ex Aussie Stat Write Offs - consensus?

[qube 3568]

Im looking at a ex NSW stat write off import,

https://www.ppsr.gov.au/understanding-written-vehicle-codes?fbclid=IwAR1i0P5tZt9pN1rY2nsjwaeBoWFjTqnT9mjEV4MgZxaKtlIqbzawd1tGkP0

NSW, 20 Oct 2017, Statutory Write-off

M01K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Passenger front | Minor vandalism]

M02K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Driver front | Minor vandalism]

M03K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Driver side | Minor vandalism]

M04K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Driver rear | Minor vandalism]

M05K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Passenger rear | Minor vandalism]

M06K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Passenger side | Minor vandalism]

M09K [Malicious/vandalism/stripped | Interior | Minor vandalism]

 

I wonder if its a case of someone keying all around the car for insurance claim? what could be considered minor vandalism?

the car is being sold not by the original dealer/importer but someone who has bought it from them and is now on-selling.

 

avoid or consider? if it was impact damage or water damage its a definite no but for this, might be worth while?

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

Any pictures of the damage Kyu ??

[Gaz 1040]

Definitely get photos of the damage, particularly the interior. Who knows what was done to the inside, could cause electrical issues. Try to get something that indicates it has been repaired correctly. 

Had a customer buy a repaired import and were forever chasing electrical issues either due to the accident or the shoddy repairs

[qube 3568]

There is no damage because its all been fixed and sold already in nz. Its being on sold privately in mint condition 

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

IIRC some Aussie flood damaged right-offs were brought in and repaired locally, but I'm not sure what year that was. We had a customer with a Mini that fitted that criteria. What year is the vehicle Kyu ?

[Driftit 1925]

Flood damaged vehicles are marked as such at the boarder now days.

[qube 3568]

its a 2014 bmw.

the reason for stat write off is definitely not impact or flood or hail. if you go to that link in my original post it has different letter designations for different damages.

this one is just a bit vague saying "vandalism" which could be something like being keyed, spray painted on, someone went around and smashed all the windows in maybe..

I am mainly just trying to determine what the actual reason/damage was because as far as I can tell the car is mint, paintwork, interior, etc, all works fine and no record of damage to engine/mechanical side of things.

 

[E30 325i Rag-Top 2914]

Personally I would not be afraid of it, not just because I’m ready to tackle issues myself and can get stuff cheap. 

From what I have been told and seen there is a real shortage of qualified and capable repairers in Australia (yup insurance companies screwed the trade just like here) so cars are being written off for what some would consider to be easy fixes.

If the car checks out now and looks to have been repaired properly (needs a real good PPI scan etc) I would say go for it if price is under market value - to allow for issue with resale value only.

[qube 3568]

I've been through hoops trying to get some more information.

Here is my findings:

NZTA - when asked about who is the best place to call/ask regarding compliance and checking vehicle history they referred me to carjam and lemoncheck. then told me to do an inspection.

VINZ - was able to tell me from their database the car was complied through VTNZ

VTNZ - wouldnt tell me much due to privacy laws and couldnt answer any generic questions regarding the process.

managed to track down the workshop that serviced the car 3 times during the 2 years its been on the road and told me generic warranty service only so far.

also managed to find the original owner through facebook, waiting for a reply.

 

 

[Olaf 3235]

Sounds as though they're all ducking and diving, running and hiding, for fear of a liability claim in future if they say something they can't substantiate, or say something you can later substantiate.  

Your NZTA answer = "caveat emptor".

VINZ answer = "no, sorry"

VTNZ answer = "we're not going to divulge anything we don't need to by law, and we've a convenient one to hide behind, thank you".

If you decide to move forward, you're putting your faith/trust in a process that has inconsistencies.  At it's base, if it's been declared a (statutory) write-off in Australia and they wouldn't have it on their roads,  what's less stringent about their poor cousins on the East Island, that allows it to be registered here?

You could well get a good car out of this.  The damage codes you've provided appear to indicate it was not the scary flood damage, or accident damage.  However, you could find it takes a very long time to sell as potential buyers will encounter the same stonewall in trying to qualify their potential bargain.  If you save $4k at this end, would the cost of that money - when you need to sell - be $4k? 

As a percentage, how much under market is this vehicle looking for you?

Interesting conundrum, Kyu!

Edited December 4, 2019 by Olaf

[Driftit 1925]

Outside of panel beaters I am yet to see anyone make money from these Aussie write offs.  There is always more than meets the eye.

How good is the repair?  And who did the repair?  Those are defiantly questions I would want answered.

