Hashi

Folks - i need some advice.

Just over a week ago i bought a jap import coupe from a dealer.

Since then I've found out that its basically a ringer.
Its older than they advertised and has probably been clocked.

I have the advert stating its supposed age and spec. It was registered this summer in the UK and has all the correct UK documentation. The chassis number and VIN plate match the V5 and MOT.

There are (after looking closer) very obvious physical signs that this car is an earlier model. I was stupid not to have done enough research before committing.

So what should I do now? I'm going to call my local (or their local) trading standards, but what would they do?

I just want my money back - and I'd just forget about it. But will it be that simple?

Help!

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

Trading standards will give you advice, but they do not have any direct power to help you.

If the garage play up, you will have to take them to court, and hope that they still have assets if you win that can be seized. That is the worst case scenario (assuming you win)

Fuzz

Offences

If the seller is in business (rather than a private seller), he may have committed a criminal offence if he:

* sells goods which are unsafe;
* has given a false description to the goods i.e. a car sold with incorrect mileage (clocked car);
* gives a false description to the services he is providing e.g. falsely claiming to be a member of a trade association;
* advertises a misleading price;
* displays a sign which states ‘No Refunds’.

If you feel that any of the above could apply, you should report the matter to your local Trading Standards Service before you return to the trader.




Andy

Fuzz

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/c...V0003-1011.txt

GC8

Cars a frequently registered long after production. Ive seen a 1994 built GF8 first registered for use in Japan in 1997 and Ive Imported an Evolution (Evo 1 CD9A) which was manufactured in 1994 (only just...) and registered in late 1996 (on a P here)..... My point here, is that you need to be sure.


Simon

scoobybitch

the advertisment has misrepresented the car, ring trading standards and speak to them. I've got an ongoing query they are helping me with at the moment. What area did you buy the car from?

davegtt

ohhh bugger, unlucky mate.

Didnt buy it from Kieghly Trade Centre did you?

Jamo

iTrader: (23)

thats first thing that popped into my head to dave!

GC8

Until you have established the vehicles provenance, this is all conjecture. What was the vehicle described to you as? Look at the Applied Model Number, what is it? What is the vehicles registration prefix? What 'year' was the vehicle advertised/registered as (remember that this is the year of first registration/use not production)? As well as the Applied Model Number you can also check the month and year of production by looking at the tag on the base of the seatbelts. Its a shame that you dont havew a copy of the original Japanese 'Certificate of De-Registration' as thisd answer most queries Im sure.

One final point Id make is that there arent any Model Reports available for Impreza Coupes so Im curious to see how its been registered. If you told me that it was a newer car than it had been advertised as then I wouldnt have been surprised ; but that wouldnt have meant that it was stolen.....

Simon

davegtt

Bad isnt it when many people from different parts of the country all have the same view of this company yet theyre still allowed to be trading.

Chip

Firstly go back to the dealrr to see what he has got to say for himself.

Chip

GC8

I disagree; first be sure that you are correct..... From the evidence weve seen so far Im far from convinced.


Simon

Hashi

Ok...Thanks to all for your opinions - i've taken it on board.
Now, without divulging all the details, I'll say this...

The car is not a Subaru.
It has interior and exterior trim from a much earlier model.
the seat belt tags are 4 years older than the claimed age.
the clocks (incl rev counter) dont match the other gauges.
the rear panel of the bodywork has been cut away to accept late spec lamps.
the speedo is mechanically driven and not electronic - which it should be.
the AC refridgerant went obsolete two years earlier than the claimed date of manufacture.
rear strut braces are not present - which they should be on that claimed year.

The advert clearly states its year and version number, i believe that its older.
Besides isnt it an offence to knowingly register an older car with a newer plate?
The facts above were presented to two people I know in the motor trade, and both of whom work extensively with japanese imports. One of them was the first to physically notice it, the second has also confirmed that the above methods are known to be used to "tart up" this car.

