1.3 on log book etc.

B00MSTICK

Just wondering what peoples feelings are on this kind of thing

You know how it is, Glanza V down as standard 1.3 Starlets, 1.4 Civics etc. with Type R engines, turbos added/engine conversions done with no mention to insurance company/tax office.

Maybe I should take it to adverts support or whatever but I reckon its a bit much to allow these (IMO) lying scum, who are knowingly driving around without insurance to sell there cars and proudly display this information as a benefit.

Replies like this one on this thread just grind my gears.
(No offence to the seller, he posts here regularly enough and may have everything above board, I'm sure the car's a rocket)

What ye reckon, am I just a jealous begrudger or does it p*ss anyone else off?

From what I see the adverts mods know about this and don't bat an eyelid so maybe I'm in the minority here.

Owen

It's fraud. There's no grey area.

Dartz

1.3 is a 1.3.... doesn't matter if it's turbo'd or not, it's still a 1.3. Old style tax system didn't car about this, IIRC, it was based only on the CC of the engine, not the performance and output.

Technically it's also insurance fraud... but shrug... everybody's on the take somehow, in someway. It's not something worth getting pissed off about.

I wonder though.... how that works with the CO2 based system? Change a 1.6 for a 2 litre today, or add a turbocharger.... how does that work?

feylya

Don't suppose you report the ad so the mods can look at it?

Owen

Dartz wrote: »

1.3 is a 1.3.... doesn't matter if it's turbo'd or not, it's still a 1.3.

Dartz wrote: »

Technically it's also insurance fraud

What's on the logbook does matter. There's a clause in Insurance Policies called 'utmost good faith', so if someone knowingly drives around in a 1.3 with a turbo that's registered as a 1.3 standard car, not only are they driving an illegally registered vehicle, they're uninsured as a result by default.

peasant

I'd like to point out (sort of officially if you like) that there is nothing wrong with the ad that the OP has linked to.

The answer to that ad is a different story.

B00MSTICK

Indeed peasant, as I said the poster of the ad has done nothing wrong, it's just the attitude of the reply that gets me.

It's not so much as the tax as the insurance that I'm talking about.

siralfalot

ned78 wrote: »

What's on the logbook does matter. There's a clause in Insurance Policies called 'utmost good faith', so if someone knowingly drives around in a 1.3 with a turbo that's registered as a 1.3 standard car, not only are they driving an illegally registered vehicle, they're uninsured as a result by default.

so point out where it says Turbo on the log book?

both my cars are properly registered and insured 2.0 turbos, nowhere on either logbook does the word "turbo" appear in relation to the engine discription, only the CC of the engine regardless of turbo or not

Glanzas are logged as a 1.3
Glanza Vs (the turbo one) are also logged as 1.3

EPM

B00MSTICK wrote: »

Indeed peasant, as I said the poster of the ad has done nothing wrong, it's just the attitude of the reply that gets me.

It's not so much as the tax as the insurance that I'm talking about.

How do you know the advert owner has done anything wrong? How are you to know he's got dodge insurance or not? All I can see is a dude that did an engine conversion TBH. at least find a decent example before having a go at someones advert

Owen

siralfalot wrote: »

so point out where it says Turbo on the log book?

Some cars are marked on log books as having turbos by their model designation, some aren't. Some cars have emissions on the log books to show something screwy's going on under the hood, some don't.

The issue being raised in this thread isn't specifically about one particular car (But I do love how we all choose the 'Glanza' as the usual example of trying to evade the law), but more specifically about people who might have a 1.8 litre turbo, down as a 1.5/6 on the log book.

Drummerboy08

I think it was the response to the thread that the OP was using as an example, not the Ad itself.

See Peasants post above!

Owen

EPM wrote: »

How do you know the advert owner has done anything wrong? How are you to know he's got dodge insurance or not? All I can see is a dude that did an engine conversion TBH. at least find a decent example before having a go at someones advert

As DB said, I don't think anyone's having a go at the ad submitter. We're having a go at the concept of having an illegally registered car masquerading as a legitimate vehicle.

