https://www.easyexport.us/vehicle-fi...ncho-cucamonga

 

Fortunately, some pictures can be found through salvage brokerage sites as above from past auctions. Copart and IAAI discourage and frown upon brokerage dealers when they allow access to historical data.

 

That little hood stripe suites it well.

The leaping cat on the back doesn't look like it belongs though?

 

The damage looks a lot worse than it may be in those salvage pictures, as it seems to have taken the hit above its crash structure. It peeled the top of the car back like a can opener.

Unless your strut tower structure took much of a hit, the damage probably just looks a lot more catastrophic than it really is. My '86 '44 took such a hit before I bought it when the front left made contact with a SUV when the SUV tried to force itself into the end of a stopped turn lane and ended up sitting in two lanes at once with little warning. I've had it six years now.

 

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Everyone loves the XKR. I've always been worried regarding potentially high repair costs on my 3 other XKR's and they were all clear titles except that my 2003, it was a dealer buy back. The car is awesome, but I'm having second thoughts on how long and how miles I'll log with it. Always bought to sell after 6 months or so but might have to re-access.

 

Holy smokes DGL......you should be a private investigator. That XKR was smashed something silly and there can be no doubt the car sustained major damage. The buyer David XKR should go back to the seller and request repayment or an additional price allowance for what he paid. From reading his posts, it certainly appears that he was taken for a ride literally by the seller. I had seen the car was offered by Co-Parts but never could come up with any photos. But you certainly did. Great discovery DGL.

He (David XKR) may think he can hold it for 6 months and resell it, but now that he sees your photos, he will have to fully disclose the entire damage done to that XKR.

Let the buyer beware. Good information DGL. Very impressed with your discovery on this Jag XKR.

 

I am not so sure a private seller is required to disclose anything? Besides the obvious Salvage Title, but that would come out no matter what at some point. The extent of the rebuild and initial damage, well not so much. Even if he sold it and someone else found out afterwards I am not so sure what recourse they would have for a used car sale. David was blatantly lied to, unless the guy he bought it from him has a dealer license I don't know that there is much to go back on? There has to be a lawyer or two on the board?

Now that the VIN has been disclosed on the open internet and the pictures of the damage has been associated to that number it certainly is easier for a potential buyer to find. Even so, I googled the VIN and this forum did not even come up in the first page.

 

For the most part I knew what I was getting into. Yes, he said it was a theft recovery when in fact the damage was from a collision. I've bought a lot of cars and some have been from questionable situations. But as I said before, you take risks for reward. Everyone has there own risk tolerance. Some people will buy a car with 150k miles if it's a high quality car that has been well taken care of and some people wouldn't buy a used car under any circumstances. This story could turn out in many different ways. Right now I have a amazing car that appears to be in better shape than most cars without a rebuilt title. The paint work and fit is very good. I've drove it everyday and it's an awesome car. It's very possible that someone on this forum that bought a similar car that's a clear title, one owner, never in harsh weather and was maintained at the highest standard could end up with a whole list of repairs over the next 5000 miles and I might not have a single one. When I decide to sell it I will include all the info and pictures so someone can make their own choice. Things may change but for now I'm driving the only 2008 XKR Coupe for miles and paid almost half what most have paid.

 

Went to the "Tax Collector" yesterday for title and tags and absolutely no hitches or hoops. You might be thinking about what the guy I bought it from had to go through to get it on the road. It had to be inspected for many things including checking for stolen parts.

 

richzak, What do you think of this post by DGL. I give him a lot of credit for modifying his position based on a closer examination of the information. Many people can only "think" in one direction.

 

All branded (salvage repaired) cars are not the same. Some sustain little to no damage, some should never be repaired, others are repaired cheap to hide major problems, while some people take pride in doing the repairs and return the car to new condition. It's the unscrupulous resellers that any buyer needs to stay away from. This is why branded cars have a very small market pool and must be deeply discounted. I think David took a leap of faith to buy the car and to drive it a long distance home. I'm glad he never had any problems. If the car was repaired properly David should do fine. On the other hand if the repair was not done properly he could have problems. richzak is probably a person that would never look at a branded titled car, and that's fine, because of the nightmares that could follow. On the other hand a deeply discounted properly repaired car is a bargain to someone who wants to keep it for a while. Given the price David paid for the car, and his safe event free drive home, I think he should do OK. I hope David thoroughly checks over all critical parts before driving the car further for peace of mind. The seller did show pictures of the car with the replaced body panels installed; however, he lied about the status (theft recovery) and most likely bought the car in the state of the pictures I posted and had access to the pictures. When buying any used car it is buyer-beware regardless of branded title or clean title. At least David knows his car was damaged. A lot of clean titled cars have sustained just as much and more damage with no record to indicate so. No worries David, you should do fine.