I spoke to the trading standards, and amongst other things they first advised me to call the dealer which i did. Despite the denials, I'm waiting for him to call me back...

Also, it wasn't bought from KTC, though I did visit them a couple of weeks ago and without trying to slander them, I thought they were simply a bunch of liars. Arrogant ones.

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

Could just be an older model a previous owner ( or the garage ) has tried to tart up to newer spec ( badly by the sound of it ! ).

Could also be it was bought by the garage as a 5hitter and they've done it up on the cheap with whatever parts they could get.

If the car was advertised as all original and 100% fine, then you have a case as it isnt, the year thing is a bit tricky - unsold cars often dont get first reg'd until a couple of years after they were built - you often see ads for last years model available this year, brand new with this years plates on it - nothing dodgy about it, just end of line stuff that gets superceded by the new model.

If the difference is more than a couple of years I'd be suspicious though, as its unusual for a car to hang around this long without being sold and reg'd.

Think you need to get the car to someone professional who really knows about these specific models and pay them to give it a full going over and see what they reckon. If you can go back to the seller with an independant report from a recognised specialist it'll carry a lot more weight than just your word.

Unfortunately there are a lot of shady import companies around - the best imports sell at a premium, and the top dealers buy them, and dont sell them cheap - the dross that is left gets picked up by the shady dealers, tarted up on the cheap, and shifted on as soon as they can.

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

Actually re-reading your last post, if the car IS the age it says, it sounds a lot like a stolen recovered vehicle that had been part stripped, recovered, and repaired on the cheap.

It doesnt sound like its been written off in an accident, as why would the interior need changing ? ditto the clocks etc....

MattN

so what car is it? what year advertised and what do you think it is?

Re the seatbelt thing, they are not always exactly right! I bought a new car from Japan and the tags said 2002 and it was a 2003 car, but 4 years is slightly excessive.

Air-con gas, when did it change. I have a 92 car on r12 and a 93 on R134, anyone know the excat date it changed and was there a grace period, I.e. for cars they had already been produced?

as GC8 has stated it could be a late registered model, you need the de-reg doc.

davegtt

This is the only points I would consider to be dodgy as such, everything else is explainable so I wouldnt be too worried but the fact the rear panel has been cut away is a little worrying but again it could be simply that the previous owner wanted to tart it up a little with some newer model parts....

Suprised you didnt clock most of this stuff though whilst buying the car. Did you do any research on the particular vehicle you was looking at? most people should know what the newer model interior should look like compared to the older?!? Not having a go or questioning your ability of viewing cars but it does seem strange. Hope you can get it sorted

Hashi

Unfortunately and stupidly, i was in a rush. Broke the golden rule of car buying. I'm normally very meticulous and have a check list etc., but on this occasion I viewed it and bought it on impulse!

I think some ppl have got confused by what I'm saying too, what I'm saying is the the car is an old model (which is in excellent condition for its true year) but all that has been changed (from an original equipment point of view) are the rear lamps and clocks; for a later spec.

Anyway, last night I checked the chassis number on the manufacturers database, and it is indeed, an older model. Built during the year that I'd suspected all along... The V5 document reads "declared manufactured 19XX" much much later than is true...somebody falsified the de-reg documents.

I've made the written complaint official now. So lets see what they say. I'm gonna get my neighbour (a police detective) to advise on an inspecting body to verify the car identity and esimated mileage. This is going to the top!!

Tidgy

sorry to hear man, sounds like a situation i could have ended up in

Before i bought my mcrae i spent alot of time reading up and looking around for the best impreza i could find, was looking for an sti around the late version 2 early version 3 age. Went up north to look at one and wasn't as described. It was advertised as a standard import sti with 31k (miles) on the clock after conversion. I was well impressed with the pics that were sent and it looked emaculate. Before i went i asked a few questions,
1) has it been smoked in? told not sure but there are no cigaret burns in the car.
2) is there any accident damage or any evidence of previous repaire. told no except for a scuff on the back bumper caused during transit. they told me that the rear bumper was gonna be resprayed so wouldn't show.
3) Is it standard? yes except for exhaust.

so was happy with the answers and jumped in the car the next weekend and zipped the 100 miles up north to go and look at it.

