Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3


11905 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1557636 23-May-2016 00:03
Send private message

lxsw20:

 

Reading through this thread, that question has already been answered. I see plenty of CAT D's for sale here in the UK too, so it's not like it's just NZ. 

 

 

 

 

I can't see an answer as to why we accept lower standards than Australia does to be honest.

 

I don't really think any modern vehicle can be adequately repaired beyond the odd small ding etc. that can be handled by way of a panel replacement.

 

Once a monocoque chassis is bent, I'd never trust it even if it had been 'straightened'. So many integral panels would probably have small ripples and things in that I would personally never feel safe in that vehicle.

 

Certainly the one shown on Fair Go was well rusted beyond what you would expect on a modern car: it looked more like a 1979 Escort that had spent time on salted European roads than a car that was built within the last 10 years.

 

We have so many vehicles come in from Japan as it is - why do we need to accept damaged ones from Australia?

 

 (and OOI do we fob off our damaged ones on someone else further down the line?)

 

 






UHD

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 303
Inactive user


  Reply # 1557638 23-May-2016 01:29
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

UHD:

 

If the cars pass an AA check or some other equivalent mechanical inspection and have a current WoF/license what exactly is the problem?

 

 

The problem is that you the buyer should be able to make an informed choice as to whether you are prepared to take the risk, whatever it is.

 

If the information is not disclosed, you can't do that.

 

 

The information must be disclosed though.


UHD

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 303
Inactive user


  Reply # 1557639 23-May-2016 01:30
Send private message

MadEngineer:

 

UHD:

 

If the cars pass an AA check or some other equivalent mechanical inspection and have a current WoF/license what exactly is the problem?

 

 do you honestly think such a check can deem a car safe? Flood damage tends to be pretty comprehensive and damages many of the exotic components that a modern car is chocka-block with with.

 

 

I would imagine flood damaged vehicles have their electronics replaced.




11905 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1557823 23-May-2016 11:08
Send private message

UHD:

 

MadEngineer:

 

UHD:

 

If the cars pass an AA check or some other equivalent mechanical inspection and have a current WoF/license what exactly is the problem?

 

 do you honestly think such a check can deem a car safe? Flood damage tends to be pretty comprehensive and damages many of the exotic components that a modern car is chocka-block with with.

 

 

I would imagine flood damaged vehicles have their electronics replaced.

 

 

That would virtually entail stripping the car back to bare metal for many modern vehicles that include things like fibre optic ring mains, sensors in tyres, suspension, steering, brakes, exhausts, gearboxes, underbody, airbags etc etc etc. Pretty hard to be sure that much work was properly done.








11905 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1557826 23-May-2016 11:10
Send private message

UHD:

 

Geektastic:

 

UHD:

 

If the cars pass an AA check or some other equivalent mechanical inspection and have a current WoF/license what exactly is the problem?

 

 

The problem is that you the buyer should be able to make an informed choice as to whether you are prepared to take the risk, whatever it is.

 

If the information is not disclosed, you can't do that.

 

 

The information must be disclosed though.

 

 

But, at least according to the example in FG, it sometimes isn't being. They also found that there was no single source of information a buyer could look at to see whether a prospective vehicle was such a write off.






Banana?
4457 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1061

Subscriber

  Reply # 1557835 23-May-2016 11:19
Send private message

Almost a 'buyer beware' case. I'd say if the vehicle is a lot cheaper than others of the same year/condition, you'd have to ask why.

 

I didn't see Fair Go, so can't comment on that case, but I do wonder what she paid for the vehicle.


1888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 316


  Reply # 1557864 23-May-2016 11:26
One person supports this post
Send private message

I know a guy who imports statutory write-offs from Australia and occasionally take photos of the vehicles ready for sale.

These are not rust buckets.  These are 2014/15 Toyota 86's or luxury spec vehicles worth onward and upwards of 120K a lot of the time.  Or at least, that is what my friend imports.  The 86 I referred to had bumper damage and the insurance company didn't want a bar of repairing it and simply paid out for a new one.  Damaged car gets sold at auction for 15K, shipped to NZ, it gets a new bumper and a cert and then sold on for 25 or 30K as repaired, or whatever they are worth.