B00MSTICK

Wow...

Did you read what I've posted, how did I have a go at his advert?

What I'm saying was he didn't write "Down as 1.6 on the log book so cheap to insure" so is advert is perfectly fine.

Maybe he is a dodgy scummer but I'm not jumping to that conclusion just because he's done a conversion, his advert is perfectly fine.

B00MSTICK wrote:

(No offence to the seller, he posts here regularly enough and may have everything above board, I'm sure the car's a rocket)

I'd take that as a compliment tbh.

EPM

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I think it was the response to the thread that the OP was using as an example, not the Ad itself.

See Peasants post above!

My bad - posting at work and got interrupted mid rant. Carry on and apologies OP:D

B00MSTICK

No probs, it happens :pac:

Glanza drivers just seem to do it the most, there's 3 on adverts with "standard starlet on logbook,so insurance is cheap." or similar sentiments

Although I can remember seeing a Cynos with a 4E-FTE and a CRX with a B16B on it fairly reasontly.

Zube

EPM wrote: »

at least find a decent example before having a go at someones advert

Here, here, here, here, etc. etc.

You know exactly what he's talking about.

EPM

I remember it used to happen years ago but the opposite way around - Fancy a BMW 525 2.0 diesel courtesy of Nissan:D

EPM

Zube wrote: »

You know exactly what he's talking about.

Already copped it.

Surely carzone can cop those in fairness. Dont the ads have to be approved before they go up?

Saab Ed

EPM wrote: »

I remember it used to happen years ago but the opposite way around - Fancy a BMW 525 2.0 diesel courtesy of Nissan:D

Or a Volvo 245 diesel estate ...by Toyota Hiace

tommygun999

Of course there not insured! A GLanza turbo and Glanza non turbo are totaly different insurance classes. You cant go around with your head in the sand in ignorance pretending "oh its down as a non turbo" knowing full well that its a turbo! Again a big difference between an Evo and a 1.3 Lancer. Just wait untill you have a claim. You honestly think an insurance company wont look under the hood?

Henry Ford III

What's on the log bog is of no relevance.

It's what's on the insurance proposal that counts. A deliberate lie, half lie, or concealment of any sort of a "fact material to the proper assessment of a risk" will make the policy voidable.

Insurance fraud is huge I reckon, and we are all paying for it everytime we renew.

CoDy1

well said henry, how many threads have been started about insurance premiums going up so far?

Something tells me these guys have something to do with it :rolleyes:

it shouldn't encouraged.

Henry Ford III

I agree. If I had enough time I'd report all of the above ads for incitement to commit fraud.

Del2005

tommygun999 wrote: »

Of course there not insured! A GLanza turbo and Glanza non turbo are totaly different insurance classes. You cant go around with your head in the sand in ignorance pretending "oh its down as a non turbo" knowing full well that its a turbo! Again a big difference between an Evo and a 1.3 Lancer. Just wait untill you have a claim. You honestly think an insurance company wont look under the hood?

Henry Ford III wrote: »

What's on the log bog is of no relevance.

It's what's on the insurance proposal that counts. A deliberate lie, half lie, or concealment of any sort of a "fact material to the proper assessment of a risk" will make the policy voidable.

Insurance fraud is huge I reckon, and we are all paying for it everytime we renew.

I know a while ago the Gardai where stopping Glanza's and checking to make sure they had proper insurance, if not they lifted the car. I'm sure they are still doing it and while they are doing their best there are too many dodgy cars on the road for them to catch them all.

Also there are a lot of people who are driving with no insurance at all so just picking on one group of people isn't fair. At least they are paying some money in and not getting anything back when sh!t happends.

The insurance companies should be more proactive about this, but they don't care as we end up paying in the end not them.

Henry Ford III

Del2005 wrote: »

I know a while ago the Gardai where stopping Glanza's and checking to make sure they had proper insurance, if not they lifted the car.

I wonder how could they do this? A ins. disc will only give the reg. and policy no.

To check properly they'd have to check was a turbo in the engine bay, and if so what engine spec. was on the insurance proposal.

