had been honest about its history, nobody would have a problem with it. As you say, if the repairs have been well done, there won't be much to worry about although the disclosure will taint the car & it will always command a lower price & be less desirable than if it had been undamaged. The GT3 world is very small & also very well informed about the history of the UK cars. Trying to hide the history of one is foolish in the extreme; sooner or later the truth emerges... By illustration, Disco's old car was written off at the 'ring in 2011 and has now re-emerged from a long hibernation back on the road. We know that car had a twisted chassis which normally means a new shell. You haven't been able to get new shells for about 10 years. Draw your own conclusions about how that one was repaired...

As it stands, we have no idea how it was repaired or who by, although the fact that it is missing the wing endplates points to it being done either on the cheap or by people who don't know what an RS wing looks like; it may be fine, but that's obviously a concern. Who knows what other shortcuts have been taken? Without pictorial / invoice evidence of what the damage was when it went for repair & how it was addressed, it will be up to each potential buyer to get the car inspected & hopefully the inspection will be thorough enough to shed light on the repairs. Even if this is the case, we still have the problem of not knowing how & who carried out said repairs. For instance, was a bent chassis leg jigged straight properly or was it attached to a forklift by a chain & simply pulled straight while the other side was chained to a post? I'm not saying this is what has happened to this car but it is the kind of bodging that can go on; when you are sinking £70K into a car, you'd want to know wouldn't you?

Eventually, someone will come along & buy it at full retail with their heart not their head. They will then be in a world of pain when it's their turn to move it on.

That's the nub of the issue.
 
RE: Oulton 8th Mar, a few 911UKers and I did enjoy the quiet wet track just before lunch and in the afternoon.

I don't blame others for not coming out to play though, when most of the expensive machines there were wearing Cup2s or equivalent.

In the afternoon's first session I outbraked myself three times at the same corner and had to use the escape road. Then after a long 25+ minutes second session I said to my friend 'let's quit while we're ahead', esp when I had another track day two days later at Anglesey (it was wet, then dry, then hailstorm).
 
crash7 said:
Rigsby99 - Do you have a vested interest in this car? Have a relationship with the owner/seller? Or do you own a car that is in a similar situation?

Your ferocious defence of its situation seems a little excessive and very committed.

I have no interest or knowledge of this car. Ferocious defence, oh please, I merely find this witch hunt pathetic Oh my God it's had a scratch, no worse a bumper replaced that's 10k off, woops two bumpers thats 20k. You may all be surprised at how many of your 20 yr old cars have had a bit more than this.
 
rigsby99 said:
crash7 said:
Rigsby99 - Do you have a vested interest in this car? Have a relationship with the owner/seller? Or do you own a car that is in a similar situation?

Your ferocious defence of its situation seems a little excessive and very committed.

I have no interest or knowledge of this car. Ferocious defence, oh please, I merely find this witch hunt pathetic Oh my God it's had a scratch, no worse a bumper replaced that's 10k off, woops two bumpers thats 20k. You may all be surprised at how many of your 20 yr old cars have had a bit more than this.

Could you perhaps share the accident repair report, which I assume you have given that you continually state the car has only had a bumper replacement?

Cars that are insured for track work and take a hit whilst on track are often not Cat recorded. - This is not to say that the damage was not significant.

The market dictates the value, end of, and this has been for sale for a long long time, draw from that what you will.
 
rigsby99 said:
crash7 said:
Rigsby99 - Do you have a vested interest in this car? Have a relationship with the owner/seller? Or do you own a car that is in a similar situation?

Your ferocious defence of its situation seems a little excessive and very committed.

I have no interest or knowledge of this car. Ferocious defence, oh please, I merely find this witch hunt pathetic Oh my God it's had a scratch, no worse a bumper replaced that's 10k off, woops two bumpers thats 20k. You may all be surprised at how many of your 20 yr old cars have had a bit more than this.

Just a scratch, or at worst a replacement bumper??

How do you work that out when the repair estimate was 20k, and had it gone back to Porsche 3 times that amount

So no, it clearly wasn't just a scratch or bumper replacement
 
rigsby99 said:
Senoj said:
Cunno said:
Cunno said:
I've seen the screen shot above, that says the car has been subject to a salvage auction , but what does that mean? Does this car have a CAT status? Asking because AT have the car showing as clear on their site? And still advertised by present seller.

Anyone know the answer to my question?

It means nothing Jon. Apart from the fact it's been through a salvage auction, that in itself is not a 'status' of any sort.

The only way a car gets any sort of status is if the ins co tells the Dvla. Without wishing to be cynical you could think that the ins co gets more for the salvage without any status so what's their motivation for telling the DVLA...obviously it's a selling plus point for the salvage auction as they go to the effort of informing perspective buyers that cars are unrecorded with DVLA. You could argue they are being totally factual,which they are, but they are also pointing out an opportunity for perspective buyers to fix and put back on the road with zero disclosure.

You can think what you like about that. I think it's a bit bent.

Insurers have to inform DVLA of Cat A,B,S

Car was a total loss. Ergo a write off. Every write off has a category A,B,C,D,N,S . So why didn't they, is it still in the post?
 
Keep up the posts, Google loves it :grin:
 
Senoj said:
Car was a total loss. Ergo a write off. Every write off has a category A,B,C,D,N,S . So why didn't they, is it still in the post?

It's a peculiarity of the trackday Insurance AIUI. It's not one of those letters, it's a U (uncatagorised).
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,552
Messages
1,441,450
Members
48,966
Latest member
SondeMadiu
Back
Top