Sellers that fail to supply details of cars issues.

[Adz The Rat]

Why on earth is someone going to list advisories??

[POORCARDEALER]

Some of the issues bothered me more than others, but the Govt could do a bl00dy big service to the motoring public by promoting that website, even if not everyone is qualified to interpret the advisories.



[/quote]

Quite simple....if all the advisories were fails then the work would have to be carried out to gain an MOT.


The price of cars will go up significantly obviously

[J4CKO]

Nothing there would bother me, just seems like an MOT tester who loves his job, a bit of time with a bit of wore wool, a rag and some WD40 would have most of that lot cleaned up.

Cant be many 15 year old cars that have been used that dont have rusty springs, pitted brake disks etc, neither will need replacing.

For me, I would just go and view it and pull it to bits anyway "Will need brakes" and then chip it based on the seller will be aware by the MOT anyway.

I am interested in rust and actually rusty brake pipes, stuff that will cost big money or involve me on the path getting annoyed with rusty bolts.

[mighty kitten]

Back under the old system with red green and amber paper I would have traders screw the advisories up and bin them in front of me so I always printed extras and hid them usually under seats so when the occasional call from a buyer having issues and wanting to make someone responsible the evidence was there to see , I don't do any sales cars now thankfully

[Ahbefive]

r11co said:

You are joking, aren't you? The car was 'priced accordingly. £1200 for a TT with suspension components that are old but 'not significantly weakened' is a bit of a result.

Well first of all £1200 was not the price.

Secondly, maybe I'm just used to seeing a clean m.o.t sheet on my cars when they pass the m.o.t and also used to listing faults with cars when I sell them even if they are minor.

If a seller has nothing to hide then whats the problem?

I did think this would end up as another "bash the op" thread but was really more interested in seeing more/worse examples of this sort of thing rather than hear peoples excuses as to why they don't list faults in their cars when they sell.

[r11co]

Ahbefive said:

Well first of all £1200 was not the price.

OK, so the ad's gone now but I am pretty sure it was a figure south of £2000.

Ahbefive said:

Secondly, maybe I'm just used to seeing a clean m.o.t sheet on my cars when they pass the m.o.t...

That's all down to your tester then. As I said - advisories are discretionary.

Ahbefive said:

...and also used to listing faults with cars when I sell them even if they are minor.

None of the advisories are faults. The majority are cosmetic issues and the rest are a vague expression of wear-and-tear far short of being a safety issue - all consistent with age/mileage/pricing.

The words 'not seriously weakened' and 'not resulting in excessive movement' speak for themselves and are what matter.

'Slight corrosion to ferrules' - I reckon that could be an observation levelled at a zero-mileage car that has sat outdoors in a pound for a few weeks in midwinter.