 

It's legal because the vehicles pass a mandated safety inspection.  If they don't pass, they don't get to drive on our roads.  Pretty simple.

 

 

 

I'd prefer a car bought for cheap in Australia because of minor damage, fixed here and then go through enough certifications to rival a spaceship.  As opposed to purchasing blind at an online Japanese auction.  If you're buying a 40K second hand car (that would otherwise be 70K in the same market) and want to remain willfully ignorant as to the history of your second hand vehicle, that's up to the buyer.






Sometimes what you don't get is a blessing in disguise!



11905 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1558297 23-May-2016 22:42
Send private message

trig42:

 

Almost a 'buyer beware' case. I'd say if the vehicle is a lot cheaper than others of the same year/condition, you'd have to ask why.

 

I didn't see Fair Go, so can't comment on that case, but I do wonder what she paid for the vehicle.

 

 

 

 

You can see the piece here and it's worth seeing, as certainly in this case, the car was valued by Turners as being worth $5000 for 'parts only'.

 

 

 

The lady paid $18,500.






2173 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 359


  Reply # 1558431 24-May-2016 09:08
3 people support this post
Send private message

What about cars already here in NZ that get damaged, patched up and onsold without going through the insurance/re-vin process? there will be zero history, the problem is not the import process, it is some individuals are effectively out to rip someone off and there are many channels for them to do that


2720 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537


  Reply # 1558435 24-May-2016 09:19
One person supports this post
Send private message

It really proves that the certification program in NZ is not sufficient.

 

In the case of the vehicle on Fair Go (I think Campbell Live may have done a story or two on these write-offs as well), the vehicles are publicly written off in Australia - the information is certainly 'on record' and available to officials. You would expect that the process for certifying a used vehicle for NZ roads would involve some sort of paper trail check - are they stolen, have they been checked by customs, have they been written off? At that point you would expect the vehicles that have been written off should automatically fail to be passed as fit for NZ roads until they have had a heavy duty (probably prohibitively expensive) check up, and remedial work done.

 

As was pointed out by Fair Go - there are 3 or 4 government departments that info on these vehicles - but none of the departments really flag them. 





Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

31 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 15


  Reply # 1558500 24-May-2016 10:29
One person supports this post
Send private message

I think we need to consider that the certification process for damaged cars is not the issue. As stated in an earlier post, there is a high level of scrutiny that is undertaken before the vehicle can even go through compliance.

 

What this will not help with, is ratbag individuals who will find a way to circumnavigate legal (and morally just) process, in order to make a quick buck.

 

They will find another way, whether it is importing as a wreck and reskinning the parts onto a legit VIN number, or something else. 

 

The best recommendation I can make;

 

- Buy from a reputable dealer

 

- Have the car inspected by a trusted independent third party specialist

 

- Review all supporting documentation (particularly where the car is imported). You can see if a car was imported as damaged through the flags on this. If it doesn't have full doco, don't touch it.

 

 




11905 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1558574 24-May-2016 12:16
Send private message

I would say the simplest answer is to instruct Customs to refuse clearance to any such vehicles at the border, returning them to Australia.






21463 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4362

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1558576 24-May-2016 12:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

I would say the simplest answer is to instruct Customs to refuse clearance to any such vehicles at the border, returning them to Australia.

 

 

Plenty of other reasons to bring them in other than fixing and putting on the road here.

 

I know that many cars come over and then go to the islands, or you could be parting them out, easier to ship as a complete car. Someone might want one for a non street car. Absurd to block import of them based on a few people failing to disclose the history.





Richard rich.ms

Mad Scientist
19012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2469

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1558587 24-May-2016 12:32
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

I would say the simplest answer is to instruct Customs to refuse clearance to any such vehicles at the border, returning them to Australia.



One could always build a wall ...

Mad Scientist
19012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2469

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1558589 24-May-2016 12:33
One person supports this post
Send private message

I'm more worried about dodgy construction material for buildings

1 | 2 | 3
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.