Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Is this an Elephant?

Options
145679

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,783 ✭✭✭rugbyman


    fair play to him,, probably took quite a while to weld up them doors. am a MAD keen old reg person and an avid anti zv person, but for all the ring up done deal to report them, i am not on for that.. PRIVELEGES , just regulations


  • Registered Users Posts: 186 ✭✭The Big Red Fella


    Ye all seemed to have missed the real Elephant at Terenure today & at a few other shows this year!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,783 ✭✭✭rugbyman


    more details neeeded Big Red Fella a.k.a. 131(not the year reg)


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,615 ✭✭✭ba_barabus


    And the car which started it all is still going


  • Registered Users Posts: 943 ✭✭✭bbsrs


    Saw a 1990 model MR2 today (debaged of course) reg'd 7XX1 NI. He did a good job of grafting the mr2 body on to a '78 celica.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    bbsrs wrote: »
    Saw a 1990 model MR2 today (debaged of course) reg'd 7XX1 NI. He did a good job of grafting the mr2 body on to a '78 celica.

    wha :confused: I thought a '78 celica wold be worth a lot more than a naff mr2? And isnt the celica rwd, the mr2 mid engined?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    wha :confused: I thought a '78 celica wold be worth a lot more than a naff mr2? And isnt the celica rwd, the mr2 mid engined?

    Yeah Probably. But sure a pair of number plates is only 20 quid!:pac:

    Plus the price of a logbook of course.

    Anyway, can you imagine pulling up to a checkpoint with no NCT and trying to convince a guard that your 'Celica' is over 30 and doesn't need a test?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Yeah Probably. But sure a pair of number plates is only 20 quid!:pac:

    Plus the price of a logbook of course.

    Anyway, can you imagine pulling up to a checkpoint with no NCT and trying to convince a guard that your 'Celica' is over 30 and doesn't need a test?

    Aah, I got you now. Bit slow on the uptake tonight!

    Still, you would need some neck to brazen that one at a checkpoint. But fraud is fraud, and chancers will always chance it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,186 ✭✭✭Thinkingaboutit


    Licence plate fakers suck. I have a ZV plate, and the UK plate in the book, and all the history. I don't need fake history for a 44 year old car. Got knows what will happen if the licence plate fake is in an accident. The insurance might be invalidated, leaving the injured party out of pocket for a long time or for ever.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,358 ✭✭✭kev1.3s


    Licence plate fakers suck. I have a ZV plate, and the UK plate in the book, and all the history. I don't need fake history for a 44 year old car. Got knows what will happen if the licence plate fake is in an accident. The insurance might be invalidated, leaving the injured party out of pocket for a long time or for ever.
    Whilst I agree with you, to say the insurer won't pay out on the third party is only scaremongering.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,300 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    kev1.3s wrote: »
    Whilst I agree with you, to say the insurer won't pay out on the third party is only scaremongering.

    Yes they are bound by law to pay out any 3rd party claims.
    Whether they then seek to recover costs from the motorist with the fake plates is their issue but they cannot refuse valid 3rd party claim once policy is in place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    Yes they are bound by law to pay third party claims on damage caused by the insured car, but the insured car went to the crusher years before and I doubt they are liable for claims on an imposter car.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭hi5


    MIBI pays out for uninsured accidents.
    We all pay extra on our premiums for this.

    http://www.mibi.ie/making-a-claim/uninsured-unidentified-vehicles.421.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    In some circumstances.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,186 ✭✭✭Thinkingaboutit


    MIBI can take a while.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    In some circumstances.

    When wouldn't they?

    I thought it was transparent - my insurance company will fix my car ( or god forbid, pay medical expenses), and they claim from the MIBI fund. The uninsured driver is then pursued or prosecuted by them - nothing to do with me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,300 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    Yes they are bound by law to pay third party claims on damage caused by the insured car, but the insured car went to the crusher years before and I doubt they are liable for claims on an imposter car.
    They are liable to pay 3rd party claims once a policy is in force. If they feel that the car owner knowingly mislead them by running an imposter, they are likely to chase that owner for costs but 3rd party will be paid even in the most outrageous circumstances as long as the insurance company had been taking the yearly premium.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    When wouldn't they?

    I thought it was transparent - my insurance company will fix my car ( or god forbid, pay medical expenses), and they claim from the MIBI fund. The uninsured driver is then pursued or prosecuted by them - nothing to do with me.

    If it's a damage claim you have to have the car details, it's in the link posted above.

