Collecting Cars auction results
Discussion
CWagstaff said:
Thanks Petrus,
Just been sent a link to another auction site, Trade Sellers.
The car was for sale in September.
The underbody looks *****d and the interior needs a bit more than £500 spending.
I’ll put my wallet away??
Buying cars on CC is not hassle free!
What was the damage to the underbody- rust or deformed metal/components?Just been sent a link to another auction site, Trade Sellers.
The car was for sale in September.
The underbody looks *****d and the interior needs a bit more than £500 spending.
I’ll put my wallet away??
Buying cars on CC is not hassle free!
CWagstaff said:
Thanks Petrus,
Just been sent a link to another auction site, Trade Sellers.
The car was for sale in September.
The underbody looks *****d and the interior needs a bit more than £500 spending.
I’ll put my wallet away??
Buying cars on CC is not hassle free!
That’s ok - just my opinion but that’s a lot of money for a car with so many question marks. Just been sent a link to another auction site, Trade Sellers.
The car was for sale in September.
The underbody looks *****d and the interior needs a bit more than £500 spending.
I’ll put my wallet away??
Buying cars on CC is not hassle free!
I disagree with the whole ethos of this "managed" sale business. It is being used in a manner that allows motor traders to circumvent the legal responsibilites of being a motor trader whilst still being "paid" to sell a car.
There is no doubt whatsever that DK engineering are a motor trader, if they are handling the sale of a car it is difficult to argue it's not a trade sale no matter what the agreement with them may be. Their business is motor trade, they are being paid to sell a car, how is this a private sale? The manner in which they are begin paid should not allow them the circumvent their resposibilites as a Motor Trader.
CC are just the advertising medium on which the sale is being advertised. In the same way Autotrader, Pistonheads or any other advertising medium would work, except the fee structure is very different.
Ed Lovett will argue differently and has done so with me directly during a recent phone conversation. CC do monitor this forum/thread with genuine interest.
Choosing a dealer like DK engineering to "Manage" the sale is, in my opinion, giving a false sense of security to potential buyers. It is being done in a way to create a perceived quality or security that the car in question is absolutely on point but with no comeback whatsoever if it isn't.
It's a loophole that is being exploited openly and it will take a high profile problem and likely a court case to change it materially.
Personally I find the whole practice designed to be misleading.
There is no doubt whatsever that DK engineering are a motor trader, if they are handling the sale of a car it is difficult to argue it's not a trade sale no matter what the agreement with them may be. Their business is motor trade, they are being paid to sell a car, how is this a private sale? The manner in which they are begin paid should not allow them the circumvent their resposibilites as a Motor Trader.
CC are just the advertising medium on which the sale is being advertised. In the same way Autotrader, Pistonheads or any other advertising medium would work, except the fee structure is very different.
Ed Lovett will argue differently and has done so with me directly during a recent phone conversation. CC do monitor this forum/thread with genuine interest.
Choosing a dealer like DK engineering to "Manage" the sale is, in my opinion, giving a false sense of security to potential buyers. It is being done in a way to create a perceived quality or security that the car in question is absolutely on point but with no comeback whatsoever if it isn't.
It's a loophole that is being exploited openly and it will take a high profile problem and likely a court case to change it materially.
Personally I find the whole practice designed to be misleading.
Edited by 21ATS on Thursday 22 October 21:12
21ATS said:
I disagree with the whole ethos of this "managed" sale business. It is being used in a manner that allows motor traders to circumvent the legal responsibilites of being a motor trader whilst still being "paid" to sell a car.
There is no doubt whatsever that DK engineering are a motor trader, if they are handling the sale of a car it is difficult to argue it's not a trade sale no matter what the agreement with them may be. Their business is motor trade, they are being paid to sell a car, how is this a private sale? The manner in which they are begin paid should not allow them the circumvent their resposibilites as a Motor Trader.
CC are just the advertising medium on which the sale is being advertised. In the same way Autotrader, Pistonheads or any other advertising medium would work, except the fee structure is very different.
Ed Lovett will argue differently and has done so with me directly during a recent phone conversation. CC do monitor this forum/thread with genuine interest.
Choosing a dealer like DK engineering to "Manage" the sale is, in my opinion, giving a false sense of security to potential buyers. It is being done in a way to create a perceived quality or security that the car in question is absolutely on point but with no comeback whatsoever if it isn't.
