550 Maranello article - they'll be Β£200k before you know it!

550 Maranello article - they'll be Β£200k before you know it!

Author
Discussion

footsoldier

1,771 posts

150 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
getting pricey already

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
That's me out, I was comfortable at £65,000 including 6% commission which is a bid at £61,320.

This is a private sale of a driver mileage 550, anymore than where it is now it creeping into the realms of retail pricing.

It's academic anyhow as it appears it's still not hit reserve.

SFTWend

211 posts

33 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
Very sensible. I think £60k was plenty given service interval gaps and lesser known garages having maintained the car.

It's reached current bid much earlier than one would expect. If you read recent CC thread content there is enough rumour and gossip to make one question whether buying via this medium is a good idea.

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
I have "Angel" down as a house bidder. It's not usual you smash the bid out the park then start asking for service proof.

ferrisbueller

24,994 posts

185 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
I have "Angel" down as a house bidder. It's not usual you smash the bid out the park then start asking for service proof.
They've hardly smashed it out the park, just bid more than you wanted to pay. Assuming CC doesn't allow duplicate user IDs, that user has bought (paid for and collected) at least one other car from CC.

jtremlett

934 posts

180 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
SFTWend said:
Very sensible. I think £60k was plenty given service interval gaps and lesser known garages having maintained the car.

It's reached current bid much earlier than one would expect. If you read recent CC thread content there is enough rumour and gossip to make one question whether buying via this medium is a good idea.
I wouldn't for a moment wish to suggest anyone should bid higher that they have decided to. That said, I can't really see much of an issue with the service history. It looks like it missed a service or two 10 years ago. If that was going to lead to any issues they would have happened before now. Also the last couple of services have been by QV who are a known specialist even if I don't know some of the others.

But also the service history may not necessarily be a complete record of the servicing it has actually had. When I bought my own 550 it had some gaps in the service history in the service book. However, it also came with paperwork for a service that hadn't been recorded in the book. After I bought the car I took the book and paperwork to Maranello's to get them to add in the stamp for the service I had the paperwork for. They were happy to do that for me (although I know them well anyway) and I happened to ask if there were any other services on their system not in the book. I ended up going away with stamps in the book for four services that had been done at a main dealer but were not previously stamped in the book. I'm sure that isn't an infrequent occurrence because I have taken cars in for service and forgotten to take the book and I've taken cars in for service and the dealer has forgotten to stamp the book.

In any case, really the service history is only backing up the condition of the car and it is that which is really the most important thing in my view.

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
ferrisbueller said:
They've hardly smashed it out the park, just bid more than you wanted to pay. Assuming CC doesn't allow duplicate user IDs, that user has bought (paid for and collected) at least one other car from CC.
You don't find it odd that the bids were taken up and then the questions about history start?

It was that bit I found odd. Surely you'd like this information before you are the current winning bidder?

EDIT, I've just thought about this and it dawned on me it's actually irrelevant as the reserve appears to have not been met yet.

Edited by 21ATS on Monday 12th October 22:47

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Monday 12th October
quotequote all
jtremlett said:
wouldn't for a moment wish to suggest anyone should bid higher that they have decided to. That said, I can't really see much of an issue with the service history. It looks like it missed a service or two 10 years ago. If that was going to lead to any issues they would have happened before now. Also the last couple of services have been by QV who are a known specialist even if I don't know some of the others.

But also the service history may not necessarily be a complete record of the servicing it has actually had. When I bought my own 550 it had some gaps in the service history in the service book. However, it also came with paperwork for a service that hadn't been recorded in the book. After I bought the car I took the book and paperwork to Maranello's to get them to add in the stamp for the service I had the paperwork for. They were happy to do that for me (although I know them well anyway) and I happened to ask if there were any other services on their system not in the book. I ended up going away with stamps in the book for four services that had been done at a main dealer but were not previously stamped in the book. I'm sure that isn't an infrequent occurrence because I have taken cars in for service and forgotten to take the book and I've taken cars in for service and the dealer has forgotten to stamp the book.

In any case, really the service history is only backing up the condition of the car and it is that which is really the most important thing in my view.
I'm less bothered about the history as the car looks tidy.

What does bother me - and this is not specifically about this car, is the number of people clearly trading vehicles and managing to circumvent any legal comback in doing so.

The Collecting Cars as a site has shaken up the industry, I'm not entirely sure it's a good thing yet. It's certainly blurred the lines between what or who is a dealer and who isn't. This particular listing has highlighted another business model that operates in a similar manner.

The seller of this car is a storage facility, they openly advertise their service for "Sales & Aquisition" here:- https://www.v-management.com/#sales

They aren't dealers though - they are simply "introducing" two buyers and taking a commission from the seller for doing so - much like Collecting Cars. No accountability, no comeback.

I have no doubt this has been going on for some time but it seems to be growing.

So when is a dealer not a dealer? Surely if you're brokering sales and being paid for doing so you're a dealer?

bish_345

67 posts

28 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
I'm less bothered about the history as the car looks tidy.

What does bother me - and this is not specifically about this car, is the number of people clearly trading vehicles and managing to circumvent any legal comback in doing so.

