That's NOT dodgy ! Dodgy is clipping a fwew K's off the clock or nannas in the diff. By The panelbeaters description this amounts to criminal negligence. Forget the silly tickbox that wasn't ticked because that's just paperwork. --Someone somewhere sighned that car off as safe to be on the road in NZ. THAT person should be hung upside down by their gentlemans parts.
gammelvind,
Feb 2, 6:29am
You are too kind Kaz, he ain't no gentleman!
steve56467,
Feb 2, 6:46am
Well said Kaz. Someone has certified that car and the onus lies on that. The dealer has a repaired and certified car for sale with a new WoF. The dealer has done his duty of care. Appears that the dealer didn't do the repair or the certification or the WoF. Duncan Garner is a journalist and a broadcaster - he's looking for a story but shame he had to bark up the wrong tree. Why couldn't he track down the branch of the AA where the WoF was done or the repairer and ask questions? Love the part where he tells Duncan Garner "I don't know who you are" Brilliant!
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 6:47am
I would genuinely love to meet Duncan. he's on the right track but is focussed on generalisations rather than the specifics. I also think the guy from the AA was trying desperately to dodge a bullet. The only possible semi legit explaination I can think of is that mr scumbag actually unbolted parts from a straight vehicle and bolted them on this vehicle to get compliance then swapped back once sighned off. Im angry from 2 points of view. 1) All dealers and compliance centres get tarred with the same brush. From a business prospective of trying really hard to maintain a good reputation and doing it right that totally tears my shorts. 2) That a human being can knowingly allow something so utterly dangerous to be driven on the same road as my friends and family--THAT really gets me angry.
To be clear despite the AA guys hamfisted attempt at butt covering the systems in place are robust and that vehicle should have had FOUR lots of people look at it. 1) the repair engineer (certifier) 2The company that did the COMPULSARY wheel alighnment -ie provided proof that the wheels were in alighnment 3) the AA inspector who is still required to ensure the rest of the vehicle is up to standard. -that includes sway bars etc -and they were not. 4)the company that issued the WOF
Mind you the buyer did NO due diligence whatsoever. Keeping in mind he had $12k at stake. 1)NO pre purchase inspection. 2)didn't get a carjam report or similar 3)didn't road test the car at 80km/h or more.
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 6:52am
Steve--I would agree with you right up to the point that the guy without doing any more work tried a second time to sell the car once it was returned with the faults clearly outlined. At that point Jury was out-he might have been trying to do the right thing. But no he tried again to sell it.
3tomany,
Feb 2, 6:56am
they make car dealers guarantee a car for life and yet an insurance company can sell a write of to a dodgy bloke who gives it a dodgy repair then just on sells to unsuspecting customers. once a car is written of it should stay written of.
franc123,
Feb 2, 7:03am
Doesn't happen like that though, a badly damaged car being disposed of by an insurance co will be deregistered and will have to be complied again, the compliance system is supposed to stop badly repaired cars reaching the public or the roads. It seems that time and time again it simply isn't. If you are going to be selling a previously damaged and repaired car you would (and are required to) disclose this on the CIN aren't you. The fact that this hasn't been disclosed, well make up your own mind whether its accidental or not.
steve56467,
Feb 2, 7:04am
Good point. And the dealer didn't really explain that. Or they didn't broadcast his response? He did invite Ducan to come down and have a talk though.
franc123,
Feb 2, 7:06am
Indeed, these places have always been an outlet for questionable vehicles, even more so than car fairs IMO. its obvious that these places are being used by CGA dodgers.
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 7:08am
ACTUALLY MATEY--much as I hate those park n sell places--I betya they didn't know--ie they weren't told it was a rebuilt wreck. That said I'd love to see the recorded owners of the dealer selling the car OBO at P and S and see if its the same people as own that P and S
3tomany,
Feb 2, 7:13am
that is why a write of should stay a write of
franc123,
Feb 2, 7:23am
I know what you are saying but the term Write Off is a very loose one, it normally only means that the insurance co believes its not economic for THEM to repair. It could well be for someone else and that someone else could repair it perfectly well and return it to a safe structural tolerance, and that someone else could sell it on and make a bit of money, its how that someone else repairs it and the competence of the certifier and whether the buyer is made aware of its past that are the important bits.