    "Vehicle/property claims are covered under the MIBI compensation scheme however the alleged offending vehicle must be identified by means of a valid registration plate. In instances where the alleged offending vehicle cannot be identified MIBI has no liability to pay compensation for vehicle/property damage unless there are significant personal injuries arising from the same accident."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    mickdw wrote: »
    They are liable to pay 3rd party claims once a policy is in force. If they feel that the car owner knowingly mislead them by running an imposter, they are likely to chase that owner for costs but 3rd party will be paid even in the most outrageous circumstances as long as the insurance company had been taking the yearly premium.
    you are very sure there.
    What If I go out this morning and take the plates off my wife's car and put them on mine and she goes out in my uninsured car and has an accident. Does my Wife's policy pay out he third party just because her number is on my car?

    I don't know the answer, just I think your answer is too simplistic


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    If it's a damage claim you have to have the car details, it's in the link posted above.

    "Vehicle/property claims are covered under the MIBI compensation scheme however the alleged offending vehicle must be identified by means of a valid registration plate. In instances where the alleged offending vehicle cannot be identified MIBI has no liability to pay compensation for vehicle/property damage unless there are significant personal injuries arising from the same accident."

    I think the context of the above quote is in cases of where the offending driver does a runner (where they drive off). I dont think it puts the onus on the victim to ascertain the bona fides of the legal identity of the car that hits them.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    I think the context of the above quote is in cases of where the offending driver does a runner (where they drive off). I dont think it puts the onus on the victim to ascertain the bona fides of the legal identity of the car that hits them.

    It does clearly state that in a damage claim the registration number is required. That's a seperate matter to whether the vehicle is bogus or not. Just pointing out that it isn't automatic that MIBI will be paying out as you seemed to be saying. In othere words, MIBI will only pay up if they have a registration number of the offending car to pursue.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    It does clearly state that in a damage claim the registration number is required. That's a seperate matter to whether the vehicle is bogus or not. Just pointing out that it isn't automatic that MIBI will be paying out as you seemed to be saying. In othere words, MIBI will only pay up if they have a registration number of the offending car to pursue.

    I see your point. Golly, it sure makes a compelling case for driving a cloned car, doesn't it?

    * no tax to pay
    *no insurance to pay
    * no speeding fines ( from cameras at least
    * if you hit someone,either drive off ( if you can) or do a legger. Either way, there is zero chance of getting caught for it. Neither the state nor the insurance companies have to pay for it, so have zero interest in pursuing it.

    You sometimes feel like a right mug for living within the law in this country.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    it does say it has a 1275 engine so I guess it could be an up-specced 1100 rather than a real 1300GT.


  • Registered Users Posts: 186 ✭✭The Big Red Fella


    it does say it has a 1275 engine so I guess it could be an up-specced 1100 rather than a real 1300GT.

    looks like a real Gt to me i reckon thats the Irish 1100 in bits in the ad?
    why say logbook has to be applied for so no logbook to check numbers etc?
    i would like it but not as a ringer at 1500 yo yos!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    looks like a real Gt to me i reckon thats the Irais 1100 in bits in the ad?
    why say logbook has to be applied for so no logbook to check numbers etc?
    i would like it but not as a ringer at 1500 yo yos!

    Thta's what I thought too


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,071 ✭✭✭✭unkel


    Is this another one?

    I've been informed that it isn't. Someone who is familiar with the car says it's a real GT. It's an original County Limerick "IU" reg car which used to attend vintage events 25 + years ago ,the then owner restored it ,used it & eventually sold it couple years back via DDeal due to lack of use.

    An Irish GT would have been rare back in the day & may not have been described accurately on reg document. That body shape would have generally been described as an Austin or Morris 1100 irrespective of engine size


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    well they would say that ....


    1100 and 1300 were seperate models, 1300GT more so


  • Registered Users Posts: 186 ✭✭The Big Red Fella


    unkel wrote: »
    I've been informed that it isn't. Someone who is familiar with the car says it's a real GT. It's an original County Limerick "IU" reg car which used to attend vintage events 25 + years ago ,the then owner restored it ,used it & eventually sold it couple years back via DDeal due to lack of use.

    An Irish GT would have been rare back in the day & may not have been described accurately on reg document. That body shape would have generally been described as an Austin or Morris 1100 irrespective of engine size
    what a load of bull mate!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,561 ✭✭✭Blue850


    TIU *** ran from March 68 to Aug 68

    1300 GT's were launched in Oct 1969.


Advertisement