The Collecting Cars as a site has shaken up the industry, I'm not entirely sure it's a good thing yet. It's certainly blurred the lines between what or who is a dealer and who isn't. This particular listing has highlighted another business model that operates in a similar manner.

The seller of this car is a storage facility, they openly advertise their service for "Sales & Aquisition" here:- https://www.v-management.com/#sales

They aren't dealers though - they are simply "introducing" two buyers and taking a commission from the seller for doing so - much like Collecting Cars. No accountability, no comeback.

I have no doubt this has been going on for some time but it seems to be growing.

So when is a dealer not a dealer? Surely if you're brokering sales and being paid for doing so you're a dealer?
Imagine you are a car storage facility storing several hundred cars. A fair number of the owners live overseas. An owner decides to sell one of his cars. He can't be bothered to deal with the public. He asks the storage facility (which also looks after his MOT and taxation and annual service arrangements as he can't be bothered to deal with that minutiae either) to sell the car for him. This happens a few times a year. The seller is clearly the owner of the car, not the storage facility. The storage facility may "handle" the sale for a fee, but it seems a stretch to think of them as a dealer trading vehicles and doing so with a deliberate view to circumventing legal obligations. Is it that different from the "I'm selling the car on behalf of a friend/relative" adverts where presumably the seller's friend/relative who deals with the tyre kickers and does the deal probably gets paid a few bob by the seller for his time and trouble? Who knows...

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
bish_345 said:
21ATS said:
I'm less bothered about the history as the car looks tidy.

What does bother me - and this is not specifically about this car, is the number of people clearly trading vehicles and managing to circumvent any legal comback in doing so.

The Collecting Cars as a site has shaken up the industry, I'm not entirely sure it's a good thing yet. It's certainly blurred the lines between what or who is a dealer and who isn't. This particular listing has highlighted another business model that operates in a similar manner.

The seller of this car is a storage facility, they openly advertise their service for "Sales & Aquisition" here:- https://www.v-management.com/#sales

They aren't dealers though - they are simply "introducing" two buyers and taking a commission from the seller for doing so - much like Collecting Cars. No accountability, no comeback.

I have no doubt this has been going on for some time but it seems to be growing.

So when is a dealer not a dealer? Surely if you're brokering sales and being paid for doing so you're a dealer?
Imagine you are a car storage facility storing several hundred cars. A fair number of the owners live overseas. An owner decides to sell one of his cars. He can't be bothered to deal with the public. He asks the storage facility (which also looks after his MOT and taxation and annual service arrangements as he can't be bothered to deal with that minutiae either) to sell the car for him. This happens a few times a year. The seller is clearly the owner of the car, not the storage facility. The storage facility may "handle" the sale for a fee, but it seems a stretch to think of them as a dealer trading vehicles and doing so with a deliberate view to circumventing legal obligations. Is it that different from the "I'm selling the car on behalf of a friend/relative" adverts where presumably the seller's friend/relative who deals with the tyre kickers and does the deal probably gets paid a few bob by the seller for his time and trouble? Who knows...
Yes it's different when they are actively advertising a service of sales and acquisition. IMO they are trading/dealing. That is simply nothing like selling a car as a one off for a friend or family member.

They are being paid to broker a sale. How can that not be considered trading/dealing?


jtremlett

934 posts

180 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
I don't know what the legal definition of a trader is but that is what counts. Although if someone is starting off trying to avoid the obligations that come with that then you know you're going to have a fight if anything goes wrong.

ferrisbueller

24,994 posts

185 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
ferrisbueller said:
They've hardly smashed it out the park, just bid more than you wanted to pay. Assuming CC doesn't allow duplicate user IDs, that user has bought (paid for and collected) at least one other car from CC.
You don't find it odd that the bids were taken up and then the questions about history start?

It was that bit I found odd. Surely you'd like this information before you are the current winning bidder?

EDIT, I've just thought about this and it dawned on me it's actually irrelevant as the reserve appears to have not been met yet.

Edited by 21ATS on Monday 12th October 22:47
I don't find it odd, no. Given how "safe" the original bid was.

Your point was that the bidder was an insider or employee. I was just pointing out that the user ID in question has bought from CC before.

SFTWend

211 posts

33 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
Traders dont have any consumer/warranty obligations when selling via auction.

Apparently it's fairly standard practice for auction house employees to bid a car close to reserve. Also, the other thread suggests some cars recorded as sold aren't.

MDL111

4,884 posts

135 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
jtremlett said:
SFTWend said:
Very sensible. I think £60k was plenty given service interval gaps and lesser known garages having maintained the car.

It's reached current bid much earlier than one would expect. If you read recent CC thread content there is enough rumour and gossip to make one question whether buying via this medium is a good idea.
I wouldn't for a moment wish to suggest anyone should bid higher that they have decided to. That said, I can't really see much of an issue with the service history. It looks like it missed a service or two 10 years ago. If that was going to lead to any issues they would have happened before now. Also the last couple of services have been by QV who are a known specialist even if I don't know some of the others.

