Victim Wanted!

Motorcheck

Hi All,

I've been asked by a TV production company for some real life examples of people that have been the victim of the following;

1. Bought a used car with finance outstanding that was subsequently repossessed.

2. Been a victim of an internet scam that caused them to part with cash for a car that never existed.

If you know of anyone that fits the bill and would be prepared to share their story on TV please send me a PM.

EPM

Motorcheck wrote: »

2. Been a victim of an internet scam that caused them to part with cash for a car that never existed.

If you find someone that would admit to this I'll buy ya a pint:D

johnos1984

I doubt anyone on here will admit publicly to either of those

MetzgerMeister

To be honest Motorcheck, not trying to be cheeky or anything like that but people who are active in Motoring forums like this one would (hopefully) be too well educatedin these matters, or at least have enough knowledge about them for something like that to happen to them.

Motorcheck

einheisserschre wrote: »

To be honest Motorcheck, not trying to be cheeky or anything like that but people who are active in Motoring forums like this one would (hopefully) be too well educatedin these matters, or at least have enough knowledge about them for something like that to happen to them.

Point taken. I guess I was hoping somebody might know someone.

MetzgerMeister

Motorcheck wrote: »

Point taken. I guess I was hoping somebody might know someone.

Understandable

Wile E. Coyote

einheisserschre wrote: »

To be honest Motorcheck, not trying to be cheeky or anything like that but people who are active in Motoring forums like this one would (hopefully) be too well educatedin these matters, or at least have enough knowledge about them for something like that to happen to them.

I wouldn't be too sure about that einheisserschre. There's a lot of people that lurk in these forums who might know a very gullable victim of a scam. Plus just because people know about cars and post on the forum doesn't mean they're clever enough with their money not to have one re-possesed.

vengeance52

I know a girl who was scammed out of money trying to buy a BMW 330D in the north last year, asked her does she want to go on TV about it, she threw a book at me.....so thats a no.

I think most people who were caught out may not want to come forward. Try the scams sticky, there may be a few in there.

Tomebagel

Hope noone volunteers after the bad press towards japanese car owners you gave in the last tv programme you starred in!

Here is some of the posts after the last programme.......

The guy from motorcheck.ie came across badly, hes giving out about japanese cars, yet he sometimes judges the prodrift, also he said more tracks wouldnt help, course he he doesnt think so, sure more tracks means less people for his courses in Mondello... and all this thing about engine changes, all he wants is people to use his site to make sure their car is as it should be..

The guy (motor-check) banging on about japanese cars looked a little foolish and had nothing relevant to say.

motor check dude = fail

I can see it turning into another pathetic attempt by you at trying to sway publicity over to your business.

DonJose

Motorcheck wrote: »

Hi All,

I've been asked by a TV production company for some real life examples of people that have been the victim of the following;

1. Bought a used car with finance outstanding that was subsequently repossessed.

You'd have to be a right Kerryman to buy a car and not check if it had finance outstanding.

Oh wait...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64905872&postcount=12

-Corkie-

Was that the new consumer show with eddie hobbs Motorcheck????

Motorcheck

Tomebagel wrote: »

Hope noone volunteers after the bad press towards japanese car owners you gave in the last tv programme you starred in!

Here is some of the posts after the last programme.......

I can see it turning into another pathetic attempt by you at trying to sway publicity over to your business.

Thanks for your contribution. A little off topic but worth mentioning none the less. For those of you reading the thread that don't know what Tomebagel is referring to I'll fill you in....

Following on form the tragic deaths experienced in Donegal recently, RTE's Prime Time ran a piece a month or so ago on the problem of young drivers driving recklessly on public roads. The programme showed some excerpts uploaded to Youtube with some interviews of young drivers that admitted to driving more 'enthusiastically' than they should.

We were asked to make a contribution to the programme and rather than focussing on the mentality of the drivers involved we tried to draw attention to the problem of mis-representation that exists with Japanese imports in Ireland.

Many Japanese cars, when imported into Ireland, are registered here as non-turbo or standard engined cars rather than the high performance versions that they actually are. This means that on paper they are cheaper to VRT and cheaper to insure. Some might say - what's the problem?

