I´ll second that...every thread Roy create, he post on it, which is not bad but then he start with his negative comments, you definitely have something against Roy
That was the point, I wasnt, I was covering minor to major. Regardless, I fully understand what you are saying about disclosure however disclosure can be given using different methods and the method mentioned above by intercepting a customer first and explaining in person is doing nothing wrong. You are assuming that Cats would not disclose but you just cant do that with any substance. Who cares whether your friend backed off regarding the car, dod hey call Cats? Seeing that picture, yes its damaged but its been fully repaired to return to its former glory which i would rather over it being salvaged/scrapped for other cars. A genuine customer would have all this checked. There is nothing more to say here, 360t, stick to your word and drop it. Lets just see more of the car in its present condition. Roy, hows about we see some detailed pictures of this car to put things at rest, is that possible?
I am in Monterry for the show...when I get back to Seattle I will be happy to take numerous pics and post of detaill...I will get it up on the lift.
Don't have much of a dog in this fight but what reason would there be to actively solicit purchasers to buy the car, without disclosing the damage, other than to sell the car without ever disclosing it? The notion that it needn't be disclosed because the buyer should know is asinine to me. Should I ask eight thousand questions about the car before I hit upon the thing that's wrong with it... "has the engine ever had major repairs? no.... has the car had a fire? no... " then a few months later my mechanic tells me the engine is not original. I call the seller and he says "ahhhh but you asked me if it had ever had major REPAIRS, not if it had been replaced". I can't think of any reason to hide the details other than the simple reason of hoping to get a higher price from a buyer who is unaware of the cars past - and this being justified with the notion that the buyer is responsible for asking whether the dealer is failing to disclose something. That's like saying it's OK to cheat on your girlfriend so long as she doesn't actually ask if you are cheating on her.... it's silly. And it would not be an issue if the ad said "call for details before bidding" or "call for more information prior to bidding" but it doesn't. Presumably, if someone paid the buy-it-now price, they own the car and if they did not ask specifically if it had any fire damage, they would not be told. It appears the seller doesn't consider a fire with about 1/4 of the entire car charred to be "major", so if the buyer asked "anything major ever happen to the car?" they would be told "NO!", right? What reason not to disclose the history, if not to get a higher price from the sale by hopefully finding a buyer who won't ask those questions? Is a lie of omission still a lie? food for thought...
Sorry to see you think so little of me....EVEN if someone hit the BUY IT NOW...prior to any exchange of funds and our titles and vehicle, they would be provided with all documentation on the car....period.
I pretty much doubt anybody would click the buy-it-now price on this car and pay immediately. If they did Roys job would be extremely easy!
gotta admit, i'm on the disclose it up front bandwagon. specially if you are a dealer. i don't believe roy is dishonest, quite the opposite considering some of the things he has done. but coming in on one of these threads as a new buyer, i might be a little leary of him. bottom line is, i don't know how roy keeps getting himself into these messes. he needs to tighten up his game a little.
great, did someone want to buy a car through you? We've heard your case. It's only a matter of time until you're onto the next complaint to consume your time with. And ultimately, it just breeds negative energy towards yourself. But I didn't tell you that. I think he isn't selective enough on the receiving end. And I believe it's just out of good nature, but give them a break. It's a learning process as you go. If your doors are open for business, it's not always easy to shield yourself from poisonous customers. Maybe that's part of his challenge. In the big picture, not a bad spot to be in really. He HAS customers. Dealing with these cars requires risk, and your trust in the company you place around you. If Cats Exotics doesn't do it, take it elsewhere. Complaining without a solution gets you nowhere. Roy could be that dealer who says FU with his nose up, but he isn't. And he won't ever be. That's why he retains the right customers most of the time. He creates an experience. And when I soon find myself in that new buyer-to-be position, I'll give him or Kevin a call before I walk into any dealer.
If they click "buy it now", would it be considered a sale? I'd imagine yes. So the sale is being put before the disclosure... the car is before the horse. Even if the information is all provided, the transaction is out of order. The correct procedure wouldn't be to sell the car, then let the buyer know what he just bought was in a fire, it would be to let the potential buyer know it was in a fire and then let him buy or not buy. And Roy, it's not that I think little of you, but there simply is no reason not to be up-front about the cars history. I don't expect you to say "warning! this car burned to the ground" or anything, but I'd think that disclosure would be important. And I don't see a reason to avoid disclosure other than trying to cover it up or to work a higher price out of the buyer. This car is a GTR. It's one of a scant few. The fire damage probably doesn't have a major effect on the cars value... which is IMO all the more reason just to disclose everything up front.
