Cat D Car

Marvel1

scotty1971 wrote: »

Well he got back to saying the damage was "Front bumper and scrached passenger door all is fixed" surely on a car of that age it would not be a Cat D but i could be wrong.

He knew it was a Cat D and did not disclose it in the ad, then admits it after, I would take their word on anything afterwards.

motorguy

Just to keep a sense of perspective for people, have a look down these 2013 Cat D cars on the Copart salvage site and then decide if you'd really want your family in a repaired salvage car that was put back together with minimal cost to ensure maximum profit for the trader....

http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/search?companyCode_vf=UK&Sort=sd&LotTypes=V&YearFrom=2013&YearTo=2013&Make=&FilterCodes=D4&RadioGroup=Location&YardNumber=&States=&PostalCode=&Distance=99999&searchTitle=2013-2013%2C%2CCAT+D+-+Salvage%2C&cn=2013-2013%2C%2CD4%2C

"Just needed a bumper and a bonnet pal"

BeenThroughItAll

EdGasket wrote: »

'explanation marks' - they sound really useful; my English education has obviously been lacking in some areas.

Damn it. Finally fallen foul of autocorrect.

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

No.

That is not the official description. The definition is " a Category D car is one that has suffered accident damage that would cost less to repair than its value"

If you're going to go on about the "official definition", then you could try actually giving the ABI's definition...

"REPAIRABLE total loss vehicles where repair costs including VAT do not exceed the vehicle’s PAV."
https://www.abi.org.uk/~/media/Files/Documents/Publications/Public/Migrated/Motor/Code%20of%20practice%20for%20disposal%20of%20motor%20vehicle%20salvage.ashx
...and it goes on to explicitly include stolen vehicles.

So, no, there is not necessarily any significant damage. If something's stolen, in circumstances which give little likelihood of recovery, the insurer may well choose to pay out early to minimise hire car costs. If the car is then recovered, it's categorised and put into a salvage auction. That might be CatX - stolen, recovered, minimal damage - or it might be D. The relatively low damage would mean a good price would be raised.
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/22578836
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/29006836

Or it might have been vandalised...
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/21649736

Or it might be very minor fire damage...
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/28314526
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/28381106

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

If you're going to go on about the "official definition", then you could try actually giving the ABI's definition...

"REPAIRABLE total loss vehicles where repair costs including VAT do not exceed the vehicle’s PAV."
https://www.abi.org.uk/~/media/Files/Documents/Publications/Public/Migrated/Motor/Code%20of%20practice%20for%20disposal%20of%20motor%20vehicle%20salvage.ashx
...and it goes on to explicitly include stolen vehicles.

So, no, there is not necessarily any significant damage. If something's stolen, in circumstances which give little likelihood of recovery, the insurer may well choose to pay out early to minimise hire car costs. If the car is then recovered, it's categorised and put into a salvage auction. That might be CatX - stolen, recovered, minimal damage - or it might be D. The relatively low damage would mean a good price would be raised.
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/22578836
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/29006836

Or it might have been vandalised...
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/21649736

Or it might be very minor fire damage...
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/28314526
http://www.copart.co.uk/uk/Lot/28381106

Yes, absolutely. But lets not pretend that all these Cat D cars that are on gumtree / autotrader / eby and usually being sold by unscrupulous traders masquerading as private sellers all just happened to need "a bumper and a wing".

Anyone dealing in repairing this sort of salvage is making their money by minimising the repair costs. That will include (but not limited to) - using second hand parts or unknown history (and not necessarily off the same model), repairing panels that should have been replaced, not repairing / replacing out of sight damage, making unchecked structural repairs, welding up cracked alloy wheels, using fillers / fibreglass to "hide" damage and not returning the car to its original spec (a common one is replacing expensive damaged xenon lights with normal lights)

And its always funny how they never have pics of the pre accident damage isnt it?

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

Yes, absolutely. But lets not pretend that all these Cat D cars that are on gumtree / autotrader / eby and usually being sold by unscrupulous traders masquerading as private sellers all just happened to need "a bumper and a wing".

Indeed. But, equally, let's not pretend they're all totally fubar.

CatD is a very broad church. There are many cars that, but for a minor paperwork wrinkle, would have been repaired by the insurer with zero paper trail. And insurance repairs are not always a paragon of perfection, are they...?

Anyone dealing in repairing this sort of salvage is making their money by minimising the repair costs. That will include (but not limited to) - using second hand parts or unknown history (and not necessarily off the same model), repairing panels that should have been replaced, not repairing / replacing out of sight damage, making unchecked structural repairs, welding up cracked alloy wheels, using fillers / fibreglass to "hide" damage and not returning the car to its original spec (a common one is replacing expensive damaged xenon lights with normal lights)

Because nobody would EVER do that rather than claim...

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Indeed. But, equally, let's not pretend they're all totally fubar.

Exactly. And i'm not pretending they are.

But lets remember we are on a money saving forum here where people may consider a Cat D or Cat C repaired car to be an instant bargain.

Therefore it would be extremely foolish to give people a belief that a Cat D repair is likely just to have been because the insurance company decided they didnt really want to repair it, or that it just needed a bumper and a wing and it was instantly back to its pre accident condition.

These cars are sold as salvage. Yes, there are some that need little repair however it would be very unwise to believe - or set the belief - that all were subject to merely superficial damage.

AdrianC wrote: »

Because nobody would EVER do that rather than claim...

True. However the bulk of the people who are buying up these salvage cars and putting them back on the road know all the corners to cut so you genuinely are putting your head into the lions mouth even approaching them.

My advice to anyone considering a Cat D / Cat C salvage car thats been put back on the road is to ignore the sellers "it just needed a bumper and a wing" claims, ignore the online "oh oh it probably just was stolen recovered or the insurance company didnt really fancy the idea of repairing it because it was a friday afternoon and they wanted to get home" brigade and PROCEED WITH EXTREME CAUTION.

Hintza

That is why I prefer to buy direct from copart and I have a rule of thumb not to buy if the airbags have gone off which in the main keeps things simple.

motorguy

Hintza wrote: »

That is why I prefer to buy direct from copart and I have a rule of thumb not to buy if the airbags have gone off which in the main keeps things simple.

+1

Absolutely agree.

prowla

To be clear, Cat C & Cat D are deemed to be repairable.

With crumple zones it is possible for a lot of panels to be damaged without affecting the chassis itself.

I had a car which was vandalised and it was touch & go whether the insurers would write it off; they elected to repair it and I drove it for many years after. If it had been written off, whoever picked it up could have had the repairs done and ended up with a good car.

(That said, the one in post #13 looks pretty trashed!)