opps, but inspected vehicles there before, well the yard next to where the car is parked as they use this area
outbidyou2,
Jan 4, 10:53pm
rmvt
tgray,
Jan 5, 5:06am
The fact they have stated in writing on the auction "the car does not have any mechanical issues", means you have a strong case with the disputes tribunal (phone number on back of the CIN form you would have been issued). Had they not stated that in their auction, you would have been on your own.
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 6:24am
Yur demonstrated attitude is EXACTLYwhy NZ is in the trouble it is. THE OP is showing a lack of personal responsibility for their actions. They chose not to buy a car locally where they would have full coverage under all the consumer laws. They chose not to have a prepurchase inspection carried out. They chose to bid on a car sight unseen They chose not to take a mechanical insurance on the car. Now that THEIR own actionsd have backfired on them they are not prepared to accept the risk they took but are looking to pass responsibility onto someone else.
ALL THAT SAID--Could this be a ressurection of one of the famously banned traders we refer to here! The references to 100's of cars for sale suggests it may very well be
tgray,
Jan 5, 6:55am
I here you Kaz, but the purchaser had 'in writing' from the dealer that there were no mechanical issues. In my mind, that makes all the difference.
puddleduck00,
Jan 5, 7:00am
Mate I didn't write the guarantees on his auction.
I think your attitude is why NZ is in trouble. People are willing to roll over and let retailers/dealers flout the law. The OP has a good case that is worth fighting for. Enough said.
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 7:00am
But the car hasn't been fixed yet. Untill the car is fixed there is no way of knowing if it was a pre existing condition covered up by the dealeror just bad luck on the buyers part.
incar.,
Jan 5, 7:56am
i would advise you to get a 2nd opinion, toyota may be wrong with there diagnosis, at 90k the chain, slippers shouldn't have any wear, more the likey it has a oil feed gallery issue, regardless buying a CVT vehicle without a mechanical warranty is stupid, these transmission are replacement units only if the main bearing fails. price for new chain, tensioner, slippers is $600 from toyota, plus labour, takes around 3hrs
llortmt,
Jan 5, 9:22am
I can get quality Japaneses aftermarket parts/kit (chain, guides, crank gear and seal plus modified tensioner) for $250 or cheap Chinese copy's (which i wouldn't recommend) for even less. However as I've already said an oil flush and change may be all it needs for now.
icemans1,
Jan 5, 9:45am
those 1000cc are so gutless, our 1999 one had a bit of a cam chain rattle. mileage was about 50,000 km
icemans1,
Jan 5, 9:47am
if ya had asked me, i would have told you to stay clear of it
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 10:46am
RUBBISH-Do you not see that successive gubbiments have been wrapping the public in cotton wool "to protect them from themselves" What due dilligence did the op show! What responsibility for their own lives did the OP show!
Anyhoo its all pretty much moot. The OP can take the dealer to DT. The dealer then flashes out a statement ffrom the trucky that delivered the car -NO engine light on . From the last owner and does a stat dec themselves saying the engine light wasn't on whilst in their posession. I must say reading the advert and doing some background checks there is no way on this lil planet I would have purchased that car from that dealer without at least a comprehensive PP inspection
a.woodrow,
Jan 5, 10:52am
The engine light being on or off doesn't mean that there wasn't a mechanical defect. if the chain is worn that didn't happen the second the light came on did it. If you buy something at auction you take the risk, however in this case it appears the vehicle has been misrepresented as the seller GUARANTEED it free of mechanical defects - if there is a mechanical defect causing the light to come on, I am quite certain DT will rule in favour of the buyer, regardless of the light being on or off when purchased
incar.,
Jan 5, 11:40am
I was refering to the toyota quotation using genuine parts, im sure you can but so can i so whats your point
llortmt,
Jan 5, 12:25pm
I was basically +1'ing you and adding that. worst way it could be heaps cheaper at an independent.
incar.,
Jan 5, 1:21pm
All good, yep true, toyota would replace everything to cover their a$$ if they missed diagnosed it
tgray,
Jan 5, 2:03pm
Well said.