When I bought my new XKR I paid more in tax than you paid for your car David. At least you got a car for your $15,000. I got nothing.

 

Amen to that! A good example is my 2007 Lexus LS460 that had over $30,000 in front end damage repairs but had a clean CarFax over a year later when I decided to trade it for my XJ. In retrospect, it should have been totaled, but the adjuster missed a lot initially and OK'd the supplements. The dealer knew it had been repaired and gladly took it in trade because it looked mint and drove like a new car (that's because almost everything was new from the windshield forward) and I suspect he already had a buyer for it.

A clean CarFax can be very misleading.

 

"Buyer beware" is not necessarily the case. IF the buyer can prove that the seller misrepresented the car, as is likely the case here, that is fraud. It seems he has emails to show the seller states it was a theft recovery not due to an extreme accident however the buyer also stated in his initial posting on this site (and YES this posting could easily be evidence in court) that there was a fender, hood, and bumper replaced then he had knowledge, to what degree may not be important. If he can show that there was no theft and it was salvaged purely due to the accident and that
show it was represented by the seller he can likely have the sale revoked.

There is a HUGE difference between a buyer not stating something and misrepresenting something. When I bought a RX7 I had the seller sign a statement that there was never any paint or body work done and that he only used a certain oil in it (other oils could easily blow the seals in a rotary), had I found body work I would have demanded my money back.

 

You got a great deal, I don't know about your finances, but if $15k is just disposable fun money for you then who cares. It is no big deal no matter what happens. I have seen people in the past who used the Salvage title buy to "reach" for a car that they couldn't otherwise afford. For those folks it can be tricky if the car ends up being problematic.

As an overall strategy I wonder how it really pays though? Again, this is just me being logical, not trying to be antagonistic. I always step back and try to look at the reality of the financial part of various strategies. For instance, I like to buy $90k - $100k cars right at 3 years old, when they come off of the first owners lease. That way I get them for half-price. Works for me.

OK, so you bought it for way less than market, but what if you had paid $25k for a XKR?

Buy for $25k, sell a year or two later for what, $18k? So $7k in ownership cost

Buy for $15k, sell a year or two later for say, $10k? So $5k in ownership cost

In reality you would need to judge what you end resell value is and how that would compare to the cost of ownership should you have bought the $25k car. You could say that the $10k you saved could be invested, who knows. In this market though saving that $10k for investing may not be a good idea!


This is very true, a CarFax is nothing more than an extra check and can't be relied upon completely. I wonder though, on your Lexus, was it repaired at a dealer, at the very least probably a reputable shop?

Not trying to crap on David's purchase, he got a great deal and for the last week has been trouble free. But the picture he sent of when he bought he car looks like it was repaired by a guy in a manufactured home? Not saying he didn't do a great job, maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Repairs by Joe-Blow in his shed out back can be a lot different than from a shop...

This is very true, but wouldn't that be a tough uphill battle in court? He knew there was damage, the fact that it was from theft or accident would muddy this up pretty good.

But the misreprentation aside, is it required for a private seller to disclose known damage repairs to a car?

Even with your document, if I was a seller of a car that was owned prior to me, I would have a caveat in there that I can only disclose what I know during my ownership period, not what happened with the previous owner. I have never seen anyone else have document like that, looks to be a good idea to force disclosures!

 

I'm all for making the used car industry accountable!


What we know:


1) The seller is skettchy. He claims the car is a theft recovery and in the same sentence claims no damage (no damage because of theft recover or no current visible damage?). Why did he advertised as a "theft recovery"? I suspect to mislead potential buyers into thinking the car sustained little to no damage--misrepresenting the car.


2) Before buying the car the buyer was made aware of replaced body panels, hood, fender, etc. At this time, the seller disclosed damage to the car to the degree the body panels were required to be replaced. How the buyer said this we don't know. This certainly discloses damage and should have raised a flag to any buyer to stop and investigate further.


3) The buyer took a leap of faith and bought the car without further investigating and requesting historical reports and data to ascertain previous sales and disclosure. A prudent and reasonable buyer given the above would have requested the seller's Bill of Sale (price deleted) to verify condition and reason for salvage.


4) Where's the tort? Has the buyer suffered any financial or hardship because of the misrepresentation (if deemed misrepresented). Did the buyer's Bill of Sale say, "Where As, As Is". What is the legal systems interpretation of, "the reasonable man" given what we know?


There's a lot of legal questions we are not privy to in this transaction. Also, the cost of litigation, I'm sure, will far out weigh any court reward. I think the buyer is happy with the car, but is disappointed with the seller. Only the seller and buyer really know what information was exchanged. However, the ebay ad is misleading. Maybe the buyer should open an ebay claim? Even the ebay claim may have limited utility to the buyer because he was made aware of "damage".


