- Thread starter Pickle
- Start date
marknotgeorge
Doing sums for a living since 2009.
- Messages
- 473
digital mispositioning. Easy repair...
Always seems a bit dodgy, that. If the damage is on the left side, why is there a picture of the RIGHT side in AutoTrader?
Always seems a bit dodgy, that. If the damage is on the left side, why is there a picture of the RIGHT side in AutoTrader?
malcolm
& Clementine the Cat
- Messages
- 9,730
- Location
- Bedford UK
If they were cost effective to repair them then the insurance companies wouldn't write them off. And I reckon it'd take me longer to repair a car than a bodyshop. Though they are restricted to using new parts. Last time I had a car written off I bought it back from the insurance company, jacked out the damage and kept on using it.
JimM
Member
- Messages
- 394
Remember that if you intend to sell the car on that it will be recorded as CatD if a HPI check is done. Normally this knocks at least 25% off of the value.
Also it's always going to be a bit of a gamble as you never know what you might find when you start removing damaged panels. What looks superficial on the surface could be hiding significant structural damage underneath !
Still if you've got the cash, time and will power, I'm sure there are bargains to be had.
Good luck
Jim
Also it's always going to be a bit of a gamble as you never know what you might find when you start removing damaged panels. What looks superficial on the surface could be hiding significant structural damage underneath !
Still if you've got the cash, time and will power, I'm sure there are bargains to be had.
Good luck
Jim
Not something I've tried or ever likely to. I would never buy a write-off as my own personal vehicle. Was it top gear that crash tested a focus that was Cat C or D, damage repaired to chassis legs, they drove it into a new one. The Cat C/D came of very bad and occupants would have died. The new one, you'd have walked away. Cars like that should be crushed without question. Light panel damage is ok. You're probably better off going to auctions and picking up bargains, give them a light polish and sell on.
Must have been Cat C then.
- Messages
- 17,540
I had a BMW which Mrs Woz decided was too long and needed shortening by a few inches. The insurance company wrote it off but there wasn't much damage and certainly nothing structural. We bought it back off them for next to nothing with a view to repairing it myself and using it again but I decided to sell it on. The guy who bought it said you have to get an engineer's report on it before it goes back on the road. A lot of 'damaged repairables' are non-recorded so I assume no report is needed on those.
Id rather not call for the crushing of all repairable cars on the basis that one was repaired badly and crashed for a bit of pop journalism, the cynic in me wonders if perhaps they did a bit of selective testing to get the result they were after...
Its also a very short step away from demanding all cars over x years old should be disposed off as possibly corrosion may have weakened the monocoque in unseen ways.
A proper repair will be as strong as the original car was, if its seam welded in place instead of spot welded it could even be stronger.
We're throwing things away on a whim too often as a species as it is without mandating the production of extra waste.
I think the rating system works well, in that a repaired car is identified as such and allows you to then make a informed decision on the quality of repair, and if you cannot, you can take the option to take it to someone who can.
If you mandated that anything that had a repair to the chassis was to be crushed, there would be about 2 vw campers left in the entire country. And probally 0 Range Rover classics...
The car in question had obviously had a heavy front ender already and clearly pretty much any bodyshop repair would not have been able to return the car to the original manufacturers design specification and make a profit. The only way to economically return the car to the road was to carry out a less than satisfactory repair. Yes the repair was strong, the car wasn't about to fall apart, but the crash safety designed into the crumple zone had been compromised by welding up and repairing the car. It was legal and economical to return the car to the road, even though safety would be seriously compromised in another crash and the owner may not have known they were driving around in a potential death trap.
I wouldn't call for the crushing of all repairs but in this instance the car had been involved in a heavy front ender and couldn't be returned economically to the road while maintaining the safety of the original vehicle.
Old vehicles like VW campers are pretty much excluded here, infact any car of a few years ago could be excluded since NCAP tests and thoughts to passenger safety weren't really considered in the same way they are today and designed with safety and crumple zones in mind. I wouldn't like to crash test my Strada.
A friends father, has done this many times over. He's presently got all 3 of his daughters driving repairs.
If you know what your doing then go for it (he has been in the trade for over 30 years though). But just thoroughly examine before purchasing, it's structural damage that causes most of the problems. But, IIRC to purchase a cat A or B, you need to be a licensed dealer.
If you know what your doing then go for it (he has been in the trade for over 30 years though). But just thoroughly examine before purchasing, it's structural damage that causes most of the problems. But, IIRC to purchase a cat A or B, you need to be a licensed dealer.