Henry Ford III

Del2005 wrote: »

....Also there are a lot of people who are driving with no insurance at all so just picking on one group of people isn't fair. At least they are paying some money in and not getting anything back when sh!t happends.

The insurance companies should be more proactive about this, but they don't care as we end up paying in the end not them.

Ah now. Paying motor premiums is not a savings scheme! You pay whatever you need to pay, pray for no claims, and then flush the premiums away.

The duty to make a full and frank disclosure is on the proposer. It's a basic principal of insurance.

Del2005

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I wonder how could they do this? A ins. disc will only give the reg. and policy no.

To check properly they'd have to check was a turbo in the engine bay, and if so what engine spec. was on the insurance proposal.

From what I heard they checked to see if it had discs on the back wheels, only turbo's have disc on the back. If it had discs they'd ring the insurance company on the disc and ask was it insured as a turbo, if not they lifted it as it is up to the owner to prove they have valid insurance to be on the road.

Owen

Henry Ford III wrote: »

What's on the log bog is of no relevance.

I don't agree with this. If technically the car is misrepresented on the log book, it's illegally registered, which means it could be impounded at any time.

Henry Ford III

ned78 wrote: »

I don't agree with this. If technically the car is misrepresented on the log book, it's illegally registered, which means it could be impounded at any time.

I meant from an insurance pespective Ned, which is what this thread is about.

p.s. The logbook does not need necessarily need to show the aspiration of the engine btw. Think Golf GTI or Focus ST, some of which were n/a and others turbocharged.

Esel

B00MSTICK wrote: »

Just wondering what peoples feelings are on this kind of thing

You know how it is, Glanza V down as standard 1.3 Starlets, 1.4 Civics etc. with Type R engines, turbos added/engine conversions done with no mention to insurance company/tax office.

Maybe I should take it to adverts support or whatever but I reckon its a bit much to allow these (IMO) lying scum, who are knowingly driving around without insurance to sell there cars and proudly display this information as a benefit.

Replies like this one on this thread just grind my gears.
(No offence to the seller, he posts here regularly enough and may have everything above board, I'm sure the car's a rocket)

What ye reckon, am I just a jealous begrudger or does it p*ss anyone else off?

From what I see the adverts mods know about this and don't bat an eyelid so maybe I'm in the minority here.

Any links to back that statement up? Ads that state '1.6 in log book' etc. get binned when spotted or reported, and the poster gets a ban.

For info, mickversion3 is already banned for being a rereg of another banned user.

Senna

A few years ago my other half bough a VW Golf, i knew it was a 1.6 but when i took it down to the tax offices i noticed that the log book had it down as a 1.4 under cc and the description as Golf CL 1.6, must have been entered wrong at some stage.
I said to the girl behind the counter that its wrong and she said i would have to take it to the VW dealership and get them to fill out a form saying it was a 1.6, even though the description said 1.6.
Phoned the dealership and asked would there be a charge for verifying a cars engine size, they said that they would have to view the car and research it origins and it would cost between €50 - €100. Screw that.
We just insured it as a 1.6 and paid the 1.4 tax, she had it for about a year.

Henry Ford III

Senna wrote: »

A few years ago my other half bough a VW Golf, i knew it was a 1.6 but when i took it down to the tax offices i noticed that the log book had it down as a 1.4 under cc and the description as Golf CL 1.6, must have been entered wrong at some stage.
I said to the girl behind the counter that its wrong and she said i would have to take it to the VW dealership and get them to fill out a form saying it was a 1.6, even though the description said 1.6.
Phoned the dealership and asked would there be a charge for verifying a cars engine size, they said that they would have to view the car and research it origins and it would cost between €50 - €100. Screw that.
We just insured it as a 1.6 and paid the 1.4 tax, she had it for about a year.

A minor issue, caused by a clerical error.

lifer_sean

Won't this new registration procedure (next year?) where car has to be inspected by NCT centre prior to paying VRT, put an end to incorrect logbooks going forward ? I'm sure the intect is to collect the correct VRT more than any other objective, but should also prevent further imports from having incorrect logbooks ?

