PDA

View Full Version : vehicle Pre-purchase Inspection



bk T
28-02-2010, 10:08 AM
Have paid a deposit for my Nissan Wingroad and the AA Pre-purchase report says:
"Medium to low risk of unplanned maintenance and repair"

Should I or should I not take up the Mechanical Warranty Insurance which will cost $1,395 for 3 years?

To what extent can I trust the AA report?

prefect
28-02-2010, 10:10 AM
I would buy a manual and some tools with the money.

plod
28-02-2010, 10:37 AM
Is it manual or auto? If auto then I would.

Scouse
28-02-2010, 11:08 AM
Re: "Medium to low risk of unplanned maintenance and repair"

Surely that's meaningless crap to cover someone's arse. It could be said of every car and motorbike I have owned over sixty years, including the occasional new one. Ignore it. :cool:

bk T
28-02-2010, 11:11 AM
Is it manual or auto? If auto then I would.

It's auto.

Can AA be trusted? I have the feeling that AA & the car dealer have certain 'under-table' arrangements! Remembered vaguely that sometime ago either TV3 or TVNZ ran a report on the creditability of this AA pre-purchase inspection.

prefect: thanks for your view, of course, if I think I am capable of doing all those repair works myself, I wouldn't have raised this issue.

Sweep
28-02-2010, 11:38 AM
So what does the CGA give you?

It's another form of insurance. You are taking a bet.

You are betting on the vehicle either having or not having repair problems over the next three years that will or not cost more that the $1395 outlay.

Note also that most of these policies do not cover fair wear and tear and usually require you to take the vehicle in for regular maintenance and have receipts to ensure you have done so.

KenESmith
28-02-2010, 12:24 PM
A condition of the Insurance will almost certainly stipulate that all scheduled servicing and maintenance will be done by a duly qualified and approved service provider, and further motre such servicing will be strictly done on time - ie 4000km late for a routine service ( say oil and filter changes) could invalidate the warranty. The scheduled servicing by approved service providers is not cheap - say $60 per hour.

This condition can give the insurer a fairly safe let out on major claims.

prefect
28-02-2010, 12:34 PM
Plod is right maybe a warranty is called for with auto they are unreliable and costly to repair.
I have seen 70 year old Model A gearboxes done over a million miles and still fine. you wont get that with an auto they are like a grenade.

plod
28-02-2010, 12:48 PM
I have seen transmission repairs declined because an engine service has been late, their will do anything to void a warranty payment.
But the choice is yours to take the gamble with. Save $1300 now, or maybe pay $3000 later.The chances are you will have no problems

pctek
28-02-2010, 01:37 PM
To what extent can I trust the AA report?

Not at all. Too many cases of them missing the screamingly obvious.

Get a real mechanic to check it out instead.

bk T
28-02-2010, 01:41 PM
Re: "Medium to low risk of unplanned maintenance and repair"

Surely that's meaningless crap to cover someone's arse. It could be said of every car and motorbike I have owned over sixty years, including the occasional new one. Ignore it. :cool:

In other words, it's no point of paying $140.00 for a so-called 'pre-purchase inspection', and I've wasted my $140.00! :groan:

Scouse
28-02-2010, 03:48 PM
Sorry - but yes. Think about the words. They apply right now to your lawn mower, your computer, your teeth, the stove, and your own health. Magic words.

"Medium to low risk of unplanned maintenance and repair"

All they need is some old ju-ju man dancing around a small fire and waving a few bones about. And they're absolutely true. Enjoy your banger.

bk T
28-02-2010, 04:45 PM
Sad story, considering I'm a loyal AA member for the past 20+ years and only 'used' them to start my car (dead battery) 2 - 3 times! This is the reward they gave me. What a cruel world in the raw. AA is supposed to be an non-profit organisation providing services to protect its members, but turns out to be the other way round. What joke!

Nomad
28-02-2010, 06:30 PM
That sounds like Turners?

We've got 3 cars from Turners that had a AA passing, been all fine. No repairs whatsoever within the few yrs then maintenance cost cv joints, brakes etc ...