Happened to see it in the car park i parked in at the back of the place so had a quick look round before i went in.

noticed a few things, first the exhaust hadn't been covered properly when rear bumper was sprayed (still on the car i might add) and there was an 3 inch round blob of paint on it.

next thing was the fact it had a roof scoop fitted, by now i was aware at that it might not be what it was described as, but i thought it might have just been an option fitted in japan.
next i noticed the front bumper wasn't lined up properly and the gap between the headlights wasn't the same.
i had a good look round after that and found the inner lining of the wheel arch was hanging off and the screw holding it in place had been forced out.

At this point i went round and found the guy i'd been dealing with over phone and had a chat and went for a test drive, car sounded amazing and didn't seem to have anything mechanicly major wrong that i could tell from my limited knowledge.

First thing i noticed when i got into it was the smell of cigarets, then i spotted a burn in the passenger seat.

got back from the test drive and spoke to him and mentioned what i spotted and all i got was, its not a new car so it'll have the odd knock and scrape here and there.

fair enough i can except odd stone chip etc for its age but the whole front bumper and inside left quarter seeming to have damage in it made me very nervous.

i aslo then asked about the roof scoop and he said as far as he was aware it was a standard sti.

I had before i'd gone there done alot of reseach into import models and features and special editions, so i asked him about why it was 555 blue, with a roof scoop and looked like one debaged.

All he said was it was a standard sti with options.

after this and saying that there was no way i was gona pay the asking price and would only be interested if he dropped the price (alot i might add) or i was gonna walk away, i walked away.

about 4 months later i went on there website again and sure enough it was still there, but now advertised as a 555 not a normal sti. it finally sold (or at least went from the site) about 8 months after i had seen it.

i hope whoever bought it isn't on here because i should think they have bought a shed.

There are always dodgy dealers out there either deliberatly or by a lack of knowledge about what they are selling.

ALWAYS check the info you given, ALWAYS walk away and dont buy it on the spot, if they say the price is for now and now only you have your answer, walk away, especially with imports of any car you have to check as much information as possible and if in doubt walkaway, theres plenty of other cars out there.


have you got any writen advertisement, comunications, letters or emails about the car which describe its condition, age, version, accident history (if available) or auction grade (if it was bought in japan)

accident damaged cars have a dfferent auction grade to none damaged cars.

and now for perhaps a bit of light at the end of the tunnel.

As said if it isn't as decribed you have a right to get your mony back and the company will more than likely be facing prsecution for supplying goods not as described (or words to that effect)

speak to trading standards, they have people who know the law inside out and can give you the best advice, they may take a week to ring you back but they are the people in the know.

GC8

Hashi; I suspect that this fraud involves the Cert of De-Reg translation. If I were you Id contact the DVLA with a plausible reason for requesting copies of the original and the translation. Feel free to PM me and I'll explain more fully.


Simon

Tidgy

damn thats an essay, didn't think it was that much lmao

GC8

See what happens when you act in haste? Had I read you last post Id have realised that youd come to the same conclusion as me.....

Still; if youre interested in how its been done then let me know.


Simon

GC8

Without wanting to appear argumentitive Matt; the tags should always be right, theyre there for a reason. It looks as though youve got a late registration. In Japan as in the UK, a vehicle is regarded as being 'new' when its first registered, irrespective of when it was manufactured (within reason). This doesnt affect Hashi's situation btw.


Simon

Hashi

Thanks guys, I've sent them the official letter. I'll contact them soon and also try to obtain an official document from the main dealer to prove its year of manufacture.

In my opinion, they haven't got a leg to stand on. Maybe they too bought it in error, but I shouldn't be made to pay for it?