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 4:02pm
Hold yer horses dude. lets say for the sake of this discussion that the camchain is now worn out.It isn't a sudden FAILURE it has worn to its service limit.Like tyres or brake pads or spark plugs or. So yes its entirely possible that the chain has JUST reached its service limit. As they say -brown smelly stuff does indeed fall. Keep in mind that the reason the light is on is that the cam/crank angle sensors are telling its got an issue BUT- have a look at the responses from people who work on those little toyotas on a regular basis. Im still betting theres a par blocked oil gallery and running a good flush through the engine and putting the correct oil(5w 40) into it with a new filter will have it back to normal. My thinking is that a lump of goop has fallen down inside the engine whilst on the transporter and then first drive its sucked into a gallery. But again untill someone does more than put a scan tool on it noone will know.
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 4:05pm
My thinking precisely.-Ohh it doesn't actually need a camchain or tensioner or. But we had better fit them anyways and OF COURSE its good practice to change the oil at the same time.
jason18,
Jan 5, 4:13pm
Well to be honest. At the end of the day you got a cheap car.6.5k. And you took the risk of buying site unseen and not having it looked over. Hey I have done it before so not saying that against you. Maybe ask the dealer if he will pay a little bit towards it and move on. If you had paid say 9k then I would be a bit bummed. Do what Kaz has said and give it a good oil change etc and see how she goes. May not have been serviced for a while
puddleduck00,
Jan 5, 4:15pm
Be that as it may, that's still a mechanical defect. Not a mechanical defect that appeared out of nowhere, but a fault through lack of maintenance. The dealer chose to accept the car as a trade in and then guaranteed the car as being mechanically sound without so much as even giving it a service.
Do you accept this as an okay practice! We've both read the same auction. It states it right there in black and white that it's guaranteed to be mechanically sound.
kazbanz,
Jan 5, 4:34pm
You really don't get it do you! IF the car was sold by normal means through the dealership then the OP has full cover under the CGA etc and I'd be singing a totally different tune. But they diddn't. Therefore the responsibility is on the BUYER to establish that the vehicle is mechanically sound. Or do you feel that the buyer bears no responsibility in this case! ASSUMING THE SELLER ISN'T A CROOK -The vehicle to the best of the sellers knowledge was mechanically sound AT TIME OF SALE.That is the limit of the sellers responsibility. If the OP wanted full cover under consumer laws they should have purchased the car from a local dealership b conventional means.
rpvr,
Jan 5, 7:43pm
Of course the buyer took a risk, which they admitted from post 1 as being "dumb". And the seller may well have thought the vehicle was ok to "the best of their knowledge".
But the crucial part, to my mind, is that the seller chose to use the word "guaranteed". This word gave the buyer a sense of security that they had a guarantee, which obviously meant nothing to the seller than a means to entice bids.
Think about auctions for goods other than cars for a moment. If I auctioned a painting as a guaranteed Ralph Hotere, would that not be expected to attract more and higher bids than if I used the wording "to the best of my knowledge by Ralph Hotere! That is the whole point.
rpvr,
Jan 5, 7:43pm
Of course the buyer took a risk, which they admitted from post 1 as being "dumb". And the seller may well have thought the vehicle was ok to "the best of their knowledge".
But the crucial part, to my mind, is that the seller chose to use the word "guaranteed". This word gave the buyer a sense of security that they had a guarantee, which obviously meant nothing to the other seller than a means to entice bids.
Think about auctions for goods other than cars for a moment. If I auctioned a painting as a guaranteed Ralph Hotere, would that not be expected to attract more and higher bids than if I used the wording "to the best of my knowledge by Ralph Hotere! That is the whole point.
rpvr,
Jan 5, 7:43pm
Of course the buyer took a risk, which they admitted from post 1 as being "dumb". And the seller may well have thought the vehicle was ok to "the best of their knowledge".
But the crucial part, to my mind, is that the seller chose to use the word "guaranteed". This word gave the buyer a sense of security that they had a guarantee, which obviously meant nothing to the other seller than a means to entice bids.
Think about auctions for goods other than cars for a moment. If I auctioned a painting as a guaranteed Ralph Hotere, would that not be expected to attract more and higher bids than if I used the wording "to the best of my knowledge by Ralph Hotere"! That is the whole point.
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.