Henry Ford III

lifer_sean wrote: »

Won't this new registration procedure (next year?) where car has to be inspected by NCT centre prior to paying VRT, put an end to incorrect logbooks going forward ? I'm sure the intect is to collect the correct VRT more than any other objective, but should also prevent further imports from having incorrect logbooks ?

Possibly, but it won't end insurance fraud. Most insurers don't routinely get to see logbooks at proposal stage.

Owen

Henry Ford III wrote: »

p.s. The logbook does not need necessarily need to show the aspiration of the engine btw. Think Golf GTI or Focus ST, some of which were n/a and others turbocharged.

The logbook has a record of the engine number. If someone drops in a new engine other than the original without declaring the changes, then immediately the car is in itself incorrectly registered according to the Dept of the Environment & Government in Shannon.

The playing devils advocate, nearly all (Not all before someone says theirs doesn't) new cars from about 05 on have the Co2 on the logbook, so changing an engine without altering the enginer number and Co2 figures will be worse again - as the Co2 will be the dead giveaway that there's a more powerful engine in there.

Still though, I can't believe the 'sure it's only the log book' attitude here. If you bought a car from a garage with the wrong engine in it, you'd all be looking for blood.

Top Dog

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I wonder how could they do this? A ins. disc will only give the reg. and policy no.

To check properly they'd have to check was a turbo in the engine bay, and if so what engine spec. was on the insurance proposal.

Typically (well - in my expierence anyway) responsible owners of cars like Glanza's, Evo's, Subaru's, GTI-R's etc carry a copy of their insurance policy with them for just such occasions. Been stopped myself a few times in the past and asked by Garda "Is it a real GTI-R?" followed by "and is it insured as a GTI-R?". Given that I had nothing to hide I was happy to show him my insurance policy where, sure enough, it was detailed that the car was indeed insured as a GTI-R.

Responsible owners are used to this sort of nuisance, its part of the deal when you buy such a car. But when you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. Its only if you can't produce the insurance policy that they might ring the insurance company to check everything is legit.

Gumbo

imo doesnt matter whats wrote on the log book, as long as you have it insured as what it is your ok.

a few years back i have a Honda Integra Type R (1997 Model) and all the log said was 1.8 vtec which was technically correct but i insured it as a Type R.

B00MSTICK

Here's one I spotted.

Yes its a crap example of an ad, its probably why I remember it. Its a 4AGZE engine and although it probably doesn't mention the SC on the log book, the seller is claiming it can be insured as a 4AGE.

Now I know mods do their best but think its abit unfair if people aren't allowed to sell SIM cards or "modified" PSP's/DS's but can essentially promote tax/insurance fraud.

Here's another, phone number removed but "1.3 on log-Cheap Tax/Insurance" remains.

It may be a grey area, so if a rule was established then I'm sure mods would remove these details/people would report the listings but as it stands we're not sure what is/isn't allowed.

Like I said in the OP, maybe I should have went to Adverts Support but I just wanted to find out what the general conscensus was on the issue.

EDIT: I'm aware you could easily buy a car like this and declare it properly (legally) but the fact that the ads are written in a way that promotes illegal activity is my problem.

darragh o meara

I had an impreza sti last year which I bought from a dealer in Dublin. It was only when I went to tax it I copped something was up. The tax was costing me less than I expected so I queried it and low and behold on the tax book it was down as 1.5 liter. Brought it back to the dealer and he told me they weerr all like that and if I wanted I could swap it for a 1.3 mitsubishi evolution fq340 !! In the end I told him my brother worked for the customs crowd and I'd report it should I not get a refund. Needless to say I got my refund. But in fairness a lot of these lads selling these Caesa prob bought them like that and are now stick with them! Once a car is insured properly then its half the battle. If its not insured , well as Mr T says " I pity the fool ". Also I recently heard that some insurance companies are sending out people to check on certain models of cars to see if they are what the owners say it is. So maybe this will sort out a lot of the fools on the road!