GC8, thanks. I'll let you know if I need more info.With a similar story to Tidgys, I rang an import dealer twice to confirm the cars condition. Twice he said that the car was good condition, taxed & tested and "ready to drive away".

So I zip up there one morning with my mate, check out this car. As soon as its fired up, coolant spills out from underneath!

Bits of the trim (inside and out) are missing and seatbelts were not bolted down to the floor! The guy drives it around the block - at which point I ask AGAIN about MOT & Tax. Turns out there's no Tax at all, but "this car will fly through the MOT" he says. Hmmmm.

Get back to the forecourt and its my turn to drive it. 5 mins later I'm back, I look under the car and Woah! There's a river of coolant following the car!

I make a low offer of cash for it, to compensate for the coolant system repair and missing/damaged trims etc. He says ok, "but you're not getting an MOT"!

So he was going to sell me this leaking , unroadworthy car, with no tax or MOT and expect me to take it away? I ask.

"Sold as seen mate" he says

Well, according to Trading Standards, "Sold as seen" does not apply if you're a Trader. It doesn't affect your rights as a buyer.

Anyway, I reminded him that he said it "would fly through the MOT" and it'd only cost a bit. He said it'd cost too much. So he contradicted himself.

And without so much of a haggle from him, I walked away.
Shame, nice looking car, but presented really badly by cowboys.

GC8

Can you share the make/model with us without letting the cat out of the bag? I cant work out what can be facelifted be altering the lights.....

If you do contact the DVLA requesting a copy of the Certificate of De-Registration ensure that they send you a copy of the translation too. I assume that the the original year of manufacture was 1992 or earlier and the date of first use 1996 or earlier? If not then theyd have struggled with an E-SVA.


Simon

MattN

It was manufactured in Dec 2002, and registered in Jan the following year, so wasn't a 'late' registration. If a car is built towards the end of the month it won't be registered the same month.

The point being the tags said 2002 and the car WAS a 2003 registered car, but by scoobynet standards it was a ringer, stolen, and a death trap because the tags were from a different year

minted_aye

Dont waste your breath with trading standards, write to the garage rejecting the car and demand a refund, if no joy park the car up and say the car is ready for collection and that you will be hiring a car with all costs being sought from them, at the same time file for county court action for the total paid + any additional costs ie: hire car etc

If its a ringer then go to the police what are you waiting for?

MattN

Thing is rejecting the car and passisng hire car costs on won't work (IMO of course).

He's saying it was advertised as a 1995 (or whatever), it IS registered as that so the advert is not misrepresenting the age of the car. The problem is the documentation was obvioulsy wrong which at present cannot be proven it was the garage that changed them. If it wasn't they would be within their rights not to pay hire costs or take the car back, if it was, well, I for one wouldn't be handing back a car to a bunch of criminals in the hope that a strongly worded letter make them change their ways.

No one can offer any real advice until we have a response from the garage inquestion, you never know they may well be totally unaware and happy to take the car back to keep their good reputation (if they have one). At the moment everything seems to be conjecture, we don't even know what ******* car it is!!!

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

This thread is a good warning story for everyone that goes to buy a car and gets hit with 'shiny car syndrome' !

Hashi

Ah
Well, now that the whole affair has been settled, this is what happened.

The car is a 1990ish MR2 G-Ltd rev 1/2, but was sold as a 94 rev 3.
I stupidly didnt do all the necessary research on each version so i cocked up big time, as there are quite a few glaringly obvious physical differences in hindsight.

I wrote the dealer a couple of official letters etc., and after the initial "surprise reaction" turning to denial and how "somebody else registered it", eventually he gave me a cheque (3 weeks later) for the full amount I'd paid for it. They knew exactly what they were selling, otherwise they would've disputed it more when I told them that I was going to speak to the police.

Furthermore, its back on sale again. With exactly the same description on the advert as when I bought it...