It's a loophole that is being exploited openly and it will take a high profile problem and likely a court case to change it materially.
Personally I find the whole practice designed to be misleading.
If DK are offloading sub standard shock in this way via CC shame on them. It will only come back to bite them and their reputation. There is no doubt whatsever that DK engineering are a motor trader, if they are handling the sale of a car it is difficult to argue it's not a trade sale no matter what the agreement with them may be. Their business is motor trade, they are being paid to sell a car, how is this a private sale? The manner in which they are begin paid should not allow them the circumvent their resposibilites as a Motor Trader.
CC are just the advertising medium on which the sale is being advertised. In the same way Autotrader, Pistonheads or any other advertising medium would work, except the fee structure is very different.
Ed Lovett will argue differently and has done so with me directly during a recent phone conversation. CC do monitor this forum/thread with genuine interest.
Choosing a dealer like DK engineering to "Manage" the sale is, in my opinion, giving a false sense of security to potential buyers. It is being done in a way to create a perceived quality or security that the car in question is absolutely on point but with no comeback whatsoever if it isn't.
It's a loophole that is being exploited openly and it will take a high profile problem and likely a court case to change it materially.
Personally I find the whole practice designed to be misleading.
Edited by 21ATS on Thursday 22 October 21:12
Do DK have a financial interest in CC?
DK sold a car very early on in lockdown through CC....991.1 GT3 RS. It was a trade sale IIRC. So this “managed sale” status does seem odd but I suppose it’s the same as any auction. That would be CC’s argument I assume. Although the significant difference is there you pay the auction house and don’t have any direct contract/exchange of finds between buyer and seller.
And I believe there is a relationship...someone I know bought a car through International Collectibles he told me store cars with DK (DK have 250 cars in storage!). I don’t believe International Collectibles have a premises/showroom per se....great business model if you can make it work.
I am sure CC do read the thread....like a lot of dealers read PH.
And I believe there is a relationship...someone I know bought a car through International Collectibles he told me store cars with DK (DK have 250 cars in storage!). I don’t believe International Collectibles have a premises/showroom per se....great business model if you can make it work.
I am sure CC do read the thread....like a lot of dealers read PH.
thecook101 said:
Easy gents. Maybe check the car in question before insinuating that either myself or DK are attempting to fool anyone into buying sub-standard stock.
As I said on another thread this week. No one should be throwing around shade towards cars without getting facts 100% correct. To many cars have been wrongly sullied on forums.
Even if its eventually proven a particular car is not the one they thought it was, there's a lot of stupid people who will still believe it. On the internet mud sticks for years.
Edited by FezSpider on Thursday 22 October 22:27
Seems to be a few people, who have neither bought nor sold cars through CC that are jumping to conclusions. I’ve had no complaints in actual dealings with them, and don’t know anyone who has.
Managed bids are stats clearly, and just seem like an agency to me - I sold a car like that as couldn’t be bothered with the hassle of answering daft questions...
Managed bids are stats clearly, and just seem like an agency to me - I sold a car like that as couldn’t be bothered with the hassle of answering daft questions...
thecook101 said:
Easy gents. Maybe check the car in question before insinuating that either myself or DK are attempting to fool anyone into buying sub-standard stock.
Understand very clearly I am not questioning the car in this or any other listing. It is the manner in which it is being sold that I'm questioning.It could be the most perfect example of whatever model it is, or it couldn't. The issue I have is a motor trader (a very prominent one in this case) are lending their name to the sale of a vehicle (to provide a percieved quality or provenance) and being paid to "manage" the sale. However they are not fulfilling their legal requirment as a motor trader by providing any form of guarantee should a major problem reveal itself after the sale.
It's a private sale, end of story. I believe the "managed" status is misleading to potential buyers.
I believe they are circumventing thier obligations as a motor trader by trading in this manner.
Is it avoidance or evasion? That's the critical point.
This is how it works:-
CC list the car - they are an advertising platform only, there is no comeback or legal responsibility to accurately describe the car. The only obligation is reputation.
The managing agent (in this case DK) act a "broker" - they are simply introducing a buyer to a vendor and enabling a transaction to take place. They are then paid a fee by the vendor for their services. Legally this is being described as a private sale.
Should there be a catastrophic failure with the car on the drive home - tough, it's a private sale - there's no comeback.
Should it turn out to be stolen or cloned at a later date and not have been recorded on HPi, tough - your problem, no comeback with either the broker or the advertising platform. You see the problem.
