know theses regs..??.....
know theses regs..??.....
Author
Discussion

kleonard

Original Poster:

767 posts

251 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
G11EWY
SJR798
anyone know theses regs...?? gt2....?? any history..??

Rob_T

1,916 posts

278 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
yes.

[PART OF MESSAGE DELETED]

Edited by Dazren (moderator) to say can I please remind everyone of this sites no naming and shaming rules. If anyone has concerns about a specific vehicle could they contact the poster requesting the info via email directly, then perhaps post a "YHM" message on the thread, so that anyone else looking at the car and seeing the thread can contact you away from this site.

thanks

DAZ

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:10

rich 36

13,739 posts

293 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
[picture deleted]

Plate indicates a yellow GT2 registered in 2003 on the RAC website.

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:28

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
FAO - KLeonard

Please read my note, following the edit of Rob's post. Can I please ask you contact him directly.

thanks

DAZ
(moderator)

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:11

kleonard

Original Poster:

767 posts

251 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
no prob.... how do you obtain peoples e mail add from forum...???

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
Click poster's name next to their message. Then click on the link over ont he right hand side, which in Rob's case is just above the piccy of his GT2.

DAZ

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:14

DanH

12,287 posts

287 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
dazren said:
Click poster's name next to their message. Then click on the link over ont he right hand side, which in Rob's case is just above the piccy of his GT2.

DAZ

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:14


lol Daz, have you looked more closely at the screenshot above?

kleonard

Original Poster:

767 posts

251 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
bad weather... that must mean dangerous driving conditions.... heavy right foot= damage

DanH

12,287 posts

287 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
kleonard said:
bad weather... that must mean dangerous driving conditions.... heavy right foot= damage


You are reading more into that than I did. Its simply that Rob's moderated comment is pictured in the screenshot

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
DanH said:
lol Daz, have you looked more closely at the screenshot above?

Good spot.

DAZ

agent006

12,058 posts

291 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
DanH said:
lol Daz, have you looked more closely at the screenshot above?


Why was rich searching for "wild and wooly northampton"?

edit: and now the pic's gone, nobody can see the contents of his Google search bar.

>> Edited by agent006 on Monday 19th December 23:28

cuneus

5,963 posts

269 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
Sorry I must have lost the plot how exactly did he name and shame ?

kleonard

Original Poster:

767 posts

251 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
true....

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
cuneus said:
Sorry I must have lost the plot how exactly did he name and shame ?

If any feedback or comments on an internet forum such as this were to cause the owner of a vehicle to lose a sale etc and they can demonstate a loss, he/she will have a case against the website/owners to reimburse the loss. BTW I don't make the rules up, parliament/the courts actions lead Ted setting them to being the way they are.

Hence the clarification of how people may choose to independently pass info between each other whilst keeping this website out of it.

DAZ

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:42

cuneus

5,963 posts

269 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
Fair enough

I read the name and shame and it only references dealers not cars

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
My understaning is the same legal redress is available to individuals as well businesses etc.

DAZ

>> Edited by dazren on Monday 19th December 23:49

cuneus

5,963 posts

269 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
Daz , not going to argue but there are many examples where the fora have comments aboutt individual cars if they have been crashed (I've been amazed how many cars are "known" in this forum)

dazren

22,612 posts

288 months

Monday 19th December 2005
quotequote all
cuneus said:
Daz , not going to argue but there are many examples where the fora have comments aboutt individual cars if they have been crashed (I've been amazed how many cars are "known" in this forum)

I've seen many comments myself, but there is normally an element of vagueness ie not stating specific plates. The knowledge base here is very good, which is down to the contributors.

DAZ

sjn2004

4,051 posts

264 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
Wouldn't it be easier and quicker to just print a list of GT2's that weren't crashed?

Just a serious question, do dealers try and pass off these crash damaged GT2's as 100% clean? If they are, they are effectively defrauding the buyer and could hardly cry if they are caught out by a few posts on a website?

slippydiff

16,238 posts

250 months

Tuesday 20th December 2005
quotequote all
From my knowledge of "the trade" such cars are usually found to be rogue after purchase by the dealer, they are then sold onto traders as a trade sale, often at a loss (the the trade purchaser buys in full knowledge of the cars "history" and thus has no redress against the vendor)