[qube 3568]

The saving is potentially about 25% off market value for a highly spec’ed car that is uncommonly seen in nz new or jap import examples. 
 

to me this is a pretty good deal for a nice car and as funny as it may sound i am hoping to keep it for a couple of years (long for my standards) and not too worried about the resell value as much purely based on the fact that i couldnt get the same spec car. Car will always depreciate but at least i could enjoy it for the time i own it. 
 

driftit makes a good point. What i want to know is what was the actual damage? Keyes paint/panels? Someone smashing the windows in? What is it? I couldnt get these answers. 
 

all i am told is that the certification process is stricter for damaged imports and must be repaired to a high standard.. whatever the f that means given that we are talking about people who are dodging all questions and couldnt provide answers to generic questions. 
 

its a real shame, as i really like the car and price is very fair. Will see how it pans out. Hoping to get a reply from the first owner to shed some light and maybe take it from there. 
 

the learning from all this is, it seems very grey area, i looked at other stat write offs for sale on tm (few dealers specialise in it) and they can spin any story they want - how could i check the validity? I do not know.. 

e.g apparently an m4 was “near a fire” and was written off as a precaution but there was no damage. Uhh... okay sure.. because insurance companies are actually running a charity apparently now. 
 

 

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

Will the owner be willing for you to have it inspected ?

[APT 179]

Just curious, how does one tell if a vehicle is a Aussie write off  if sold privately ?  Do the reports like carjam show this info ? 

 

[Palazzo 427]

Yes and there is a section on TM too that shows if it was imported as damaged.

Although interestingly, Primax Cars (one of the main importers of damaged) has that information unavailable on their TM listings but do declare it in the text.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Palazzo

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

I've just been talking with a highly respected BMW/Euro Collision repairer who said to walk away as you are not going to be able to check it properly anyway. If it was only minor damage it wouldn't have been written off.A starting point to check it properly would be removing panels. The seller would never allow that. I'm sure there is more to tell than what you have been presented with. Getting someone to check it is also and issue over liability. Personally with no proof of previous damage, I'd walk away.

[NZ BMW 368]

I always wonder if it was unable to be repaired in Australia why would I want to get into that here in NZ? 
 

Vehicles which undergo major repairs are always compromised to some degree in my eyes. Maybe you save some money but it’s not that much really in the scheme of things. 

[qube 3568]

2 hours ago, B.M.W Ltd said:

Will the owner be willing for you to have it inspected ?

yes

1 hour ago, APT said:

Just curious, how does one tell if a vehicle is a Aussie write off  if sold privately ?  Do the reports like carjam show this info ? 

 

carjam:

10 minutes ago, B.M.W Ltd said:

I've just been talking with a highly respected BMW/Euro Collision repairer who said to walk away as you are not going to be able to check it properly anyway. If it was only minor damage it wouldn't have been written off.A starting point to check it properly would be removing panels. The seller would never allow that. I'm sure there is more to tell than what you have been presented with. Getting someone to check it is also and issue over liability. Personally with no proof of previous damage, I'd walk away.

I totally understand all of this but this is why my main point of argument is to try find out the specifics of the damage which is relevant to this vehicle. "minor vandalism" to me sounds like something along the lines of the owner or other keying the outside of the car to basically claim insurance and get a payout. or it could be something worse. I want to know what it is. If it was ANY other write off designation code, (such as Water, Fire, Impact) I wouldnt even think about it purely because of the potential underlying issues it may have.

10 minutes ago, NZ BMW said:

I always wonder if it was unable to be repaired in Australia why would I want to get into that here in NZ? 
 

Vehicles which undergo major repairs are always compromised to some degree in my eyes. Maybe you save some money but it’s not that much really in the scheme of things. 

the word on the street is that the insurance tends to write off vehicles a lot easier than in NZ. My best guess is, high premiums and compulsory insurance means they can afford to. Also heard that there is a lack of qualified vehicle repairers but who knows. It is their country their rules. 

If you think about your own car, if you were involved in a minor accident and the insurance company wanted to write it off, wouldnt you want to buy it back and get it repaired (if feasible)? 

I agree if it was indeed a "major" repair, then I also believe there will be some compromise. But in this instance I am led to believe that the repair is most probably panel and paint - which I dont mind. I am just trying to figure out if this indeed the case BUT having difficulty to get this information.

Also, my biggest reason for considering said vehicle is not purely because of the money savings but because it is well spec'ed. I honestly hate some of the poor spec of the NZ new and japanese examples but I cant complain because Im not in a position to buy new and tick the boxes myself 

 

 

[SmithyInWelly 212]

There's no "right" answer Kyu... insurance write-offs are different over there, BUT as mentioned above, they're not in the business of giving money away for the sake of it either. So - it's simply a matter of ascertaining in Aussie exactly what happened (ideally visually), and the process it went through to get repaired, who repaired it (and where - Aus or NZ?), and who complied it in NZ.

