dealer sold me salvaged turbo no disclosure
10-01-2009, 03:15 PM
#106
The Rebel
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
10-01-2009, 03:16 PM
#107
Banned
Owner #3, the gentleman that Canepa purchased the car from, stated openly that the car acquired superficial damage to the tops of the front fenders and hood during the first 800 miles. It seems that Owner #1 drove under a steel cable catch fence, lightly damaging ONLY the hood and tops of the fenders.
I guess anything can happen, but how can a cable damage the Tops and the hood "superficially"?
If it is loose it would never touch the hood, or at least you would think that if it just scratched the front of the hood then when it got over the fenders there is still that much slack not to do anything but scratch?
If it was tight it would crush the fenders to reach the hood
That is assuming it is just a cable and not a cable / fence, like nascar
If it did go that way... that was one sweet save
Jerry
I guess anything can happen, but how can a cable damage the Tops and the hood "superficially"?
If it is loose it would never touch the hood, or at least you would think that if it just scratched the front of the hood then when it got over the fenders there is still that much slack not to do anything but scratch?
If it was tight it would crush the fenders to reach the hood
That is assuming it is just a cable and not a cable / fence, like nascar
If it did go that way... that was one sweet save
Jerry
When completed, you could post your findings on this thread along with the Baron's. Ted will be in charge of archiving and securing all of your's and the Baron's test data and reports.
10-01-2009, 03:28 PM
#108
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
10-01-2009, 03:38 PM
#109
The Rebel
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
10-01-2009, 03:48 PM
#110
Banned
10-01-2009, 03:52 PM
#111
RANT
Personally, I don't think Carfax should exist -- the DMV should provide this service not only free, but MANDATORY, in the purchase of any car. If you're not allowed to drive down the road without insurance and a tax stamp on the license plate, you shouldn't be allowed to buy a salvage title car without it being properly rebuilt and the title branded with a new status to indicate it passed a repair inspection. It's exactly this kind of service to the community that a government should provide. They force us to pay for vehicle information to be captured throughout the life of the vehicle (apparently only for the purposes of taxation) and yet do no service to the community with the information they gather, in fact "hiding" it behind outdated systems that leave it to a third party to literally prevent consumers from being properly informed (because it costs money to run the report, so the most vulnerable buyers, say below $20K, are the ones least likely to pay for the protection.) I should also mention that I see no problem in a salvage title other than its impact on the market value of the car, especially an expensive car. If the buyer is fully informed and has a very thorough inspection (panels off, trim off, carpet out, chassis on a frame-aligner, etc.) then I see no problem in having a properly repaired car and the advantage of a car you might be more willing to track and starting from the fair point on the depreciation curve. And no, I'm not talking about the zealouos investor restoring an historic car for its provenance from little more than a steering wheel and a chassis number.
/RANThttp://www.carfax.com/cfm/check_orde...AC2999TS375404
10-01-2009, 03:59 PM
#112
For the past few days, I've read 80+/- posts with only one (1) side of the argument presented. I merely presented the other side of the argument that was told to me by the accused. As a former customer I wanted to hear his side of the story. I would think that the esteemed readers of this site and thread would want to hear the other side of the disagreement before forming and opinion.
Canepas statements are no more or less unsubstantiated than those of NYC1123..... just his side of the story.
It is you who attempt to throw gas on the fire with you comment to me.
Canepas statements are no more or less unsubstantiated than those of NYC1123..... just his side of the story.
It is you who attempt to throw gas on the fire with you comment to me.
As for your subjective one-sided reading of this thread, I think it's been remarkably well balanced and even-handed give or take one or two more outraged posts. Even so, I think it's perfectly reasonable for consumers to relate to the predicament of the consumer without taking "sides."
10-01-2009, 06:32 PM
#113
salvaged 993 tt
Even if you assumed that everything the Baron posted was true (which is a big assumption) but lets play along. Dont you think it would of been nice for the dealer to disclose some of that history. I know none of that was disclosed to me. How many others inquired about the same car and how many were told that story. Again I am NOT saying that I agree with what the Baron posted but if that is the dealers story it still seems a bit different than the ad as well as what the dealer was telling people that inquired about the car.
10-01-2009, 06:46 PM
#114
Even if you assumed that everything the Baron posted was true (which is a big assumption) but lets play along. Dont you think it would of been nice for the dealer to disclose some of that history. I know none of that was disclosed to me. How many others inquired about the same car and how many were told that story. Again I am NOT saying that I agree with what the Baron posted but if that is the dealers story it still seems a bit different than the ad as well as what the dealer was telling people that inquired about the car.
10-01-2009, 06:50 PM
#115
salvaged 993 tt
I am not going to comment on what I think is true vs not true about the story that the dealer told the Baron but I think common sense would say that if the dealer in fact "offered" to buy back the car why have I spent the money to hire a lawyer to try and get my money back. I guess his "offer" and check got "lost in the mail"
10-01-2009, 06:58 PM
#117
I am not going to comment on what I think is true vs not true about the story that the dealer told the Baron but I think common sense would say that if the dealer in fact "offered" to buy back the car why have I spent the money to hire a lawyer to try and get my money back. I guess his "offer" and check got "lost in the mail"
10-01-2009, 10:41 PM
#119
Three Wheelin'
I want to reserve judgment until all the facts are known. And I definitely agree that there are three sides to every story (his side, her side and then the truth). But, if as Baron claims Canepa knew of the prior damage (however minor or superficial), I find Canepa's original advertisement (quoted below, where the car is described as being in *NEW* condition) somewhat misleading. I will be curious to hear if he disclosed that damage verbally to NYC1123 prior to purchase.
10-01-2009, 11:53 PM
#120
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Salinas, CA
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the hell are you talking about? Hey wait a second, maybe we should put you in charge of reproducing this scenario. You may want to contact Myth Busters for some guidance on how to properly conduct the testing and help with considering all of the cable options such as height, girth, tension, material, temperature and humidity, etc...
When completed, you could post your findings on this thread along with the Baron's. Ted will be in charge of archiving and securing all of your's and the Baron's test data and reports.
When completed, you could post your findings on this thread along with the Baron's. Ted will be in charge of archiving and securing all of your's and the Baron's test data and reports.
But if you like, I will supply the cable, you bring the car. You seem like you really thought this out so what ever test you want we can do
