HPI / MOT questions and stuff
Discussion
Mate of mine has bought a car from everyone's favourite internet auction site, and things aren't checking out.
The HPI is saying its clear, but doesn't list the engine number. I've not seen this before - is this an irregularity, or is it normal?
Secondly, it looks like on an MOT certificate, the mileage has been transposed... so its done LESS miles than the previous one, e.g.
Old MOT 55100
New MOT 54500
Thoughts?
The HPI is saying its clear, but doesn't list the engine number. I've not seen this before - is this an irregularity, or is it normal?
Secondly, it looks like on an MOT certificate, the mileage has been transposed... so its done LESS miles than the previous one, e.g.
Old MOT 55100
New MOT 54500
Thoughts?
Having looked at the info, I reckon the mileage was written down as 57762 and transfered to the computer as 51162. Anyone know if this is possible?
Additionally, the car is a 51 plate, registed in Feb 2002. However, it was first presented for MOT in 2006. Is there any way I can check whether it was SORN'd?
Additionally, the car is a 51 plate, registed in Feb 2002. However, it was first presented for MOT in 2006. Is there any way I can check whether it was SORN'd?
I cant help with the HPI thing, the MOT Mileage can be one of 2 things He has adjusted the mileage backwards ie Clocked it, or more realisticly he has replaced the dials in the dash at some point and not bothered updating the odometer to the correct mileage(I did this on my old mk4 escort and drove for 3 years on mileage that showed less than the last MOT certificate issued before the change), as MOT stations only issue them and put down the corresponding mileage on the mot certificate they do not check against previous mot certificates which is how you can sometimes tell if it has been clocked.
What car is it, how much did he pay? etc..
What car is it, how much did he pay? etc..
Podie said:
Having looked at the info, I reckon the mileage was written down as 57762 and transfered to the computer as 51162. Anyone know if this is possible?
Additionally, the car is a 51 plate, registed in Feb 2002. However, it was first presented for MOT in 2006. Is there any way I can check whether it was SORN'd?
MOT tester not reading his own writing. Very common error.Additionally, the car is a 51 plate, registed in Feb 2002. However, it was first presented for MOT in 2006. Is there any way I can check whether it was SORN'd?
Car could have sat in a compound for a year at end of lease/ on forecourt as overpriced stock etc etc
Has he paid for and picked the car up yet?
Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
Car has not been picked up yet, nor paid for, but he is the winning bidder.
The vehicle has little history with it, so he's doing the digging (he's had the lecture). Vehicle is a 4x4.
HPI comes up clear, but previous MOT test data (downloaded from DirectGov site) shows a few things of interest...
Approx daye of first use: 28/02/02
First MOT: 01/02/06
Was it off the road for a year?
2007 MOT fail:
Nearside rear position lamp(s) adversely affected by the operation of anothe rlamp (1.1.A.2d)
Nearside rear stop lamp adversely affected by the operation of another lamp (1.2.1d)
Would this be a rear spot lamp?
2008 MOT fail:
Nearside rear position lamp(s) incomplete (1.1.4a)
Has it been in a smash?
2009 MOT - 52401 miles
2010 MOT - 51162 miles
Odometer showing just under 57000 at the moment.
Again, any suggestions / thoughts welcomed.
The vehicle has little history with it, so he's doing the digging (he's had the lecture). Vehicle is a 4x4.
HPI comes up clear, but previous MOT test data (downloaded from DirectGov site) shows a few things of interest...
Approx daye of first use: 28/02/02
First MOT: 01/02/06
Was it off the road for a year?
2007 MOT fail:
Nearside rear position lamp(s) adversely affected by the operation of anothe rlamp (1.1.A.2d)
Nearside rear stop lamp adversely affected by the operation of another lamp (1.2.1d)
Would this be a rear spot lamp?
2008 MOT fail:
Nearside rear position lamp(s) incomplete (1.1.4a)
Has it been in a smash?