Of course you must get it properly inspected here by someone who knows the vehicles - and has expertise in vehicle repair... keeping in mind that vandalism may not be simply a cosmetic fix, there's also electronics/coding to consider (which is often where these repaired write-offs fail).

The less information you have, the bigger the risk, and in turn, the lower the price should be... consider the worst case scenario (ie: if your buying privately with no warranty and the car fritzes itself) and whether/how you'd deal with that, however unlikely it is; and then if that price (both purchase and your onsell/trade price) is within your comfort/happy zone - then pull the trigger, it's more likely than not you'll have a happy couple of months/years of ownership. And if not... 

[Golfboy666GTI 68]

If its a new car in OZ with hail damage on 3 panels or more its a write-off.

 

[qube 3568]

1 hour ago, SmithyInWelly said:

There's no "right" answer Kyu... insurance write-offs are different over there, BUT as mentioned above, they're not in the business of giving money away for the sake of it either. So - it's simply a matter of ascertaining in Aussie exactly what happened (ideally visually), and the process it went through to get repaired, who repaired it (and where - Aus or NZ?), and who complied it in NZ.

Of course you must get it properly inspected here by someone who knows the vehicles - and has expertise in vehicle repair... keeping in mind that vandalism may not be simply a cosmetic fix, there's also electronics/coding to consider (which is often where these repaired write-offs fail).

The less information you have, the bigger the risk, and in turn, the lower the price should be... consider the worst case scenario (ie: if your buying privately with no warranty and the car fritzes itself) and whether/how you'd deal with that, however unlikely it is; and then if that price (both purchase and your onsell/trade price) is within your comfort/happy zone - then pull the trigger, it's more likely than not you'll have a happy couple of months/years of ownership. And if not... 

exactly, my problem with all of this is the lack of transparency from the compliance centres and or other appropriate bodies that should (imo) be able to provide this kind of information for the informed consumer. Otherwise it I reckon it is a huge loophole for the ex aus import dealers that can just spin any story and rip off unsuspecting car buyers. 

I am still considering it at this stage. 

16 minutes ago, Golfboy666GTI said:

If its a new car in OZ with hail damage on 3 panels or more its a write-off.

and again, this reinforces my theory that if one wanted to get rid of a car, all you would do is go throw a rock at each of your doors and claim vandalism, get a nice pay out and not bother with the aus version of tardme and the like.

 

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

Privacy Laws in NZ will also prevent or dissuade anyone giving you that information as you are not the registered owner of the vehicle. This protects the seller unless he can offer you the information you desire. 

[Driftit 1925]

Just an idea.

When I was importing damaged cars from Japan back in the the late 90's early 2000's.  Vandalism also could mean stolen and recovered.

I purchased a number of 90's sports cars that were recovered.  Some just had lots of missing parts.  Some had been kicked in/keyed/broken windows.  E.g. vandalized.

The biggest concern there would be how the vehicle was treated.  One car I had turned up with big end bearing knock.  It had been thrashed to within an inch of its life.  But hey it could still roll on/roll off the ship and was driving.... I had some words with my agent when that arrived.

[E30 325i Rag-Top 2914]

1 hour ago, qube said:

and again, this reinforces my theory that if one wanted to get rid of a car, all you would do is go throw a rock at each of your doors and claim vandalism, get a nice pay out and not bother with the aus version of tardme and the like.

The key word in the original statement is “new”, if the car still belongs to the manufacturer or dealer then it can only be repaired with new parts - in this case panels. It is not a case of being able to slap some bog in, blow some paint over and still sell it as new. 

Big difference to a used car, which can be repaired with little impact on value.

If i were the owner I would have kept all the paperwork and photos for when I would sell the car, and not have bought it without this evidence. As they don’t seem to have this info, assume the worst case and price accordingly.

[qube 3568]

1 hour ago, Driftit said:

Vandalism also could mean stolen and recovered.

This is helpful. I had not considered this and looking back at the incident type, seems very much a possibility. 

 

46 minutes ago, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

If i were the owner I would have kept all the paperwork and photos for when I would sell the car, and not have bought it without this evidence. As they don’t seem to have this info, assume the worst case and price accordingly.

My feeling is the first owner would have this information from the dealer, then on-sold it to the current owner without full disclosure.

Now I am trying to find out but to be honest, if it was a stolen/recovered car, then its a big no from me. just like you would never buy an ex rental, thrashed to death. seems like a no brainer to me.

interesting thing is the car actually has mechanical warranty also with Protecta insurance, im suprised they would insure/warrant a car with potentially dubious history.