To tell or not to tell?

Thanks for the nice comments! I would say the word pristine was not a good word to choose for selling this car {Answer for Norcal}, especially after looking up the definition of "Pristine". It actually couldn't be further from the truth after reading the actual definition. Actually made me chuckle a bit.

Main Entry: pris·tine
Pronunciation: \ˈpris-ˌtēn, pri-ˈstēn, especially British ˈpris-ˌtīn\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin pristinus; akin to Latin prior
Date: 1534
1: belonging to the earliest period or state : original <the hypothetical pristine lunar atmosphere>
2 a: not spoiled, corrupted, or polluted (as by civilization) : pure <a pristine forest> b: fresh and clean as or as if new <used books in pristine condition>
— pris·tine·ly adverb

Ok am unclear on one thing. The date shows the carfax from Jim Lyons was run on August 20th 2008. Roy bought the car December 5th 2008. Was the Salvaged title notation removed from the carfax between August and December? Is it back on the carfax now? {Page 13 of this topic}

 

I just spoke to a CarFax account representitive (1-800-274-2277). For VIN#ZA9DU01B21LA12794 there have been no changes to the record since July 28, 2008. Let me repeat. THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES TO THE RECORD SINCE JULY 28, 2008. The last entry added was a notification that the car was availible for sale by a dealer.

 

If you look at post #261 you will see that the clean CA title was issued on 4/26/2007. Let me repeat. THE CLEAN CA TITLE WAS ISSUED TO A PRIVATE OWNER ON 4/26/2007. It was not issued as Roy stated between August and December 2008.

 

Here are my personal dealings with carfax trying to get information corrected. I have been told that they will not remove anything on the Carfax, but they will make a "notation" if they receive what they consider proper evidence to support a claim. Otherwise it will never be removed, only a statement saying evidence was produced to correct what could possibly be an error. Now, it does appear that an owner might have tried to contact Carfax thinking he could get the salvaged title removed from the carfax. This is a guess, but after that customer sent carfax a copy of his clean title, Carfax did indeed make a "Notation", saying the title could have been "washed".

 

I call on Rob or one of the other moderators to look into the claim that the Carfax was changed between Aug and Dec 2008 and a salvage title added. I also ask that whomever is not telling the truth has their sponsorship permanently revoked.

Roy, are you willing to lay it on the line?

 

Roy has quite an F-Chat following. I don't know if you know who you are up against. If it takes digging to China to get out of the hole, Roy will do it.

Sounds like time to let it go. Jim Lyons is probably saying "get your ass back to work" and don't use the word Pristine on salvaged cars anymore. LOL!

 

This is correct...we ran the carfax prior to purchase and the salvage was not listed, only the notation. In speaking to carfax via phone and e-mail, they are working with us to try and find out how and when the information was purged. We have to go through the channels of paperwork submissions, etc to find out how it could have been removed, even for a short period, and who may have submitted this paperwork. Previous owner claims no knowledge of any salvage on the car during his ownership, albeit I cannot see how anyone could stand within 100 feet of this car and not notice the repair work, or lack thereof.

Carfax issue aside for a moment, Rick KNOWS full well that neither him nor Jim disclosed SALVAGE...big difference between salvage and "notation".

Jim claims the car was serviced at Bobileff's and nothing visual was found during that service...wrong, only had an alternator installed top side and again I ask, how can anyone stand within 100 feet of this car and NOT see something was wrong with it?

Jim claims there was never a need to have an inspection on the car because "nothing in the visual inspection made us feel it was warranted"...the right rear tire has a substantial toe out and there's really no way to miss it...hell the tow truck driver that picked the car up to take it in after delivery noticed it right away...oh yeah, the ignition switch broke on delivery and needed to be replaced...another $1500.00 towards this "pristine example". Why on earth would you NOT perform an inspection on a car you KNEW had a salvage history, according to your comments posted in this forum, you "knew about the history and re-negotiated the price"

Bottom line, Rick and I had several conversations about this car, I asked several times...any paint work, accident history, salvage...each time his response was the same...no accidents, some father son squabble about a theft recovery was the notation and they were trying to get that fixed.