Want to take out finance on the car? That's whole other can of worms.
The main issue being that all this is being presented in a way that you're dealing with a motor dealer or motor trader and you're not.
Moderator edit: cut out the potentially defamatory comments please.
Edited by 21ATS on Thursday 22 October 23:19
I will add here that my personal interest in this situation is of no particular beef with anyone (or any car) in particular but rather the legalities of the entire on line car sales business that has boomed since the intervention of CV-19.
I own and run an E commerce business and I need to be very aware of what my legal obligations are and aren't. As is happens most of our customers are B2B not B2C and most of them have no idea that the legislation is very different indeed based on the status of the original sale.
What I would be interested to know is the status of liability under "distance selling regulations" when a sale is managed by a recognised motor trader.
Most legalities available here:-
https://www.themotorombudsman.org/distance-sales-f...
Also of interest is this site regard B2B and B2C transactions:-
https://www.wholesaleclearance.co.uk/blog/differen...
With particular interest to this paragraph:-
What is exempt from the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000
1. Business-to-business contracts
2. Financial services sold at a distance (However, these are covered by the Financial Services (Distant Marketing) Regulations)
3. Contracts for the sale of land
4. Products bought from vending machines
5. Goods or services bought at an auction with an auctioneer.
In this instance eBay is NOT an auction site (not according to EU directives at any rate), and in any case “Buy It Now” listings and “Second Chance Offers” will never be regarded as auctions.
Is CC and Auction site or is it simply an advertising platform? There is no auctioneer. So interestingly CC could actually be subject legally to distance selling regs when describing a sale as "managed as it's clearly a business undertaking the transaction. There's a thought.
I own and run an E commerce business and I need to be very aware of what my legal obligations are and aren't. As is happens most of our customers are B2B not B2C and most of them have no idea that the legislation is very different indeed based on the status of the original sale.
What I would be interested to know is the status of liability under "distance selling regulations" when a sale is managed by a recognised motor trader.
Most legalities available here:-
https://www.themotorombudsman.org/distance-sales-f...
Also of interest is this site regard B2B and B2C transactions:-
https://www.wholesaleclearance.co.uk/blog/differen...
With particular interest to this paragraph:-
What is exempt from the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000
1. Business-to-business contracts
2. Financial services sold at a distance (However, these are covered by the Financial Services (Distant Marketing) Regulations)
3. Contracts for the sale of land
4. Products bought from vending machines
5. Goods or services bought at an auction with an auctioneer.
In this instance eBay is NOT an auction site (not according to EU directives at any rate), and in any case “Buy It Now” listings and “Second Chance Offers” will never be regarded as auctions.
Is CC and Auction site or is it simply an advertising platform? There is no auctioneer. So interestingly CC could actually be subject legally to distance selling regs when describing a sale as "managed as it's clearly a business undertaking the transaction. There's a thought.
Edited by 21ATS on Thursday 22 October 23:54
It looks like some of the posts regarding myself and the 612 owner was deleted. That’s very odd as I believe nothing there was against any rules.
I am totally in sync with 21ATS and Chieb regarding their views on CC.
There is nothing wrong with DK selling the car but there is something wrong if they try to circumvent their responsibilities by ducking behind a ‘managed’ sale act.
To me, if DK was being paid to manage the sale, they are acting as a dealer. If my son lists the car on my behalf, I can argue it’s a managed sale!
21ATS said:
thecook101 said:
Easy gents. Maybe check the car in question before insinuating that either myself or DK are attempting to fool anyone into buying sub-standard stock.
Understand very clearly I am not questioning the car in this or any other listing. It is the manner in which it is being sold that I'm questioning.It could be the most perfect example of whatever model it is, or it couldn't. The issue I have is a motor trader (a very prominent one in this case) are lending their name to the sale of a vehicle (to provide a percieved quality or provenance) and being paid to "manage" the sale. However they are not fulfilling their legal requirment as a motor trader by providing any form of guarantee should a major problem reveal itself after the sale.
It's a private sale, end of story. I believe the "managed" status is misleading to potential buyers.
I believe they are circumventing thier obligations as a motor trader by trading in this manner.
Is it avoidance or evasion? That's the critical point.
This is how it works:-
CC list the car - they are an advertising platform only, there is no comeback or legal responsibility to accurately describe the car. The only obligation is reputation.
