From: Adrian on 1 Apr 2010 08:54
"Man at B&Q" <manatbandq(a)hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:
>> Don't forget that a CatC write-off is purely a financial decision on
>> the insurer's part. The repairs - at insurance price - exceed the
>> market value.
> So if the market value now really is £5k+ and it was not economical to
> repair 5yrs ago when it was, presumably, worth a fair bit more, it must
> have been quite some prang?
Put it through a hedge at speed - panel damage across <say> front and all
down one side, together with bolt-on suspension bendage, and some new
rims & rubber - mebbe a trashed hood, too - that'd very quickly add up to
a horrible number with paint etc. Yet no structural damage.
It's five years since it was returned to the road. Plenty of time for
somebody to have cut their losses in that time. I don't see any great
_inherent_ "run, don't walk".
From: Silk on 1 Apr 2010 10:08
On 01/04/2010 13:02, Nkosi (ama-ecosse) wrote:
> On 1 Apr, 12:01, Silk<m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>> On 31/03/2010 22:10, Gio wrote:
>>> We could do with the groups constructive opinion on the possible purchase of
>>> a Honda S2000
>> The Honda S2000 is one of the most over-rated piles of shite ever to
>> roll off a production line.
>> If you like a cramped bone-shaking ride and only intend on using it on
>> the smoothest of roads or on a race track, you should grow-up and get a
>> proper car. If you're already grown up, act your age.
> I see yours is = to ypur shoe size!
Even if my shoe size was 5, I'd still be two grown up for an S2000. In
fact I'd have to have a shoes size that small in order to get in one.
From: Gio on 1 Apr 2010 12:00
"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> "Gio" <x(a)x.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
>> I just wish we could get the original damage details from the insurance
>> companies database or DVLA which surprises me somewhat in an age of
>> safety 1st. ( I was thrown when I discovered a cat C insurance
>> written-off car only has to have written confirmation that the car still
>> contains the same make and model parts to satisfy DVLA plus an mot test
> Not quite. It has to have a vehicle identity check - to ensure it's not a
> ringed/nicked car with the identity of the bent one - and an MOT.
> Don't forget that a CatC write-off is purely a financial decision on the
> insurer's part. The repairs - at insurance price - exceed the market
> value. If that car was younger when it was bent, it may have been
> repaired instead of written off, and you wouldn't even know.
> When it comes down to it, it's a 9yo car of a type that could EASILY have
> had a very hard life - lots of trackdays etc.
> Forget the history. Look at what's in front of you.
> If you don't know what you're looking at, get somebody who does to look
> at it for you.
Thanks Adrian, I see where you are coming from re what is the car telling
us. For something 10 years old, what do you expect at the end of the day?
From: Adrian on 1 Apr 2010 12:16
"Gio" <x(a)x.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
>> When it comes down to it, it's a 9yo car of a type that could EASILY
>> have had a very hard life - lots of trackdays etc. Forget the history.
>> Look at what's in front of you. If you don't know what you're looking
>> at, get somebody who does to look at it for you.
> Thanks Adrian, I see where you are coming from re what is the car
> telling us. For something 10 years old, what do you expect at the end
> of the day?
Sod the age - for five grand, I'd expect something that's got no major
faults at all.
There's only four S2000s below £6k on Autotrader - and three of them are
only a fiver under. The fourth is £5695.
If it's straight, tidy and healthy - go for it.
From: Silk on 1 Apr 2010 14:05
On 01/04/2010 17:00, Gio wrote:
> Thanks Adrian, I see where you are coming from re what is the car telling
A car tells me only one think. The owner is a complete tosser.