The problem(s) would become all too apparent if the car is involved in an accident and the insurance company opts to deny any claim as the vehicle involved in the accident is not the same as that detailed on the insurance policy. Not a nice scenario for anyone involved!

It's even worse if the person who owns the car isn't aware of the discrepancy on the logbook and is driving around under the illusion that it's properly insured.

As I said, it's off topic for this post but thanks for bringing it up.

PS. I'm sorry you thought our appearance on Prime Time was 'pathetic' but any opportunity we get to contribute to the ongoing efforts to make Irish roads safer for all of us is one we'll gladly take. Promoting Motorcheck.ie is part of that process . We'll try better next time.

Motorcheck

-Corkie- wrote: »

Was that the new consumer show with eddie hobbs Motorcheck????

Could be

Big Nasty

Have a read through the scam thread S. I'm sure some on there who got caught out would be glad to tell their story, albeit anon!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055320098

Motorcheck

Just to illustrate the point about mis-representation above. Take a look at this the ad posted on donedeal only three hours ago. Seller claims 'on the logbook as 1.6 mirage - easy to get insured'.



http://twitpic.com/2oqjeb/full

Motorcheck

Tx. Have sent some PM's already. Spoke with someone who had a terrible experience.

-Corkie-

Motorcheck wrote: »

Could be

They were on to me aswell about a totally different thing. I will be on tv soon..:p

Tomebagel

Motorcheck wrote: »

Thanks for your contribution. A little off topic but worth mentioning none the less. For those of you reading the thread that don't know what Tomebagel is referring to I'll fill you in....

Following on form the tragic deaths experienced in Donegal recently, RTE's Prime Time ran a piece a month or so ago on the problem of young drivers driving recklessly on public roads. The programme showed some excerpts uploaded to Youtube with some interviews of young drivers that admitted to driving more 'enthusiastically' than they should.

We were asked to make a contribution to the programme and rather than focussing on the mentality of the drivers involved we tried to draw attention to the problem of mis-representation that exists with Japanese imports in Ireland.

Many Japanese cars, when imported into Ireland, are registered here as non-turbo or standard engined cars rather than the high performance versions that they actually are. This means that on paper they are cheaper to VRT and cheaper to insure. Some might say - what's the problem?

The problem(s) would become all too apparent if the car is involved in an accident and the insurance company opts to deny any claim as the vehicle involved in the accident is not the same as that detailed on the insurance policy. Not a nice scenario for anyone involved!

It's even worse if the person who owns the car isn't aware of the discrepancy on the logbook and is driving around under the illusion that it's properly insured.

As I said, it's off topic for this post but thanks for bringing it up.

PS. I'm sorry you thought our appearance on Prime Time was 'pathetic' but any opportunity we get to contribute to the ongoing efforts to make Irish roads safer for all of us is one we'll gladly take. Promoting Motorcheck.ie is part of that process . We'll try better next time.

The programme was on road deaths in ireland,what does what japanese cars are on the logbook or not on the logbook have to do with it?

Ever own a nissan laurel ian?what was that down as on the logbook,be honest?


and mods sorry for goin slightly off topic.

Bodhan

I know a 3rd party who are trying to keep a car they bought for cash in a private deal, not the previous owner but the owner before them had outstanding finance, went back years and the repo mean are calling.
I'll ask them if they want to get into it and I'll come back to you

Motorcheck

Tomebagel wrote: »

The programme was on road deaths in ireland,what does what japanese cars are on the logbook or not on the logbook have to do with it?

Ever own a nissan laurel ian?what was that down as on the logbook,be honest?


and mods sorry for goin slightly off topic.

I'm not Ian but I'd glad to ask him.

If all Japanese imports were correctly registered, you would find that the insurance premiums would go up and make them unaffordable for young drivers thus reducing the chances of a fatality occurring in one.

I'm sure you understand given the problems you experienced yourself insuring a Toyota Starlet?

Tomebagel

Motorcheck wrote: »

I'm not Ian but I'd glad to ask him.

If all Japanese imports were correctly registered, you would find that the insurance premiums would go up and make them unaffordable for young drivers thus reducing the chances of a fatality occurring in one.