My dad did get a Toyota Camry from them and he did pay for some mechanical warranty. He found out that, was outside their definition so he had to repair himself, wasn't a biggie thou ..

The reason we use Turners is that we pay less and check it out with a friend then we rather pay for our own repairs than to rely on a document.

PS, check the airon yourself, cos that isn't part of the checklist and not part of WOF either .... could be $$ job.

KenESmith
28-02-2010, 08:17 PM
The work you will not get on purchase used car warranty.

Shock absorbers,
Brakes
Clutch
Exhaust system
CV Joint Boots - may get a CV joint if you are very lucky- will depnd on kms run.
Timing Belt or consequences of a timing belt failure - not an issue with Nissan who use a timing chain.
Anything else that can be construed as fair wear and tear, or a recurring maintenance item.
Cooling system if it has not been flushed, cleaned and recharged with manufacturers approved coolant in accordance with the servicing schedule.

So you are covered for transmission failure or major engine failure, steering rack and pinion, and a few other mechanicals - don't think they will see you OK for Body problems due to corrosion.

And to qualify for repairs you must religiously adhere to the makers servicing schedule with and approved service provider.

You should get the idea into your head that the people who isssue used car warranties do it as a business to make money, not because they like helping out unlucky car owners who have serious mechanical problems.

bk T
28-02-2010, 08:50 PM
...

You should get the idea into your head that the people who isssue used car warranties do it as a business to make money, not because they like helping out unlucky car owners who have serious mechanical problems.

Fair enough, that's understandable.

But AA's pre-purchase inspection is something that I find it hard to accept. We paid AA for a service and expect them to fulfill their obligations, i.e. give us a professional, unbiased report on the conditions of the vehicle inspected. As PCtek mentioned, its better to get our own mechanic to do the job. If this is the general practice, can I interpret that AA did not live up to their obligations? I wander whether there is any one taking up this sort of cases against the AA in the past?

R2x1
28-02-2010, 08:57 PM
AA used to be a good organisation, but it seems they got a team of managers in years ago who managed to drop the quality and raise the price while diversifying into car repairs and sundry other things they could once be trusted to monitor impartially. That was then, this is now and it all seems a bit of a lottery (with the same guarantees).

Cicero
28-02-2010, 10:00 PM
If properly tested,and that is up to you,then I wouldn't take out the insurance.

george12
28-02-2010, 10:35 PM
Fair enough, that's understandable.

But AA's pre-purchase inspection is something that I find it hard to accept. We paid AA for a service and expect them to fulfill their obligations, i.e. give us a professional, unbiased report on the conditions of the vehicle inspected. As PCtek mentioned, its better to get our own mechanic to do the job. If this is the general practice, can I interpret that AA did not live up to their obligations? I wander whether there is any one taking up this sort of cases against the AA in the past?

There is no evidence that their report wasn't fair, unbiased and accurate.

They sometimes make mistakes (as has hit the media from time to time) though in those cases they have had to pay out a settlement. I don't know anything about them having under the table arrangements with car dealerships but it seems unwise to simply assume that that is true...

Did the report not give more in depth information than that? Eg, condition of various parts, engine, etc? At the end of the day they can't predict unexpected failures down the track, so a vague profesional opinion is the best that could be reasonably expected of them.

bk T
28-02-2010, 11:02 PM
There is no evidence that their report wasn't fair, unbiased and accurate.

They sometimes make mistakes (as has hit the media from time to time) though in those cases they have had to pay out a settlement. I don't know anything about them having under the table arrangements with car dealerships but it seems unwise to simply assume that that is true...

Did the report not give more in depth information than that? Eg, condition of various parts, engine, etc? At the end of the day they can't predict unexpected failures down the track, so a vague profesional opinion is the best that could be reasonably expected of them.

At this stage, there is no evidence - I only suspect. No one is expecting them to produce a prediction of unexpected failures. I don't pay them to give a prediction. All I expect is a genuine report on the present condition
rather than a prediction. Any one on the street can give a prediction, don't have to pay for it.

Firstly, In the report (pdf format) the engine size was wrongly indicated; it's a little different from the sample report (from AA's website). It's very brief.

Anyway, I've sent an email with the report attached to AA for clarification.