Personally, I'm tired of the slinging mud...at the end of the day Rick and Jim, and this has been asked before, what if the car did go to an end user in the condition we received it in? Would your position be the same? Would it really be "buyer beware" and tough luck see you some other time?

In this business it doesn't take a lot to do the right thing, whether you agree with it or not...It's what seperates you from the others. I've never had a bad word to say about SCC, Rick or Jim for that matter, until they handled things this way. There are people who will read this thread and still buy from SCC as well as from Cats...and there are people who will read this and never buy from either as a result of this thread.

As many times as the discussion of disclosure has come up in these forums, its a problem for me when asked point blank, "does the car have any paintwork, accident history, or salvage history" and the reply from the seller is "No. Has clean California title."

So I ask again, since I believe the question was never formally answered...Rick/Jim, would your position be the same if this were a retail purchaser? If the car described as "pristine" were sold to an end user, are you telling the members of this community that you would say too bad too sad? If that's the case, then your moral compass is truly tainted.

Take egos out of this, set pride aside for just a moment and think...what would it take to resolve this and do the right thing? I know the answer...perhaps you do too...the real question is, are you willing to do just that? Or taking it a step further...since you "learned the car had salvage history and re-negotiated the price" are you willing to do the same with Cats, refund some money & move on? Seriously...what's it going to take to put the stones down, get out of the mud, and get this matter resolved?

 

Who is in the right and who is in the wrong no longer makes a difference in this thread; what more can possibly be added? This is not a courtroom.

I think both parties need to realize that those with the resources to actually purchase a car are just turned off by this nonsense, and it's awful PR for both companies. Do yourselves a favor. Stop posting on this thread and try and halt the ongoing damage. Without both of you feeding the flames, the thread will die and likely be forgotten.

 

Roy already knew this was a salvage title car and went for it anyway. Kinda like having Roger Clemens pitch for you then acting assraped when you find out he was doping....C'mon Roy, how can you F up like this and squeal about it later with a straight face? Is this your final for the AVD School for Looking like an ASS?

But hey, you gotta following... post some titty pics and expand it some more! Guys love them titties ya know!

 

This is something that everyone should be asking themselves....



If an individual placed the same for sale ad listing the car as "pristine" with kit car parts and bent suspension components you could chalk it up to just another con artist amongst us. This transaction should be taken much more seriously because it was done by a so called "trusted" dealer that apparently intentionally mis represented the vehicle in the advertisement in the hopes that the buyer would not dig deep enough into its history before the sale.


It could be anyone out there stuck with that lemon instead of Roy, and now we all can see what this particular dealer is willing to do to make it right.


I cant speak for anyone else, but there is a lot of us out here that reads these threads and soak up information without ever registering or commenting about them. A lot of us are biased against dealers in the first place and when one is caught using "pristine" in the description of a salvage car like this one was with the resulting, "Sorry, you lose!" attitude it does nothing but tarnish reputations and destroy future business with that particular dealer.


I, for one, will not believe anything that they ever advertise about a car because of this. I cant say that I would ever have bought from them in the first place, but some of my friends and others that read these threads anonymously like myself more than likely will not


Good luck selling the car, Roy.... it may be better in the long run to just part it out

 

Well, your response anyway......

Seems as though this car has been a topic of discussion for a few years now, how then could you think it magically improved itself to be worthy of purchase by you?

 

The scariest part is when you look at the ebay ads he has running.
"pristene" ???
Eric

 

Roy
I don't agree with you as usual

1. I spoke to Carfax today. They told me that the record has not changed since July. I take that to mean that there was no addition or subtraction on the record. As others have stated. Carfax doesn't remove information they will only add additional information. We have carfax records before and after the sale to CATS and they are identical.