I'm sure you understand given the problems you experienced yourself insuring a Toyota Starlet?

Tell us what he said too.

Nice bit of detective work on the starlet must say;)

goodluck with finding people for your programme anyhow,and sorry about the little detour on the thread.

Curlz24

MotorCheck Why did your rep on Primetime also remove a video he posted of himself racing out of the TollBridge in 2007 to go on to say in the video "Stay tuned racefans for the results of our trip to the Killarney rally without Handbreak turns,Burns outs yada yada...."

To be honest I dont deem boards helping you find a victim very beneficial to the forum but only to yourself!

Motorcheck

Curlz24 wrote: »

MotorCheck Why did your rep on Primetime also remove a video he posted of himself racing out of the TollBridge in 2007 to go on to say in the video "Stay tuned racefans for the results of our trip to the Killarney rally without Handbreak turns,Burns outs yada yada...."

To be honest I dont deem boards helping you find a victim very beneficial to the forum but only to yourself!

Hi Curlz, Had an interesting chat with Ian earlier today. I believe you two have some personal history that may be better dealt with on a one to one? If you'd like to PM me your email, I'll send you on his contact details.

PS. Not sure where you got the idea I was trying to benefit the forum? It was a genuine appeal and thanks to all who of you who made contact. We heard some very interesting stories that will be highlighted on the show soon.

L-M

Motorcheck wrote: »

Hi Curlz, Had an interesting chat with Ian earlier today. I believe you two have some personal history that may be better dealt with on a one to one? If you'd like to PM me your email, I'll send you on his contact details.

LOL

Anywho, I know and have heard of plenty of Irish cars with engine conversions and left alone on the logbook, it's not limited to the Japanese imports.

Wibbs

Just speaking personally, after the representation on Primetime and the same tired old marginally informed and confused opinion trotted out in the low level glamour of the RTE camera lights, I would be dubious of anything good that would come out of it. The misrepresented rice burner notion is but a tiny part of the problem. And an easy and obvious target, I'll give you that, but mostly smoke and mirrors. I dont like turbo nutter Glanza's per se, but when was the last time one was pictured upside down in a ditch with eulogies for those within? Or a Type R, or a scooby WRX or an EVO or a mitzi GTO, or any Japanese petrol driven stripped down racing snake you care to mention? They may be a subjective issue to Joe Duffy listeners, but objectively make a miniscule difference to the stats, or to those of us living in the real world.

colm_mcm

My understanding is that motorcheck runs history checks on used cars, mostly imports.
It'd be fair to assume the bulk of their income is from UK cars.
They're a business, not an authority on motoring.
Call me a cynic but it looks like free advertising when you hear these businesses giving their 2c in the media

Wibbs

I agree with colm_mcm. "Victim wanted so we can pimp how we could save them" would be a better title for the thread.

As for Japanese imports? I suspect motorcheck would be only too happy to see them all gone and this hyped up focus on "glanzas down as starlets/they're all souped up you know" is a red herring. Pretty obvious really as you can't check their history.

Well you can actually. To just the same level of detail as in any other modern society and more than here. Indeed a Japanese auction report alone has a lot of detail(even if you can't read Kanji). Most come with service histories and their version of the NCT, the Shaken has more detail and is far more stringent than the NCT. Of course few Irish buyers get to see that lot, unless they import the car themselves(as I did). The cars themselves are usually better maintained than UK imports and far better maintained than the average here and they don't have the all too common rust issues you get with UK cars because of their winter salt use. People would be better served looking at the shonkey dealers in these cars in Ireland, rather than the cars themselves.

Fine it's a biz and I do read the motorcheck website and it is of interest to petrolheads, but don't try and push the saaaafteee angle when questions get asked. It's an easy and lazy way out of a debate and all too used today when other avenues would be better explored by those without a vested interest.

metalgear2k2

That primetime slot that ye did was a fecking joke, rubbish about young fellas and with turbo rice burners being the problem, you think it makes that much difference to a young fella as to what he's driving, even a normal 1990 4 speed starlet will do 75-80 mph on crap roads, and if they want to drive fast or act the maggot they will do it regardless of what they are driving.

and the reason ye were on primetime was due to the deaths in Donegal, and what cars were envolved there? A passat I think it was?