Well, I disagree with you and the others in regards to this.. FIRST of no one has NOT BEEN disclosed or provided ALL INFO if they are serious in purchasing the car....period. SECOND NO I do not consider a HIT IT BUY IT now person serious on E-bay..as a matter of fact the REAL buyers ALWAYS call and discuss the car, and if by chance someone DID hit the buy it now...of course we would have the discussion of the vehicle as well as IN WRITING so they know what they are getting. LAST but not least, in these kind of cars., you speak to your customer prior to sale completion so that you can keep that customer for years to come... I am comfortable with my business dealings and will continue to sell as best I can, and I WILL ALWAYS keep my GAURANTEE in writing as my web site says..I know of no other HIGH END DEALERS that have this no questions asked GUARANTEE in W R I T I N I N G....??
I don't see any problem with what Roy does. It's part of selling. Buyer beware. When was the last time you saw an ad for a house for sale that said "Water damage, rusty pipes, A/C about to go out, mold problems, rat infested, kitchen fire and the carpet is soaked with dog piss!". You don't, and you NEVER will. None of that has to be disclosed until you have your checkbook out. Up to that point, it's your job to find out the problems. Same thing with Roy and his used cars. If you buy sight unseen over the internet, it's your fault if the deal goes south. I would never buy a $150K+ used car off the internet from someone I don't know without flying out and looking at it first hand and having it inspected at least once from a neutral party. If you pay in full without doing that for a $400K car, I would not feel sorry for you. That would make you another Josh, just richer. Roy has a car for sale. It is what it is. It's the buyers job to have it inspected.
no shiz? My assumption is trustfund baby with all the time you have on your hands. I see nothing wrong with what Roy is doing. If I see "fire damage" on any ad I'm browsing through, I'm more than likely going to be running. But if I call about a car and the buyer tells me there is previous fire damage and can provide proper documentation to show that the car was repaired correctly I would consider the car at a discount. Face it, it's human nature to run away from what we fear even if we may consider it under reasonable circumstances.
So Titanium660 wants to buy a car from Roy and after some digging it turns out the car has damage history that was not disclosed from the onset. No big surprise coming from Roy,it isnt the first time it has happenned nor will it be the last. I have my opinion of Roy and he very well knows how little i think of him.For those of you who have dealt with him and had a good experience i think it is great and i am glad you are happy with your cars as everyone deserves to get value for their purchase. However in this situation,if any of you was in the market for the GTR you would have been quite annoyed to be faced with the truth only after pushing the enveloppe a little bit. It is very easy to preach buyer beware from the sidelines but it is a total different story if you are right in the middle of it.
not jumping on to any bandwagon here, not on any one's side but after all it is a GTR not a GT, anyone buying an ex-raced car should at least expect car being in some sort of damage, after all if they don't race those things to the limit then what's the point of racing. if Roy was selling a road going GT, then i guess the buyer would expect a clean car. just my 2 cents
It is Titanium 360....and he WAS advised of the issues with the car as it is noted here...it was volunteered to him HE DID not puch any so called envelope..his first series of questions were answered, then the rest of the info volunteered when he did not ask..dont know where that constitutes no disclose?? But I guess it is different for a private party, (360) when he fails to diclsoe his trade in car accidents and damage (as a arace car) untill we ASKED..two sets of rules?? And for the record, I do not know you, have asked you several times both on the board and in PM to ID yourself to me and sate what dealings I have ever had with you direct...never a response...
first of all roy i think you need to get your facts straight. on the first go around it was not disclosed that the car was in a fire and was damaged. second of all i asked kevin if the car had any issues second time around and that's when he came clean which he should have in the beginning. so if i would not have asked it would not have been disclosed. third of all i think there is a major difference between a race car that is toasted compared to one that the body panels have been changed. dont you think so? I obviously did expect a race car to have body panels changed or fixed but to comparing that to a major fire, please give me a break. btw i have found out much more about your car's history if you would like me to disclose it. buyer beware
I disagree with your scenerio...but that's what life is about.. AND yes accidnet damage and fire damage..(which I do not think is major on this car...after all it was JUST BODY PANELS replaced and painted..just like yours!) is the same, or are you saying one should be disclosed and the other not..?? And if you have more info, I welcome you to post it...I am sure every car out there at one point or another has something not all parties are aware of..I have nothing to hide on this car...it was a race car, it was raced, it was in a cosmetic body panel fire that was replaced...what else is there that I amy not be aware of ...please share with us and me....but make sure they are facts and not blown up rumors please...back your statements with facts...not hearsay.. Thanks
