Buying a catagory C car?

AdrianC

spira9 wrote: »

The car is 2008. I looked online and the MOT dates back to 2011. So it was damaged before 2011.

That doesn't follow. 2011 would have been it's first MOT. The MOT won't show when it was written off.

wrightk

As said before have a good look at the car try to find out any history you can call around the local vehicle recycling centres that take the write offs ask for pictures.the difference between a cat c and d is that a c will have to undergo a safety inspection then mot whereas a d will just need to be roadworthy and an mot which can cause problems later on if an assessor has missed something such as a warped axle etc.in some respects cat c can give more peace of mind

AdrianC

wrightk wrote: »

the difference between a cat c and d is that a c will have to undergo a safety inspection then mot whereas a d will just need to be roadworthy and an mot which can cause problems later on if an assessor has missed something such as a warped axle etc.

Small problem there... While there has historically been a VIC for CatC cars, it was stopped in October last year - and it was never a safety inspection anyway. The clue is in the name - VIC = Vehicle Identity Check. It was only ever a quick visual inspection to see if the car was carrying the right identity. In over a decade, less than 40 ringers were found out of nearly a million checks, hence the discontinuation.

And, as already said, the only difference between CatC, CatD and an unrecorded insurance repaired car is the mood of the assessor on the day and how the sums added up.

bigjl

AdrianC wrote: »

Small problem there... While there has historically been a VIC for CatC cars, it was stopped in October last year - and it was never a safety inspection anyway. The clue is in the name - VIC = Vehicle Identity Check. It was only ever a quick visual inspection to see if the car was carrying the right identity. In over a decade, less than 40 ringers were found out of nearly a million checks, hence the discontinuation.

And, as already said, the only difference between CatC, CatD and an unrecorded insurance repaired car is the mood of the assessor on the day and how the sums added up.

The VIC check was also to make sure that car was not repaired with stolen parts.

AdrianC

bigjl wrote: »

The VIC check was also to make sure that car was not repaired with stolen parts.

All it checked was VIN and engine number. That's all it COULD check the identity of, unless you can think of any identifying marks on any other components that would allow them to be traced, somehow?

bigjl

You can identify lots of parts on a car.

They could also ask for proof of purchase for parts.

AdrianC

bigjl wrote: »

You can identify lots of parts on a car.

Such as...?

They could also ask for proof of purchase for parts.

You haven't seen my shed, have you?

Minrich

bigjl wrote: »

You can identify lots of parts on a car.

They could also ask for proof of purchase for parts.

No body parts are identifiable (not 100% true but i am not divulging what) to the car that they were originally fitted to , unless the owner marked them . Also the inspectors have no power or right to ask where the parts came from . Same when the Police did them.

bigjl

Only people with little trade knowledge think "ringers" are a huge problem.

That fact they found so few shows that.

The big problem is cars being stolen to repair damaged cars.

If you are a sensible criminal then you would never attempt to "ring" a Cat C, you would do it with a Cat D.

The whole thing was poorly thought out by somebody that spent heir life in an office and likely thinks if you haven't been formally educated then you are thick.

If you took a car in for a VIC that had had two front wings, grille, bumper, headlights, rad, inter cooler and AirCon condenser replaced with used parts it would not have passed a VIC check without proof of purchase of those parts.

That isn't my opinion that is just a fact.

People might have been under the impression that it was only looking for ringers.

But as is so often in life appearances can be deceptive.

The main target was stolen vehicle parts which is a multi million pound industry.

It did the job it was required tondo that is the reason it is being obolished, not because they only found "40 ringers"

On the subject of your shed. How can you prove they are not stolen goods?

Why do you think Police hold onto any caches of stolen car parts they find?

Because they can trace them.

Not as easily as an engine or bodyshell with numbers and tags intact but more stuff can be traced.

Pre VIC check I know at least two people that used to do exactly as Inhave suggested.

Repair cars with stolen parts.

Their favoured method of getting the stolen car was to drive round in their tow truck with a spec lift and help themselves.

Amazing how people ignore somebody towing a car because he has a clip board and a highviz

Minrich

Take it from me that what you say isn't true. I was a Police Stolen Vehicle examiner , explain to me how you would identify a wing from a Ford or Vauxhall ? Pick any model you like .