What a load of bollox.

the_syco

Was the black Volkswagen Passat saloon car that was involved in the crash in Donegal a jap import? If not, then the entire programme was lazy journalism.

Motorcheck

Some really interesting points being raised above. It's great to see some engagement in a debate that's worth having - let's keep it going.

Wibbs - Why so cynical on the thread title? It's a genuine request on behalf of Motorcheck and The Consumer Show - I'm not trying to 'pimp' anything here but give some constructive advice on a topic that will be featured on tomorrow's show.

Re. the Japanese imports. You're obviously well read on the information available to an importer and judging by the link on your signature you understand the relationship between speed and road deaths much better than I ever will.

The point we made on the show and one I stand by today is that any car going on Irish roads should be properly identified and documented. Misrepresenting a cars specification, no matter how minor you think it is, could give an insurance company grounds for denying a claim.

If all the information is available why do importers do it? TBH - I understand the temptation - cheaper VRT and lower insurance would be an attraction to anyone but I'm interested in your opinion. if these cars were properly identified at the point of importation what do you think the outcome would be? More or less of them on the road?

Tomebagel

Tomebagel wrote: »

Ever own a nissan laurel ian?what was that down as on the logbook,be honest?

Motorcheck wrote: »

Hi Curlz, Had an interesting chat with Ian earlier today. I believe you two have some personal history that may be better dealt with on a one to one? If you'd like to PM me your email, I'll send you on his contact details.

Did you ask him about his laurel?

Wibbs

This is a long one folks, even for me. So bear with me. As the bishop said to the actress....

Motorcheck wrote: »

Wibbs - Why so cynical on the thread title? It's a genuine request on behalf of Motorcheck and The Consumer Show - I'm not trying to 'pimp' anything here but give some constructive advice on a topic that will be featured on tomorrow's show.

I'd have more faith in the level of constructive advice if vested interests or to be kinder a particular angle weren't in play in such advice.

Re. the Japanese imports. You're obviously well read on the information available to an importer

Because after doing some research albeit basic at first, I realised going to the source and cutting out the local middle man was the best option to guarantee some level of trust in what I was ultimately going to drive. So I imported my own car direct from Japan. If you have a web connection, do research and then do it yourself. Simple as that. And you save a fair few quid in the process. Near 3 grand in my case.

and judging by the link on your signature you understand the relationship between speed and road deaths much better than I ever will.

That thread was started by another chap. Not me. I couldn't hope to match his eloquence and thankfully don't have to match his experience. So I really don't think it seemly for either of us to bring his post into the equation. Your position would be crass at best and untenable at worse if you did.

The point we made on the show and one I stand by today is that any car going on Irish roads should be properly identified and documented.

While a laudable sentiment, it also comes neatly back to what I was saying about vested interests. Given that one can properly identify and document a Japanese import at source(or Australian, American, European), why doesn't your company or any other do so? Laziness? Lack of expertise and skillset? Your issue, not ours. And before you retort with the equally lazy angle of "it's all our issues", you have charged yourselves with the checking of imports, so rather than deflecting the issue in ever decreasing circles, why not, I dunno actually do what you claim to do and actually check our motors?

Misrepresenting a cars specification, no matter how minor you think it is, could give an insurance company grounds for denying a claim.

Ah yes the hit them in the pocket as a scare tactic response. Again why can't you properly identify and document this section of the import market? A UK DVLA database search is easy I suppose. Hell I can do much of it myself http://www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk/EvlPortalApp/application?origin=vehicleEnquiryInfo_en.jsp&event=bea.portal.framework.internal.portlet.event&pageid=Vehicle+Enquiry&portletid=VehicleEnquiry&portletns=VehicleEnquiry_en&wfevent=link.next What if I import a car from I dunno France or Germany never mind Japan? They're closer to home so why not?

If all the information is available why do importers do it?

Greed or ignorance. Much more the former I suspect. Slightly damaged Jap imprt at half the usual price and twice the mileage expected, quick clocking and paint tart up and away one goes.