2. The word used in the PO that I attached in post #270 was "NEGATIVE" not "NOTATION".

3. There is no need for a playground. We are debating the facts here. I see them differently then you do.

4. There is no way to prove or disprove anything that was discussed on the phone. That will always be a "he said, "she said". I can only debate the facts.

5. If you think that waiting for the CHP investigation results is such a great idea. You should have taken your own advice and not started this thread.

6. I think I've put the Carfax issue to bed and proven my point beyond doubt. You claim to have seen a Carfax Report that didn't show salvage and Carfax says that the record was not changed since July, 2008. You also cannot produce this alleged Carfax. We have a dealer account with Carfax and can go back and look at reports that were pulled.

7. When you sold the car to your buyer. Did you write "Carfax Notation" or "Negative Carfax" on it?

8. I have learned from this thread that facts won't get in the way of a good story. In any thread like this the wolves are going to come out. They didn't fail to disappoint here. I can take my licks as I'm sure you can. I have received a number of calls as I'm sure you have from friends who have provided support.

Cheers
Rick

 

Point taken. I don't purposely misrepresent cars. When people call me and ask about a car. I tell them all that I know. If there are any issues that someone might have a problem with. I make them abundantly clear. That has happened a few times already with F-CHAT members. We sell 300+ cars per year and I don't go over ever single car with a microscope. I tell everyone to get an inspection. That protects everyone involved.

 

Good answer.
Buy it back and show everyone the misrepresentation was an accident.
JMO
Eric

 

Kevin
I give you credit for trying to put the spin on Roy's statements. Ever thought of politics?

 

I never said it was misrepresented. I said I don't purposely misrepresent. In my own defense. I only started selling cars last year and don't have enough knowledge or experience to be devious.

 

Great reasoning (and debating, especially #7), and cuts to the quick. You got a raw deal here by some!

Caveat Emptor

 

Why not? Is it because of Ebay's stellar reputation for honesty or because you like flushing hundred dollar bills down the toilet?

 

But it sounds like your learning fast...........

Sorry, but I'm sure someone else was thinking it.

 

Carfax having removed a salvage title that was issued back in July 2002 then reinspected and rebuilt in May 2003, I'm having a hard time with that Roy.



07/02/2002 MARLBORO, NY Motor Vehicle Dept. REBUILT/REBUILDABLE
07/02/2002 MARLBORO, NY Motor Vehicle Dept. SALVAGE
05/28/2003 BAYSIDE, NY Motor Vehicle Dept. TITLE REBUILT/REBUILDABLE SALVAGE
06/25/2003 FRANKLIN, NY Motor Vehicle Dept. REGISTRATION EVENT/RENEWAL
07/30/2003 NY Motor Vehicle Dept. TITLE REBUILT/REBUILDABLE SALVAGE
02/26/2004 NY 2,100 Independent Source INDEPENDENT INSPECTION
05/24/2005 FRANKLIN, NY Motor Vehicle Dept. REGISTRATION EVENT/RENEWAL
08/08/2006 NY 4,711 Motor Vehicle Dept. FAILED EMISSION INSPECTION PASSED SAFETY INSPECTION
08/09/2006 NY Motor Vehicle Dept. PASSED EMISSION INSPECTION PASSED SAFETY INSPECTION
03/12/2007 GLENDALE, AZ 5,279 Motor Vehicle Dept.TITLE (Title #:185M007071082)REGISTRATION EVENT/RENEWAL


The car was discussed on this forum in July 08 and then in the other forum in mid december (both threads discussing salvage history not to mention the cars been discussed on the other forum for the better part of 4 years), so your assertion is that between July and december 08 carfax REMOVED TWO MAJOR negative notations from the cars history then put them back? If indeed this is the case and Cats exotics can prove it then my sincerest apologies to Roy and Kevin.