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 7:23am
yea un Nahh um. I agree with you if the wright off is for structural damage for whatever reason. But then -what about all the cars that HAVEN'T been written off?---badly damaged and repaired. Flip side is what about a car that's hail damaged.--still apsolutely safe but uneconomical for the insurer to repair. A revisit of the system might be needed so certain damage can't ever be repaired
secca2,
Feb 2, 7:28am
so what really may have happened is a. dodgy dealer buys car from turners or manhiem b. dodgy dealer gets him and his arab mates to fix the car to middle east standards c. dodgy dealer gets his mates at AA to pass compliance and wof d. dodgy dealer invites AA inspectors around to drink black coffee and pays them their fee for signing it off, so yes he is at fault. I can say this is what has happened, is still happening and will always happen! remember with immigrants comes immigrants standards or lack I should say to New Zealand. yes its unfortunate the genuine dealers suffer, its a dog eat dog industry and its only getting worst plane by plane! http://www.autobase.co.nz/dealer/Details.aspx?id=2997
3tomany,
Feb 2, 7:33am
yes some variations to the rule might need to be considered like a valuable classic for example or a simple cosmetic repair with no structural damage maybe? but our law makers seem to just ignore the problem so insurance companies can get top dollar.
ema1,
Feb 2, 8:36am
Then shot with a ball of his own feces and hung out to dry.
beno,
Feb 2, 10:06am
I went to this yard to buy a late model imprezza. the battery was dead flat so the car wouldn't start and the four teenagers who appeared to be running the yard didn't care to help. I could only look at the outside of the car. there were painter's rubbing down marks all down one side of it where they had tried to cut out some runs in the paint and hadn't polished properyor groomed it at all. there was even a rusty razor blade corroded to the bottom of the windscreen.
tgray,
Feb 2, 6:50pm
A dealers obligation would be simply to tick the box that says 're registered', as often dealers would not know about a previous crash history and a carjam or similar report won't tell you if it's had a crash, but only if it's been re registered. As for the last question posed on the link. the answer is thousands.
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 8:29pm
ALL THAT SAID. Guys I get it that someone screwed up and someone is a crook. BUT I THINK the very last thing we on this message board want/need is MORE legislation and MORE wrapping people in cotton wool. First of all no matter how its twisted the buyer did not in any way shape or form do due diligence. why was the car THOUSANDS of dollars cheaper than any other one in new Zealand? Second --rather than changing what I feel is a VERY robust system we need to find the specific people concerned and ask them the question. What will determine once and for all if there is a failure or a deliberate effort to defraud is the engineers report,the wheel alighnment report, the pictures taken of the repairs and the recompliance report.
kazbanz,
Feb 2, 8:36pm
actually-guys. how many thousands of downright dangerous cars are out there on the roads of NZ? As I have posted.The Compliance process for fresh imports is pretty darn robust in my opinion. BUT it doesn't in any way deal with NZ new cars that have been in big accidents and for whatever reason haven't been written off.
floscey,
Feb 2, 9:05pm
more likely dodgy AA guy doing backhanders for dealers.
edangus,
Feb 2, 9:49pm
AA - still proving to be as dodgy as all heck.
Dealer may have had knowledge. Buck stops with AA Compliance as far as I am concerned.
franc123,
Feb 2, 11:35pm
Yep, the point is this stuff is either legitimately compliable or its not. If theres a rotten egg in the nest the AA need to deal with it, and get NZTA involved too. Any reputable outfit would.
kazbanz,
Feb 3, 1:34am
Within the bounds of reason ANYTHING can be legitimately repaired. imageine an old car made of unobtanium .The owner would want to repair that regardless of costs. BUT there are due processes to ensure the work is done 100% correctly. Somehow those processes were not followed. Or were followed but someone has committed fraud
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.