TBH - I understand the temptation - cheaper VRT and lower insurance would be an attraction to anyone but I'm interested in your opinion.

That is but a small part of the importer end.

if these cars were properly identified at the point of importation what do you think the outcome would be? More or less of them on the road?

Well why doesn't your company identify them? Or look to point out those dealers who don't? Like I say it's more than doable, so why isnt someone doing it? Why isn't your company doing it? I mean you are called motorcheck. So rather than lambasting a section of the market for easy scaremongering, just because it's out of your remit, why not bring it into your remit?

Del2005

Motorcheck wrote: »

The point we made on the show and one I stand by today is that any car going on Irish roads should be properly identified and documented. Misrepresenting a cars specification, no matter how minor you think it is, could give an insurance company grounds for denying a claim.

The only part of a claim that the insurance companies can deny for misrepresenting the vehicle is the owner/drivers claim. All 3rd party claims are covered and the insurance company is entitled to go after the responsible party to reclaim any money paid out.

If insurance companies weren't so lazy and properly investigated insurance claims then miss registering a vehicle wouldn't be an issue. They could also stop paying out for unaccompanied L drivers, bikers on restricted licences with unrestricted bilkes etc.

The only people who would loose out then are people who lie and/or are driving illegally, which I have no issue with. But then you'd have everyone calling Joe saying how unfair it is

ottostreet

I don't understand what that Mirage ad is supposed to point out. It says 'logbook says 1.6 mirage'....thats exactly what it is!

the mivec mirages were 1.6? so its not a lie!

Old Skool Cars

Tomebagel wrote: »

Did you ask him about his laurel?

Hi,

Ian Bergin here. Just to point out something which for one is irrelevant and also completely ridiculous and points out the obvious concerns stressed by user Motorcheck.

1. Yes, i did own a Nissan Laurel. It was a 97' Laurel C35 which was imported in 2007 with a Skyline GTR engine transplant. However the car was originally a 2.0 Automatic. At the time of purchase i was working in a dealership and also had my own Trade Policy which covered me for my own insurance NOT by the vehicles CC but by the valuation of the cars. I could drive anything to a value of €150,000 insured. Anyone who KNOWS me will be well aware of my motor trade dealing for the past 5/6 years.

If anything this is a PRIME EXAMPLE of how easy it is to get a car in from Japan and register it as something its not. The car was cleared by the dealer I bought the car from as a 2.0. Believe it or not but it would be far harder to VRT the car as an actual 2.6 twin turbo Laurel as none ever existed in Japan so it would need an independant report done post VRT anyway as there is no stat code for it in the first place? I think you will agree that for a dealer to go above and beyond the call of the VRT's job is ridiculous - remember, cars are BROUGHT too the VRT office for inspection, its their job to inspect the vehicles, not the person bringing it. also, every dealer and Joe Soap would do there best to get any car registered as the lower spec alternative etc to try avail of cheaper VRT - I dont blame anyone for that as its a stupid double taxation but thats another days work.

Bottom line being, Yes i was insured on the Laurel and yes it was registered as a 2.0 when it had/has a 2.6 twin turbo in it. whos to blame? me or the VRT inspectors for not noticing? Its very difficult to point any blame when all export documentation states "2.0" so i guess they are just doing their job by the book.....

Here is the car in Question, catch you later on AE86irl guys.

http://www.ae86irl.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4092&highlight=laurel

Regards,
Ian.

Old Skool Cars

ottostreet wrote: »

I don't understand what that Mirage ad is supposed to point out. It says 'logbook says 1.6 mirage'....thats exactly what it is!

the mivec mirages were 1.6? so its not a lie!

Correct, its not a lie at all...its simply an uninformed description of the car Make and Model without describing the model Variant - i.e MIVEC.

MIVEC. GTI. VTEC, TURBO etc....i guess you get where im going with this....

Wibbs

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

Bottom line being, Yes i was insured on the Laurel and yes it was registered as a 2.0 when it had/has a 2.6 twin turbo in it. whos to blame? me or the VRT inspectors for not noticing? Its very difficult to point any blame when all export documentation states "2.0" so i guess they are just doing their job by the book....