The managing agent (in this case DK) act a "broker" - they are simply introducing a buyer to a vendor and enabling a transaction to take place. They are then paid a fee by the vendor for their services. Legally this is being described as a private sale.
Should there be a catastrophic failure with the car on the drive home - tough, it's a private sale - there's no comeback.
Should it turn out to be stolen or cloned at a later date and not have been recorded on HPi, tough - your problem, no comeback with either the broker or the advertising platform. You see the problem.
Want to take out finance on the car? That's whole other can of worms.
The main issue being that all this is being presented in a way that you're dealing with a motor dealer or motor trader and you're not.
Edited by 21ATS on Thursday 22 October 23:19
As for the merits or otherwise of the 512 BB, someone clearly thought that for "fairly rough" private sale money (127k) it was worth taking a punt on a car that at least seems to have had the mechanicals taken care of over the last 26 years.
The 512bb is just a bit of a rough and previously crashed car. It’s been disclosed and nothing wrong.
I think the point of discussion is whether DK who is getting paid to organize the sale of the really nice 612 on CC, should be sold as a trade sale l, rather than a ‘managed’ which is essentially a misleading version of private sale.
I think the point of discussion is whether DK who is getting paid to organize the sale of the really nice 612 on CC, should be sold as a trade sale l, rather than a ‘managed’ which is essentially a misleading version of private sale.
9Elfer said:
I think the point of discussion is whether DK who is getting paid to organize the sale of the really nice 612 on CC, should be sold as a trade sale l, rather than a ‘managed’ which is essentially a misleading version of private sale.
This exactly.Lets take the 612 sale as an example.
The owner has employed DK to manage the sale on their behalf. CC has clearly stated on their listing that the sale is "managed".
The issue here is the status of the sale of a motor vehicle can only be one of two - Private or Trade. There is no third "goldilocks" option where all the professionals get paid and none of them are required to take any legal responsibility.
Understand that I don't feel anything underhand is going on here, I get the feeling CC is doing everything it can to be transaparent about how a transaction is taking place. However in doing so I think they have inadvertantly shifted liability to the company managing the sale.
When selling on line or advertising on line the vendor doesn't simply get to chose if a transaction is Private or Trade, the nature of the way transaction is undertaken determines this. That nature of the transaction is defined by the consumer protection regulations which also encompases distance selling regulations.
More details here:-
https://www.wholesaleclearance.co.uk/blog/differen...
The managing agent (in this case DK) are a professional motor trader being paid by an owner to sell their car via an online platform. CC. This is a trade sale. I think it would be very difficult indeed for DK to legally claim it was anything but - simply because CC are stating they are managing the sale. CC (like eBay) have no responsibility whatsoever for the transaction.
I think DK will take a look at this and have a rethink - they'll see CC is getting 6% for advertising/hosting the sale but that DK are in fact on the hook as a dealer should any poo hit the fan afterwards. All simply because CC are stating this is a "Managed" sale.
Interestingly on the information column on Trade sales CC chose to add the following:-
If they wanted to be truly transparent, adding a similar statement to Private (and managed if they chose to continue with that category - but I think that's subject to being legally defined) that as a buyer you have no rights whatsoever would probably be the way forward.
Edited by 21ATS on Friday 23 October 09:05
I see there is a 996 GT3 coming up being sold by Prestige Cars of Kent. I really don't understand why a dealer who apparently knows about super cars and rare / prestige cars would service a car like this themselves? It has an unblemished OPC and renowned specialist service history then they ruin the value and desirability of this one owner car by servicing it themselves.
This isn't the first time I have seen this, it seems to to be a new trend with many 'prestige' dealers to save a few hundred quid but its very short sighted. Why do this? It just seems crazy to me?
This isn't the first time I have seen this, it seems to to be a new trend with many 'prestige' dealers to save a few hundred quid but its very short sighted. Why do this? It just seems crazy to me?
I think it also missed a service. They've had it a while.
There was a mint black one which belonged to a PH-er previously which suffered a similar fate.
I'm guessing some were bought by the trade at a high point in the market and they've been faced with taking a loss. I don't know why they wouldn't protect the integrity and value of the car while it's in their care. It's a bit of a waste.
There was a mint black one which belonged to a PH-er previously which suffered a similar fate.
I'm guessing some were bought by the trade at a high point in the market and they've been faced with taking a loss. I don't know why they wouldn't protect the integrity and value of the car while it's in their care. It's a bit of a waste.
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff