Cat N & S Cars - RAC Vehicle Inspection and Background Check

Grantyone

Hi all, I posted this on another thread however; I am not sure how frequently they are checked & I thought posting a new thread would be quicker to receive a response.
I am in the market for a new car in the next couple of months & I have seen some cracking looking cars on a dealer's website who appear very reputable & have 4.8 stars out of 5 on Autotrader. Luxury Performance in Halifax to be precise.
The two cars I have seen are cat S and N respectively.
Before even thinking about purchasing, I plan to contact the dealer to try & obtain as much info as possible & ask for photo's. I would also book an RAC advanced vehicle inspection (presuming the dealer would be okay with this) and this on paper checks almost everything top to bottom. In addition, I would request an RAC vehicle history check which as you'll know gives even further info on the vehicle.
I am the first to admit that I am rather clueless when it comes to car's however; I have read a lot on buying these type of cars, and there are a lot of success stories out there.
I suppose my main question is: If the RAC checks were to come back positive, do the more experienced car buyers out there feel that would be a deal clincher? Would that be good enough for you? I think it would be good enough for me, but I would like other (and more expert opinions) before taking things further.

Thanking you all in advance for sound advice.

Grant

Lomast

Unless you know what you are looking at i would recommend not touching any cat registered car especially cat s as that is structural damage

The_Rainmaker

I only buy cars that are (usual route) or have been salvage preferably are salvage.

If you don't know what you are doing then leave well alone you will only be disappointed and you will be on here complaining if bad paintwork or worse and asking what your consumer rights are.

Grantyone

Lomast said:

Unless you know what you are looking at i would recommend not touching any cat registered car especially cat s as that is structural damage

Thank you for the reply. Yeah, a car with structural damage does put me off.
Without knowing anything about the dealer apart from largely positive reviews, surely they will be compliant with regards what was wrong with the car when I approach them? Would it have been them who purchased and repaired the car? I could obtain this before arranging the RAC visit & let the engineer know. 

Grantyone

The_Rainmaker said:

I only buy cars that are (usual route) or have been salvage preferably are salvage.

If you don't know what you are doing then leave well alone you will only be disappointed and you will be on here complaining if bad paintwork or worse and asking what your consumer rights are.

Surely the RAC engineer knows what he is doing though? I am not looking to buy then sell, or do any work myself. It would be a purchase that would hopefully last me a long time. 
That is why I was asking if the RAC inspection and background check was worth anything when making a decision on purchasing.

AdrianC

Structural damage in and of itself isn't the end of the world - remember, it's still the insurer chose not to repair the car. If they had chosen to repair it, it wouldn't have any flag at all against it. But it might still have had structural damage.

Cat N - non-structural - is anything bolt-on, but the insurer chose not to bother.
Cat S - structural - is anything that requires the welder or jig to come out, but the insurer chose not to bother.

Insurers repair structural damage every day of the week, where it's cheaper than writing the car off.

Grantyone

AdrianC said:

Structural damage in and of itself isn't the end of the world - remember, it's still the insurer chose not to repair the car. If they had chosen to repair it, it wouldn't have any flag at all against it. But it might still have had structural damage.

Cat N - non-structural - is anything bolt-on, but the insurer chose not to bother.
Cat S - structural - is anything that requires the welder or jig to come out, but the insurer chose not to bother.

Insurers repair structural damage every day of the week, where it's cheaper than writing the car off.

Thanks for this. This is what I was thinking - it's clearly a gamble to a certain extent, but surely the odds would be more in my favour if I buy from a reputable dealer & have an advanced RAC technician inspect it top to bottom? I know they wouldn't be taking anything apart, but if the dealer advised me what the damage was, I could pass this onto the technician.
As I said, I am not looking to buy & sell. I'm hoping to pick up a good car but at a fraction of the cost & if I managed to ascertain the full car's history & have a favourable inspection report, it would make me confident enough to part with the cash. 
Of course, if the inspection came back with concerns I wouldn't purchase the car, but surely it's well worth the £250 or so initial cost? 
As you say, insurance companies repair cars everyday of the week. 

Grantyone

AdrianC said:

Structural damage in and of itself isn't the end of the world - remember, it's still the insurer chose not to repair the car. If they had chosen to repair it, it wouldn't have any flag at all against it. But it might still have had structural damage.

Cat N - non-structural - is anything bolt-on, but the insurer chose not to bother.
Cat S - structural - is anything that requires the welder or jig to come out, but the insurer chose not to bother.

Insurers repair structural damage every day of the week, where it's cheaper than writing the car off.