Top Dog

Omeara_darragh wrote: »

Also I recently heard that some insurance companies are sending out people to check on certain models of cars to see if they are what the owners say it is. So maybe this will sort out a lot of the fools on the road!

I heard that story years ago, and still don't know if there was any truth to it. I know the Gardai did (and still do) check the odd Glanza/Starlet for the proper insurance since this is one of the most common cars for there to be dodgy insurance.

And no, this isn't an anti-Glanza statement. One of my good friends has a lovely example and I know from his expierences that he has been asked on many occasions by Gardai to show that it is insured legitimately.

Omeara_darragh

Omeara_darragh wrote: »

I had an impreza sti last year which I bought from a dealer in Dublin. It was only when I went to tax it I copped something was up. The tax was costing me less than I expected so I queried it and low and behold on the tax book it was down as 1.5 liter. Brought it back to the dealer and he told me they weerr all like that and if I wanted I could swap it for a 1.3 mitsubishi evolution fq340 !! In the end I told him my brother worked for the customs crowd and I'd report it should I not get a refund. Needless to say I got my refund. But in fairness a lot of these lads selling these Caesa prob bought them like that and are now stick with them! Once a car is insured properly then its half the battle. If its not insured , well as Mr T says " I pity the fool ". Also I recently heard that some insurance companies are sending out people to check on certain models of cars to see if they are what the owners say it is. So maybe this will sort out a lot of the fools on the road!

Why not just keep it and insure it properly and tax it as a 1.5 you would save a nice bit on the tax and it would make no difference as you declared everything to your insurer.

Edit:I am in no way supporting cars being insured incorrectly due to incorrect details by the way I am as much against it as everyone else as I am paying for it like everyone else with my insurance premium. Now tax, thats a different story.

darragh o meara

Natalie Faithful Son wrote: »

Why not just keep it and insure it properly and tax it as a 1.5 you would save a nice bit on the tax and it would make no difference as you declared everything to your insurer.
.

Because I'm one of those law abiding people who loves his cars specially scoobies and if I buy one it has to be a hundred percent right and if that means logbook saying STI well thats how I want it!!!! They get enough attention from the gaurds anyway so why risk being caught they aint stupid ya know!!!! there is a savage difference between say 100bhp in the 1.5 and 300bhp in the 2.0 and they know it

Esel

B00MSTICK wrote: »

Here's one I spotted.

Yes its a crap example of an ad, its probably why I remember it. Its a 4AGZE engine and although it probably doesn't mention the SC on the log book, the seller is claiming it can be insured as a 4AGE.

Now I know mods do their best but think its abit unfair if people aren't allowed to sell SIM cards or "modified" PSP's/DS's but can essentially promote tax/insurance fraud.

Here's another, phone number removed but "1.3 on log-Cheap Tax/Insurance" remains.

It may be a grey area, so if a rule was established then I'm sure mods would remove these details/people would report the listings but as it stands we're not sure what is/isn't allowed.

Like I said in the OP, maybe I should have went to Adverts Support but I just wanted to find out what the general conscensus was on the issue.

EDIT: I'm aware you could easily buy a car like this and declare it properly (legally) but the fact that the ads are written in a way that promotes illegal activity is my problem.

I have binned the second ad (Glanza), so it is no longer 'visible'. The poster has been infracted, and a ban requested. I have left the first ad in place, as it is not current, and has no replies.

The Rules are not all-inclusive, and could never be so. We would hope that users would report any Ad (or reply) that they feel deserve moderator attention. Ads such as the ones in question here do get acted on when reported or spotted by a mod.

smashey

I've come across ads like these on adverts a few times and I've always binned the ad and banned the seller. Apart from the insurance issues, anybody posting an ad saying the logbook doesn't give a true reflection of what the engine size is, and clearly saying tax will be cheaper is committing a fraudulent act.

We try to keep adverts as "clean" as possible but given how big the site has become, it gets more difficult to do so with each passing week. If anybody here sees an ad like this, please report it and it will be dealt with.