So hang on. Maybe I'm picking this up wrong as I don't know the backstory, so apologies to all if so. You work for Motorcheck Ltd in some way Old Skool Cars? If so the very thing you're pointing out as a bad thing, you've been party to yourself? Worse as it wasn't just an extra bit on the badge you were omitting, but a engine transplant? If so, it appears you're admitting to knowingly defrauding the VRT and but for your trade insurance you'd have been uninsured too. Indeed if you had crashed the car, I'd be fairly sure the insurance company would have fought any payout once they discovered the disparity. Did you inform the insurance company of the engine transplant? IMHO apportioning blame to the VRT types is a tad disingenuous on your part. Using it as an example to pimp the company is damn near laughable.

MIVEC. GTI. VTEC, TURBO etc....i guess you get where im going with this...

Oh I think we do. Again I put the question, why can't Motorcheck or any other private agency include background checks on imports other than from the UK. Anyone can do the latter, it's but a click away. The problem I see is that it feels more like "let's cause concern about a section of imports we don't have the expertise to trace, rather than actually get that expertise". So IMHO it's still far more about business interests than any notion of "safety".

Old Skool Cars

Wibbs wrote: »

So hang on. Maybe I'm picking this up wrong as I don't know the backstory, so apologies to all if so. You work for Motorcheck Ltd in some way Old Skool Cars? If so the very thing you're pointing out as a bad thing, you've been party to yourself? Worse as it wasn't just an extra bit on the badge you were omitting, but a engine transplant? If so, it appears you're admitting to knowingly defrauding the VRT and but for your trade insurance you'd have been uninsured too. Indeed if you had crashed the car, I'd be fairly sure the insurance company would have fought any payout once they discovered the disparity. Did you inform the insurance company of the engine transplant? IMHO apportioning blame to the VRT types is a tad disingenuous on your part. Using it as an example to pimp the company is damn near laughable.
Oh I think we do. Again I put the question, why can't Motorcheck or any other private agency include background checks on imports other than from the UK. Anyone can do the latter, it's but a click away. The problem I see is that it feels more like "let's cause concern about a section of imports we don't have the expertise to trace, rather than actually get that expertise". So IMHO it's still far more about business interests than any notion of "safety".

As you said in your first line, you are picking this up wrong...entirely! making mountains out of molehills about my car above is fine for argumentative opinion, fact remains IN MY PERSONAL CASE that i was insured, the clear fact that the car is insured under valuation through working for a dealership and having my own separate trade policy which i have had for years with my father only re-assures myself that i had nothing to be worrying about or doubtful of in case of any accident. The policy does not take into account make, model and engine specifics like a private policy so it makes no difference if i drive a Micra or a Ferrari - as long as value does not exceed €150,000. As i also said, im not blaming anyone in the VRT office, they were doing their job by the book at the time of question and the fact that they have since moved the VRT offices to the NCT test centers to (what i believe anyway) conduct thorough inspections on such cars above....also, its worth noting, i didn't VRT the car personally so i personally didn't defraud anyone - if anything since i joined Motorcheck i have been able to shed a lot of light on such cars that are misrepresented on PAPER to what they actually are in REALITY. Is that such a bad thing? If so, why?

Call it what you like - the fact remains a lot of cars on the road are insured and driven by inexperienced drivers who wouldn't be able to do so if the cars where registered correctly from point of import. The reason why most of this information is not simply disclosed on a general history check is due to the fact that the information is simply not there or the "intel" is inaccurate. If the car is registered incorrectly, then it goes onto the national vehicle file incorrectly which is where a lot of information for any car history check is derived from. so its wrong from the offset, and Motorcheck is determined to correct what it can along the line.

Apart from going completely off topic in this instance i hope you can see the reasoning for Motorcheck to want to have exact particulars on file for grey or Jap Imports. Its not pointing a finger at the VRT office or making dealers out to be bad registering cars as something they are not - if it can be rectified afterwards im sure there is a majority of people out there (and insurance companies) only too happy to be supplied accurate Japanese Import information - something at present which isnt available as you said yourself.

Tigger

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

Hi,

Ian Bergin here. Just to point out something which for one is irrelevant and also completely ridiculous and points out the obvious concerns stressed by user Motorcheck.

