When you find out your car isn't the model year you thought...

[Matth5 471]

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=1040782747

Rego is HWF225

Serial is PY36151

Look it up and it shows the car was built in Jan 2008, but it's registered (and advertised) as a 2010.

How does that happen? Dodgy dealer?

[*Glenn* 854]

Build date 2008

Registered in Japan

Imported from Japan

And on the NZ papers it will be first registered in NZ 2010. Registration has nothing to do with build date

[tonylauno1 7]

2010 is the year it was registered overseas, year of first registered in new country does not change. Even if you import a 25 year old car, the year will remain 1991, you can't advertised it as a 2016.
That car is actually imported into NZ on Jul 2014 and registered in NZ on Dec 2014.

Now that Jan 2008 Germany built car probably took 6 months after it was built to be shipped to Japan then from Jun 2008 to Jul 2010, it sat in the showroom until someone purchased it then it was registered.

[Haitoman 110]

2010 is the year it was registered overseas, year of first registered in new country does not change. Even if you import a 25 year old car, the year will remain 1991, you can't advertised it as a 2016.

That car is actually imported into NZ on Jul 2014 and registered in NZ on Dec 2014.

Now that Jan 2008 Germany built car probably took 6 months after it was built to be shipped to Japan then from Jun 2008 to Jul 2010, it sat in the showroom until someone purchased it then it was registered.

...yeh right.

[5amchris 45]

When the burn turns back on you...

[KwS 2425]

Happens a lot. As mentioned, it probably sat on a yard/lot for a couple of years before being registered. Happens at our dealership too, we dont register the car until its sold, but we may have it on the yard for a year or so if its a less than desirable model.

[Matth5 471]

Happens a lot. As mentioned, it probably sat on a yard/lot for a couple of years before being registered. Happens at our dealership too, we dont register the car until its sold, but we may have it on the yard for a year or so if its a less than desirable model.

I see... still, it can't be legal to advertise it is a later model just because it's registered late, surely?

[Haitoman 110]

Happens a lot. As mentioned, it probably sat on a yard/lot for a couple of years before being registered. Happens at our dealership too, we dont register the car until its sold, but we may have it on the yard for a year or so if its a less than desirable model.

There is no way a new M3 sits at a dealership for two years. It doesn't happen.

[_ethrty-Andy_ 2132]

There is no way a new M3 sits at a dealership for two years. It doesn't happen.

Demonstrator on dealer plates?

From memory my cabby was built almost two years before it was registered

[KwS 2425]

I see... still, it can't be legal to advertise it is a later model just because it's registered late, surely?

By all accounts, it IS a bloody 2010 car. You wouldnt call a car a 2009 if it were built Nov 2009, and first registered Feb 2010. It doesnt work like that. The only time it would be called a 2009 would be if you were referring to it by model year (IE: MY09).

We dont know what happened to this car in Japan to make it sit around unregistered for that long, maybe it suffered damage on route to the dealer and took many months fix? That happens too.

[Cab 148]

The year of the car is determined by the date of its first registration, not the build date.

[Matth5 471]

By all accounts, it IS a bloody 2010 car. You wouldnt call a car a 2009 if it were built Nov 2009, and first registered Feb 2010. It doesnt work like that. The only time it would be called a 2009 would be if you were referring to it by model year (IE: MY09).

Still think it's taking the piss to call a car built in Jan 08 a 2010 car. Would it be worth as much as a 2010 car built in 2010? I don't think so.

It's built to 2008 specs, missing any production changes that would have come with a 2010.

Oh well, now I know it's something to watch out for when car shopping.

Edited March 6, 2016 by Matth5

[jin108 25]

The year of the car is determined by the date of its first registration, not the build date. 

Depends what your interpretation of "year of car" is. I know id be more interested in when a car was built than when it was first registered.

[beemn 50]

Still think it's taking the piss to call a car built in Jan 08 a 2010 car. Would it be worth as much as a 2010 car built in 2010? I don't think so.

It's built to 2008 specs, missing any production changes that would have come with a 2010.

Oh well, now I know it's something to watch out for when car shopping.

only car nerds go off the build date and know how to find the build date

[M3AN 4016]

It's a MY2008 first registered in 2010?

It's a 2008 car period. And can't legitimately be advertised as a 2010 car. "First registered in 2010" perhaps, as long as that's not misleading and I suggest it probably is.

In no way, manner, fashion or form is it a 2010 car.

[KwS 2425]

oh for craps sake. why is this so hard to understand? BUILD DATE DOES NOT MATTER TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTER, IT IS FROM YEAR OF FIRST REGISTRATION.

Its not misleading. Its not illegal. And in the case of the E92, it barely matters. Anyone that is savvy enough to care about the differences in the same chassis from 08 to 10 will be able to tell its a 2008 car and factor that in. Most other people wouldnt give half a sh*t.