So with that in mind -  I may be way off here, but the cat S car I have saw is a 19 plate. If it was cheaper to write off than repair, would that not mean there was quite significant damage to write off such a new car?
The Cat N is a 2018 plate - again, would suggest quite a lot of damage if writing it off was cheaper than repairing?
The cars aren't exactly cheap, so I would hope the repairs were done to the same original standard?

angrycrow

Rac report is likely to be a waste of money, to cover themselves the report is likely to just say vehicle has been written off with structural damage buyer beware. 

Assuming this is lux performance at the queen's Road works on auto trader they have 49 cars for sale of which 35 are previous total losses. That's a lot of total losses for one place. I could not find a companies house entry for Lux Performance but he also trades under Zamann Specialist cars with all the same stock. Under this identity he has been trading since 2012 and his accounts are up to date. Which is promising. 

The main thing with high end fairly new total loss cars is identity check, identity check and a further identity check. Check all vin locations, check glass etching, plug into Ecu and check vin on there. It is easier to steal an identical car and swap the id than to repair a very badly damaged shell. Once you have confirmed the id is right you need to fully inspect the car to establish what the damage was and that it has been repaired properly. Don't take the sellers word for it that it was just bolt on panels, on a cat s it was more than bolt on parts. Does the car drive and stop right.

Finally is the saving enough to be worth the hassle and risk. 

Grantyone

angrycrow said:

Rac report is likely to be a waste of money, to cover themselves the report is likely to just say vehicle has been written off with structural damage buyer beware. 

Assuming this is lux performance at the queen's Road works on auto trader they have 49 cars for sale of which 35 are previous total losses. That's a lot of total losses for one place. I could not find a companies house entry for Lux Performance but he also trades under Zamann Specialist cars with all the same stock. Under this identity he has been trading since 2012 and his accounts are up to date. Which is promising. 

The main thing with high end fairly new total loss cars is identity check, identity check and a further identity check. Check all vin locations, check glass etching, plug into Ecu and check vin on there. It is easier to steal an identical car and swap the id than to repair a very badly damaged shell. Once you have confirmed the id is right you need to fully inspect the car to establish what the damage was and that it has been repaired properly. Don't take the sellers word for it that it was just bolt on panels, on a cat s it was more than bolt on parts. Does the car drive and stop right.

Finally is the saving enough to be worth the hassle and risk. 

Thank you for this informative response. It is really appreciated.
Yeah, 35 cars out of 49 is a very high % but I would also see this a slight positive. The guy obviously specialises in these types of cars? If he's been trading since 2012 and has an excellent reputation (based on autotrader reviews) surely that bodes well for purchasing? If he was not genuine or sold a host of car's with hidden problems, his reviews would not be good?
You are right re the RAC - of course they'd cover themselves however; I think it would still be worthwhile. Their advance check does include a hell of a lot of checks inc full mechanical & structural and full underbody, interior & paintwork. This is only going to give me further peace of mind. In addition to their inspection, I can purchase a full vehicle history check for only 30 quid and that gives details of the write off & whether it was stolen etc. I have checked a sample report on their website and it does check the VIN as well. Again, further peace of mind

I think however, the most important thing is getting as much info from the seller to begin with. Again, I'm more confident buying from a dealer rather than some random individual.

AdrianC

Grantyone said:

AdrianC said:

Structural damage in and of itself isn't the end of the world - remember, it's still the insurer chose not to repair the car. If they had chosen to repair it, it wouldn't have any flag at all against it. But it might still have had structural damage.

Cat N - non-structural - is anything bolt-on, but the insurer chose not to bother.
Cat S - structural - is anything that requires the welder or jig to come out, but the insurer chose not to bother.

Insurers repair structural damage every day of the week, where it's cheaper than writing the car off.

So with that in mind -  I may be way off here, but the cat S car I have saw is a 19 plate. If it was cheaper to write off than repair, would that not mean there was quite significant damage to write off such a new car?
The Cat N is a 2018 plate - again, would suggest quite a lot of damage if writing it off was cheaper than repairing?

Think about the other costs around it all...
"Equivalent" hire car for the duration of the repair, at credit-hire gouge rates, especially if there's a parts supply delay.
Brand new parts at main dealer price, or some used panels and lights from a car that was hit the other end.
Insurance labour rates, or some DIY labour for the bolt-on stuff.

 There's a lot of factors that could swing the financial decision.

The cars aren't exactly cheap, so I would hope the repairs were done to the same original standard?

You have no idea the quality of workmanship in any situation without looking at the car, whether somebody's DIYd the work or insurance have paid a pile-em-high-punt-em-out bodyshop. And, of course, somebody may have bent their car then paid for it to be fixed rather than get insurance involved... Maybe they let their mate drive and he wasn't covered. Maybe they'd had a couple. Maybe their insurance is loopy-expensive already.

The main difference between a used car with a write-off history and one without is that you know for a fact one's been bent and repaired.