1. Yes, i did own a Nissan Laurel. It was a 97' Laurel C35 which was imported in 2007 with a Skyline GTR engine transplant. However the car was originally a 2.0 Automatic. At the time of purchase i was working in a dealership and also had my own Trade Policy which covered me for my own insurance NOT by the vehicles CC but by the valuation of the cars. I could drive anything to a value of €150,000 insured. Anyone who KNOWS me will be well aware of my motor trade dealing for the past 5/6 years.

If anything this is a PRIME EXAMPLE of how easy it is to get a car in from Japan and register it as something its not. The car was cleared by the dealer I bought the car from as a 2.0. Believe it or not but it would be far harder to VRT the car as an actual 2.6 twin turbo Laurel as none ever existed in Japan so it would need an independant report done post VRT anyway as there is no stat code for it in the first place? I think you will agree that for a dealer to go above and beyond the call of the VRT's job is ridiculous - remember, cars are BROUGHT too the VRT office for inspection, its their job to inspect the vehicles, not the person bringing it. also, every dealer and Joe Soap would do there best to get any car registered as the lower spec alternative etc to try avail of cheaper VRT - I dont blame anyone for that as its a stupid double taxation but thats another days work.

Bottom line being, Yes i was insured on the Laurel and yes it was registered as a 2.0 when it had/has a 2.6 twin turbo in it. whos to blame? me or the VRT inspectors for not noticing? Its very difficult to point any blame when all export documentation states "2.0" so i guess they are just doing their job by the book.....

Here is the car in Question, catch you later on AE86irl guys.

http://www.ae86irl.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4092&highlight=laurel

Regards,
Ian.

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

As you said in your first line, you are picking this up wrong...entirely! making mountains out of molehills about my car above is fine for argumentative opinion, fact remains IN MY PERSONAL CASE that i was insured, the clear fact that the car is insured under valuation through working for a dealership and having my own separate trade policy which i have had for years with my father only re-assures myself that i had nothing to be worrying about or doubtful of in case of any accident. The policy does not take into account make, model and engine specifics like a private policy so it makes no difference if i drive a Micra or a Ferrari - as long as value does not exceed €150,000.

was it taxed correctly mr ian bergin

Tigger

so you drive/drove around with a falsely reristered car paying the wrong tax and then you think that some lads dying in donegal is a time to go on prime time and pimp your site.

brilliant

hey the cars you are selling on donedeal adverts etc are you selling them privatly or as a dealer

Wibbs

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

As you said in your first line, you are picking this up wrong...entirely! making mountains out of molehills about my car above is fine for argumentative opinion, fact remains IN MY PERSONAL CASE that i was insured,

I quote:

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

1. Yes, i did own a Nissan Laurel. It was a 97' Laurel C35 which was imported in 2007 with a Skyline GTR engine transplant. However the car was originally a 2.0 Automatic.

You purchased this car. Were you the first owner in this country? If so and again I quote:

i didn't VRT the car personally so i personally didn't defraud anyone

So who did VRT the car if you were the first owner in the country? The same garage you held the insurance policy with? Someone somewhere along the line pulled a fast one.

Secondly, did you road tax the car as a 2.0 or a 2.6? If the former while under your ownership, again something doesn't quite add up.

I dunno it seems to me disingenuous pointing out the failures in the system, when you yourself, by dint of having access to a motor trade insurance policy were able to circumvent the very thing you're seeking to highlight. As an aside, I was led to understand that a garage policy didn't apply to cars for personal use? Not a lot of wriggle room from where I'm standing.

the fact remains a lot of cars on the road are insured and driven by inexperienced drivers who wouldn't be able to do so if the cars where registered correctly from point of import.

Unless they had access to a trade policy of course.

The reason why most of this information is not simply disclosed on a general history check is due to the fact that the information is simply not there or the "intel" is inaccurate.