But also the service history may not necessarily be a complete record of the servicing it has actually had. When I bought my own 550 it had some gaps in the service history in the service book. However, it also came with paperwork for a service that hadn't been recorded in the book. After I bought the car I took the book and paperwork to Maranello's to get them to add in the stamp for the service I had the paperwork for. They were happy to do that for me (although I know them well anyway) and I happened to ask if there were any other services on their system not in the book. I ended up going away with stamps in the book for four services that had been done at a main dealer but were not previously stamped in the book. I'm sure that isn't an infrequent occurrence because I have taken cars in for service and forgotten to take the book and I've taken cars in for service and the dealer has forgotten to stamp the book.

In any case, really the service history is only backing up the condition of the car and it is that which is really the most important thing in my view.
Yup, I don’t think I have ever had my service books stamped - I have the invoices in my email inbox somewhere, but that’s about it

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
SFTWend said:
Traders dont have any consumer/warranty obligations when selling via auction.

Apparently it's fairly standard practice for auction house employees to bid a car close to reserve. Also, the other thread suggests some cars recorded as sold aren't.
You're confusing CC with a traditional auction model.

Whilst their format is that of an auction in so much as you "bid", they aren't doing anything other than hosting a sale between two parties.

What do I mean?

Say you go to Bonhams to buy a car. You are buying the car from Bonhams, not the owner. The owner consigns the car to Bonhams and pays a fee, they market it, host an auction, you bid and win and also pay a fee. You pay the winning bid plus fee to Bonhams, they then pay the owner of the car.

On CC, you bid. If you meet reserve CC puts you in touch with the person selling the car and you complete the transaction directly as a private sale assuming the seller hasn't identified themselves as a trader. All after CC has taken it's 6% commission of course.

CC isn't an auction house, it's an advertising platform in the same way Autotrader or Ebay are.

Edited by 21ATS on Tuesday 13th October 12:27

21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
ferrisbueller said:
I don't find it odd, no. Given how "safe" the original bid was.

Your point was that the bidder was an insider or employee. I was just pointing out that the user ID in question has bought from CC before.
To me the bid pattern and timing bore all the hallmarks of someone bidding on behalf of the house taking it up to close to the reserve.

I wasn't expecting to be outbid unitl the final day based on all previous sales on this site I'd been watching.

I may be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.

ferrisbueller

24,994 posts

185 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
ferrisbueller said:
I don't find it odd, no. Given how "safe" the original bid was.

Your point was that the bidder was an insider or employee. I was just pointing out that the user ID in question has bought from CC before.
To me the bid pattern and timing bore all the hallmarks of someone bidding on behalf of the house taking it up to close to the reserve.

I wasn't expecting to be outbid unitl the final day based on all previous sales on this site I'd been watching.

I may be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.
If it helps, a user with that ID bought my friend's car off CC and having placed a bid then asked various questions, and then bid significantly more up to the end of the auction. The car was subsequently paid for and collected.




21ATS

186 posts

30 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
ferrisbueller said:
If it helps, a user with that ID bought my friend's car off CC and having placed a bid then asked various questions, and then bid significantly more up to the end of the auction. The car was subsequently paid for and collected.
I wonder if he's a trader then? He seems to be very prolific. I've seen his name bidding on a lot of what I've been watching.

ferrisbueller

24,994 posts

185 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
ferrisbueller said:
If it helps, a user with that ID bought my friend's car off CC and having placed a bid then asked various questions, and then bid significantly more up to the end of the auction. The car was subsequently paid for and collected.
I wonder if he's a trader then? He seems to be very prolific. I've seen his name bidding on a lot of what I've been watching.
Whatever, they're a genuine buyer.

footsoldier

1,771 posts

150 months

Tuesday 13th October
quotequote all
21ATS said:
You're confusing CC with a traditional auction model.

Whilst their format is that of an auction in so much as you "bid", they aren't doing anything other than hosting a sale between two parties.

What do I mean?

Say you go to Bonhams to buy a car. You are buying the car from Bonhams, not the owner. The owner consigns the car to Bonhams and pays a fee, they market it, host an auction, you bid and win and also pay a fee. You pay the winning bid plus fee to Bonhams, they then pay the owner of the car.

On CC, you bid. If you meet reserve CC puts you in touch with the person selling the car and you complete the transaction directly as a private sale assuming the seller hasn't identified themselves as a trader. All after CC has taken it's 6% commission of course.

CC isn't an auction house, it's an advertising platform in the same way Autotrader or Ebay are.

Edited by 21ATS on Tuesday 13th October 12:27
Not quite right...the auction house deals with the cash, but it's still you that's on the hook if buyer doesn't pay.
In fact, they have t their T&Cs that they can take action to pursue the defaulting buyer, and the costs of recovery are deducted from your proceeds, but their fee is still payable in full as a priority. The owner doesn't get paid (net of commission and any legal costs) until the cash is received from bidder.
Bonhams is acting as an agent for the vendor, no more than that


Edited by footsoldier on Tuesday 13th October 13:33


Edited by footsoldier on Tuesday 13th October 13:58