Should the buyer have a comprehensive inspection done of the front end and any potential damage which may have been caused from the damage indicated in pictures he has been made aware of? Could any hidden damage found be reason for an ebay claim or small courts claim? I'm not an attorney but the sale does stink a bit. I'm just glad the buyer got home safely and is enjoying his purchase. What will the buyer do now? Salvage auction houses have contracts to prevent recourse and protect themselves and the consigner. What does the Purchase and Sale contract between the seller and buyer say?


We don't know what discussions the buyer and seller had over the car. However, based on the seller's ebay ad I would have a few words to say to the seller after seeing the damage in the salvage auction pictures. Maybe the buyer should ask the seller to pay for a comprehensive inspection and any found damage needing to be repaired? Based on what we know I don't think the buyer or the seller have the resources or interest to pursue a remedy and the financial lost, if any, should be very low considering the purchase price.

 

DGL, I agree 100% on all those statements. I say again that any litigation would be an uphill battle, as you say cost of the lawsuit plus all the time involved and the low value of the car make it a losing proposition. David could easily prove he was misled, but if the car is working properly how do you prove any damage? There is none right now, the fact that the car was repaired is known, the fact that it was salvage title is known, so how does the misrepresentation cause financial damage? It would be very muddy. However, if David got the car home and it has major problems related to the repair, then of course file immediately!!!

My question isn't to this sale though, Richzak brought up something that I thought was worth exploring. His quote:

"He (David XKR) may think he can hold it for 6 months and resell it, but now that he sees your photos, he will have to fully disclose the entire damage done to that XKR."

My question is this, is it required that David XKR disclose what he knows now that he knows it? I don't think there is such a requirement. It is up to any individual seller to be honest or not, I have never heard of any statute, law, or other requirement for private sellers to provide full disclosure.

 

IMO, this will depend on the terms of sale in the Purchase and Sale Agreement or Bill of Sale. When it comes time to sell the buyer may wish to sell it through a third party Where As, As Is, which, of course, will raise many flags and have an impact on the sales price. I think it is best for the buyer, when it comes time to sell, to just tell the truth and be honest. The prudent buyer will ask a lot of questions demanding an honest answer. The car appears to be operating good with no known problems and if he gets a comprehensive inspection done it would reflect favourably of the price.


With the very small market for the XK and extremely small market for a salvage XK this car could take up to 2 years to sell depending on how deeply it is discounted and what problems are encountered. It most definitely will require finding a rare buyer. The car has a huge strike against it. Jaguars are expensive to get repaired. The buyer interested in this car would most likely be someone who likes to wrench, knows how to source parts, and is comfortable in driving and owning a salvage car.

 

Well, I can only say, this Jaguar Forum and it's members are amazing. Every one of us has a passion owning a Jaguar. Following this thread has been an experience.

DGL is correct, I would probably never personally enter into a venture to make a purchase such as David did. What is interesting, is that forum members took some personal time to dig into the dirt about this car. Posting the photos of the real damage was quite interesting, and shows that DGL has some great resources and is knowledgeable about what he writes.

David did what he could to make an informed decision to buy the salvaged vehicle. He flew to TN and spoke to the seller directly, and appears he got good a great price. The future is unknown. But bottom line is he likes the car, went through the motions of getting it properly registered and what's great here, is everyone on the forum is really a straight shooter and tried to help him.

There is no doubt that he will enjoy the XKR which in itself is an amazing vehicle. Also, David has spent his time to address just about every member here that has made a comment.

The Jaguar Forum is a special place for Jaguar owners. I am on a few other automobile forums regarding my Corvette C7 and Porsche 981, and while many of the members are helpful to each other, the demeanor of the Jaguar forum is really something special compared to some of the other "buttwipes" on the other forums.

David, enjoy the XKR. Keep us informed. You have educated us by just starting this thread.

Happy holidays to all.

 

Some of you guys sure want to spoil David's enjoyment of the car. Jeeze.

 

I don't think anyone is posting here with the intent to diminish David's enjoyment. It is what it is and everyone has a different opinion, especially when it comes to unscrupulous sellers and salvage cars. David invited members to participate. David is now better off knowing what he bought and is more cognizant of the salvage car market and of what he faces going forward. Everyone has recognized he bought the car at a good price. Although the car is not for everyone, which is expected, he is enjoying it and should do ok. I believe we all wish David good luck and much enjoyment. This is exactly what these forums are all about. Knowledge is power, for good or bad. It's how you receive it and use it that determines your faith.