[Neal 544]

Didn't the m3 v8 get a performance update between 2008 and 2010 ?

Read somewhere that the later ones were slightly quicker .

I'd be annoyed if I was looking for something closer to an lci to find out it was an earlier example.

Mental note, always get chassis number when buying a BMW

[qube 3570]

oh for craps sake. why is this so hard to understand? BUILD DATE DOES NOT MATTER TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTER, IT IS FROM YEAR OF FIRST REGISTRATION.

Its not misleading. Its not illegal. And in the case of the E92, it barely matters. Anyone that is savvy enough to care about the differences in the same chassis from 08 to 10 will be able to tell its a 2008 car and factor that in. Most other people wouldnt give half a sh*t.

^ this is the truth.

car owners will always advertise it according to the registered year. never will you find a seller who puts the build year as the main year when listing their vehicle.

for e90's a 2008 and 2010 is a significant change as it is pre and post LCI (ie. facelift) so it does highlight the 'flaws' or 'downsides' of having the registered year but as kelvin has pointed out, anyone looking to buy such a car would check the build year and notice that it doesnt have the lci/facelift taillights straightaway. same thing with the 2002/2003 e46 m3 where the 2003.5 is the 'desireable' year. you can tell from the subtle differences in lights etc.

if it was any other run of the mill car, no one would care anyway.

this isnt even a problem. and the seller shouldnt be bagged for listing his car as a 2010. cuz it is a 2010 car according to the vehicle registration. end of story

[KwS 2425]

It should also be said that trademe populates the car information, including the year, automatically from the registration number provided.

[M3AN 4016]

oh for craps sake. why is this so hard to understand? BUILD DATE DOES NOT MATTER TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTER, IT IS FROM YEAR OF FIRST REGISTRATION.

Its not misleading. Its not illegal. And in the case of the E92, it barely matters. Anyone that is savvy enough to care about the differences in the same chassis from 08 to 10 will be able to tell its a 2008 car and factor that in. Most other people wouldnt give half a sh*t.

You couldn't be more wrong Kelvin. Best you take a breath and reconsider your position before you dig a deeper hole. Kyu, you're also off the mark.

The most relevant detail to a purchaser is the year of manufacture, not the year of first registration. That the two commonly occur within months of each other makes it convenient to use the first registration year to represent the age of the car. If the first registration date doesn't fairly reflect the age of the car then you can't use it to represent the age of the car.

You're overlooking the basics here and since they're so obvious I'm confused as to why?

Extrapolating it to the extreme proves the point quite clearly:

Car manufactured in 1972 sits in a barn owned by a long passed dealer and is never registered. It's rediscovered in 2016 by anybody else and immediately registered as brand new. Now, is that a 1972 car or a 2016 car?

Silly argument boys and girls. It's so simple it's hardly worth the time.

[Matth5 471]

If I bought a car and found out afterwards that the real age was hidden from me, I'd be pissed. Its common sense that a buyer wants to know how old the car is.

Putting off registration for two years and trying to sell the car as a 2010 is misleading.

People know it takes a few months for a car to get built, shipped, registered ect so having been built a few months before the year started is normal and expected, but two years is not.

[KwS 2425]

Car manufactured in 1972 sits in a barn owned by a long passed dealer and is never registered. It's rediscovered in 2016 by anybody else and immediately registered as brand new. Now, is that a 1972 car or a 2016 car?

Its quite simple, it would be registered as a 2016 car, as thats the date of first registration. It has happened before, but im not going to bother wasting my time to find the info.

A fact is a fact whether you like it or agree with it or not.

[KwS 2425]

Putting off registration for two years and trying to sell the car as a 2010 is misleading.

If it was intentional and the seller was the original owner, maybe, but fact of the matter is that there are so many factors that could explain why it was registered late, and the current owner isnt the original owner, whos to say they even know the build date themselves?

[polley 916]

Its quite simple, it would be registered as a 2016 car, as thats the date of first registration. It has happened before, but im not going to bother wasting my time to find the info.

A fact is a fact whether you like it or agree with it or not.

Yes it would be registered as 2016 (date of first registration). But its still a 1972 car. Anyone who tried to sell it and advertised it as a 2016 would be a f**kwit.

Now in the case of the OP, it's what? 2 years out? The seller probably isn't even aware or intending on deceiving anyone.

Anyway, who gives a f**k. You're giving me a headache reading this sh*t.

[kiwi535 538]

my is most important to me.There can be a huge difference in the speciification say of a 1996 toyota surf and a 1998 toyota surf.To advertise a my 96 year surf as a 1998 surf is just wrong..I made a trip to look at said surf.It was the first one i looked at so didnt recognise the difference in body shape.The dealer couldnt understand why i wasnt interested in his"1998" surf.