The information is there. Far more so than on an Irish secondhand car. But it goes "missing". I have no connection to the motor trade beyond having one mate who is also a mechanic. So how can such as I as a complete amateur with no experience nor connection to the motor trade import a car from Japan and have all the details. Owners name, date of purchase, location, mileage, service history, shaken reports, even the original number plate. The auction sheet alone is chock full of info. How come I as a newbie can get that, yet very very very few dealers will supply same? Things that make you Hmmmmm indeed.

if anything since i joined Motorcheck i have been able to shed a lot of light on such cars that are misrepresented on PAPER to what they actually are in REALITY. Is that such a bad thing? If so, why?

I have zero issue with being able to trace and correctly identify a car. I don't contend otherwise.

something at present which isnt available as you said yourself.

I said the opposite. Certainly with regard to Japanese imports. The data is available at point of auction. The Japanese road authorities also have the data. Indeed they're positively anal about such things. The problem are the dealers not knowing their business or losing such details in an effort to pass on clocked cars. There is also laxity on the part of the government(though the recent NCT/VRT goes someway to addressing that). Targeting one section of the import market because you don't have the knowledge to check such cars is like I said in my first post here, smoke and mirrors. It's also plugging into the current meme of "boy racers" yet I've yet to see any evidence that such grey imports are involved in accidents to any appreciable degree.

Old Skool Cars

Tigger wrote: »

was it taxed correctly mr ian bergin

Yep!

Tigger

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

Yep!

so it was taxed as a 2.6L but logged as a 2L

brilliant

did you miss the other question?

Old Skool Cars

Tigger wrote: »

so you drive/drove around with a falsely reristered car paying the wrong tax and then you think that some lads dying in donegal is a time to go on prime time and pimp your site.

brilliant

hey the cars you are selling on donedeal adverts etc are you selling them privatly or as a dealer

Clearly this is now a personal issue as being ASKED by RTE to go on air is hardly standing up to any relevance when comparing A. my own personal cars past or present and B. "pimping" anything on TV.

Please.

L-M

LOL...

Old Skool Cars

Tigger wrote: »

hey the cars you are selling on donedeal adverts etc are you selling them privatly or as a dealer

If needs must then i will answer this question - privately.

Tigger

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

Clearly this is now a personal issue as being ASKED by RTE to go on air is hardly standing up to any relevance when comparing A. my own personal cars past or present and B. "pimping" anything on TV.

Please.

what personal issue

tax evasion affects me a a tax payer but not on a personal level

and if you sell cars and have trade insurance then you sell car commercially and should represent yourself as such.

do you

i shall asume you don't

Tigger

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

If needs must then i will answer this question - privately.

brilliant

L-M

Tigger wrote: »

what personal issue

tax evasion affects me a a tax payer but not on a personal level

and if you sell cars and have trade insurance then you sell car commercially and should represent yourself as such.

do you

i shall asume you don't

IMO, you're taking a bit too far and personally... Just IMO

Wibbs

Old Skool Cars wrote: »

Clearly this is now a personal issue as being ASKED by RTE to go on air is hardly standing up to any relevance when comparing A. my own personal cars past or present and B. "pimping" anything on TV.

Please.

It has only become a "personal issue" because regardless of being asked by RTE, you were introduced as an expert on such things. You gave an opinion that would impact your business, or "pimp" it as it were. I am quite convinced that if you did have the facility to trace Japanese imported cars to this country, your opinion of them would be quite different.

Secondly it would be natural to question you re this misrepresented car you yourself owned when you're on a mission to stamp them out. How would the Primetime questions have changed if this information was available to them?

On the expert front I blame RTE more than anyone, by plugging into the current hysteria about such cars. As has been pointed out ad infinitum, can anyone show a greater risk with these cars? Can anyone show just one fatal incident where one of these misrepresented cars or any "sporty" Japanese domestic market car was involved. One would be nice. Made for Joe Duffy telly, not reality. Mr Hobbes show will doubtless egg it up even more.

BTW how can one pay road tax on a 2.6 when the log book shows 2.0? Would questions not be raised.

R.O.R

Just to point out that Motorcheck is just one part of a larger business. I'm not affiliated with them in any way, but used to deal with them a lot a couple of years ago.

Mr. Motorcheck himself has been in the Irish Motor industry for a good few years, and it's probably more because of this than the Motorcheck stuff that's he (and collegues) are being invited on as experts.