2009 MOT - 52401 miles
2010 MOT - 51162 miles
Odometer showing just under 57000 at the moment.
Again, any suggestions / thoughts welcomed.
cmackay81 said:
Has he paid for and picked the car up yet?
Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
paoloh said:
cmackay81 said:
Has he paid for and picked the car up yet?
Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".Honestly there are so many cars out there, that if you are unsure then just leave it be. Ebay policy on buying cars is very different to buying anything else. IIRC you are still under no legal obligation to buy once you have bought it. (if that makes sense)
Even if he decides the HPI and Mileage aren't issues, then he will really struggle to sell it on. In my experience if there is one dodgy thing wrong with a car, then there will be a load more you won't find out about until 200 miles down the road when it's too late.
McSam said:
paoloh said:
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".
It is if the car's mileage now is still under what that tester "could have misread" from the odo.. The guy clearly didn't write 57162 and transcribe it as 51162 when the odo's still under 57k, surely?2009 - 52401
2010 - 51162
Now - 57000
yep, this is very definately dodgy IMO. this isn't just an odometer reading being transcribed, it is much more likely the car being clocked back 20000 miles. (there would be no point in clokcing a car for only 5000 miles tbh.
also you still have the same problem of convincing the next buyer of this when you come to sell her on.
edit: do you know when the changes of ownership were for the car?
also you still have the same problem of convincing the next buyer of this when you come to sell her on.
edit: do you know when the changes of ownership were for the car?
Edited by cmackay81 on Monday 21st June 09:58
Podie said:
McSam said:
paoloh said:
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".
It is if the car's mileage now is still under what that tester "could have misread" from the odo.. The guy clearly didn't write 57162 and transcribe it as 51162 when the odo's still under 57k, surely?2009 - 52401
2010 - 51162
Now - 57000
but as I said, the proposed explanation for that 51162 on this year's MOT was that the tester misread his note of the odo's mileage and so the car had actually done 57162 miles at this year's MOT. If the mileage is now still under 57k, this cannot be the case, and 2010's mileage figure still looks dodgy.McSam said:
paoloh said:
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".
It is if the car's mileage now is still under what that tester "could have misread" from the odo.. The guy clearly didn't write 57162 and transcribe it as 51162 when the odo's still under 57k, surely?2010 MOT - 51162 miles
so on latest MOT, he wrote 51162 instead of 57162
McSam said:
Podie said:
McSam said:
paoloh said:
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".
It is if the car's mileage now is still under what that tester "could have misread" from the odo.. The guy clearly didn't write 57162 and transcribe it as 51162 when the odo's still under 57k, surely?2009 - 52401
2010 - 51162
Now - 57000
but as I said, the proposed explanation for that 51162 on this year's MOT was that the tester misread his note of the odo's mileage and so the car had actually done 57162 miles at this year's MOT. If the mileage is now still under 57k, this cannot be the case, and 2010's mileage figure still looks dodgy.That said, when there is doubt, walk away. Raise the queries with the seller, or go and see the car and see how you feel about it, advise mate apprpriately.
eltax91 said:
McSam said:
Podie said:
McSam said:
paoloh said:
TBF though, a 1 instead of a 7 is hardly "dodgey".
It is if the car's mileage now is still under what that tester "could have misread" from the odo.. The guy clearly didn't write 57162 and transcribe it as 51162 when the odo's still under 57k, surely?2009 - 52401
2010 - 51162
Now - 57000
but as I said, the proposed explanation for that 51162 on this year's MOT was that the tester misread his note of the odo's mileage and so the car had actually done 57162 miles at this year's MOT. If the mileage is now still under 57k, this cannot be the case, and 2010's mileage figure still looks dodgy.That said, when there is doubt, walk away. Raise the queries with the seller, or go and see the car and see how you feel about it, advise mate apprpriately.
Wondered if actual mileage at the MOT was 55162, and the operator did a double tap on the 5 key.
Clutching at straws, I know. Still, not my money.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff