Third Party Prepurchase Inspections

[kgreen]

It's a thoroughbred horse guaranteed to sire the fastest race horses this side of the north pole  He's for sale for a million bucks but you're not allowed to open his mouth to count the teeth.

 

Not a million dollar car, but I'm interested in a car that Gateway has in their Chicago showroom/franchise.  https://www.gatewayclassiccars.com/inventory/chi 

I found a great prepurchase inspector who will actually bring a portable lift onsite to inspect the underside of the car.  Just before scheduling him. the rep from Gateway texts that lifts aren't allowed.  Liability is the reason, corporate directive and must comply.  I ask about ramps, he's going to have to run that by corporate as well but doubts that will be allowed.

 

Is this experience familiar to anyone?  I'm starting to think this horse has no teeth.

Edited Wednesday at 06:32 PM by kgreen (see edit history)

[Bhigdog]

Looking at their web site i would say they are little more than a used car dealer. No shortage of them....bob

[TAKerry]

I dont blame them at all. I dont know if they are consignment, or part consignment but if my car was there I would not want some yahoo (no disrespect meant) showing up with a portable lift and jacking my car up. Who knows if the guy even knows how to use it properly. Now, Gateway is a big enough organization they should have a lift available that THEY can put the car on for an up close inspection. If it was a new toyota or Kia dealer I could understand not needing to look at the bottom of the car. But they deal in 'classics' (theres that word again😆) and looking at the bottom does not seem unreasonable. I have seen many a car for sale on the net that look beautiful on the show side, but underneath they are a mess.

 

If I were serious about buying a car from them, I would at least have them place it SAFELY on stands or the like at a minimum so I could look underneath. Otherwise I would move on.

[Matt Harwood]

Save your money, skip the inspection, and go right to the part at the end where you don't buy the car.

 

Pre-purchase inspections are mostly a scam. And nobody believes me, the shady, dishonest car dealer with an agenda when he says it's a scam. People are so busy watching for the dealer to pick their pockets that they never even notice the inspectors doing it.

 

If you can't go see it yourself, don't bother with a PPI. Just don't buy the car and save everyone a bunch of time.

[Den41Buick]

Sounds lie you wont be able to test drive the car without paying it in full too!

[John_S_in_Penna]

The website www.cars.com publishes

customers' ratings of the dealers who 

advertise on that site.  Gateway receives

only 2 stars out of 5.  (See link below with

the 26 comments received.)  Interestingly,

there are some 5-star ratings, and quite a few

1-star ratings, without much in the middle--

for an average of only 2.

 

I don't know them, but you can read for yourself:

https://www.cars.com/dealers/6020780/gateway-classic-cars/reviews/?page=1

 

 

[Matt Harwood]

3 minutes ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

The website www.cars.com publishes

customers' ratings of the dealers who 

advertise on that site.  Gateway receives

only 2 stars out of 5.  (See link below with

the 26 comments received.)  Interestingly,

there are some 5-star ratings, and quite a few

1-star ratings, without much in the middle--

for an average of only 2.

 

I don't know them, but you can read for yourself:

https://www.cars.com/dealers/6020780/gateway-classic-cars/reviews/?page=1

 

 

 

 

Complainers write bad reviews. Happy customers rarely do. I got a bad review from a guy who bought a car and it arrived with one of the tires 10 PSI low and he was terrified that it might have caused an accident when he first drove it off the trailer. I note that several of those reviews are from people who are angry that the dealer didn't call them back fast enough.

 

Whiners gonna whine.

[Bhigdog]

43 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

Pre-purchase inspections are mostly a scam. And nobody believes me, the shady, dishonest car dealer with an agenda when he says it's a scam. People are so busy watching for the dealer to pick their pockets that they never even notice the inspectors doing it.

Not passing judgement one way or another but that's a pretty strong statement to make without some objective examples of just how PPI actors are actually "picking" peoples pockets...........Bob

Edited September 17 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Trulyvintage]

1 hour ago, kgreen said:

It's a thoroughbred horse guaranteed to sire the fastest race horses this side of the north pole  He's for sale for a million bucks but you're not allowed to open his mouth to count the teeth.

 

Not a million dollar car, but I'm interested in a car that Gateway has in their Chicago showroom/franchise.  https://www.gatewayclassiccars.com/inventory/chi 

I found a great prepurchase inspector who will actually bring a portable lift onsite to inspect the underside of the car.  Just before scheduling him. the rep from Gateway texts that lifts aren't allowed.  Liability is the reason, corporate directive and must comply.  I ask about ramps, he's going to have to run that by corporate as well but doubts that will be allowed.

 

Is this experience familiar to anyone?  I'm starting to think this horse has no teeth.

Acceptable and good common sense.

 

All insurance is issued on an algorithm or a predictably of payout based on

known and accepted risk.

 

An unknown piece of equipment 

brought onsite for inspection 

outside of normal pre purchase 

inspection poses an unknown

insurance liability to their vehicle 

along with injury/death to anyone 

in the vicinity of the inspection.

 

As a business owner, I would also decline your request.

 

if you feel that this is something required by you to purchase a vehicle at a distance then you need to look elsewhere.

 

Jim

 

 

[3macboys]

6 minutes ago, Bhigdog said:

Not passing judgement one way or another but that's a pretty strong statement to make without some objective examples of just how PPI actors are actually "picking" peoples pockets...........Bob

Not putting words in Matt's mouth but I think what he's getting at is that anyone can hang a shingle out being a Pre Purchase Inspector, including me but you'd be getting nothing more than a report of my opinion and a few pictures showing a leaky oil pan and a few other flaws, now does that mean the car is mechanically sound, that it hasn't been Re-Vinned or that I even know what I'm talking about let alone an expert on that particular car?  Oh and don't forget the disclaimer that says I could have missed something or be wrong but I've got your money and you can't do anything about it.  

[John_S_in_Penna]

8 minutes ago, Bhigdog said:

...some objective examples of just how PPI actors are actually "picking" peoples pockets.

On past threads, Matt has described how

such inspectors may just have taken a course,

but have little knowledge of old cars;  may

note every minor scratch but miss a glaring

imperfection;  etc.

[Bhigdog]

But to say ppi,s are MOSTLY a scam as in the majority? I think that,s a pretty strong statement to make without some objective corroboration. 

It would be far more useful to offer knowledgable advice on selecting a competant PP inspector.....bob

 

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, Bhigdog said:

Not passing judgement one way or another but that's a pretty strong statement to make without some objective examples of just how PPI actors are actually "picking" peoples pockets...........Bob

 

OK, here's how the inspection industry works.

 

You hire an inspector. You either call one of the big companies with their "staff" of "experts" (who are all part-time contractors, not experienced employees) or a guy who advertises his services as an inspector. In most cases, they'll sell you on their knowledge and in-depth experience with all types of cars.

 

The inspector comes to look at the car. He typically takes a photo of every cosmetic flaw he can find, usually without context. Some photos are so close that you can't even tell where the item might be on the car or how big it is. If it's up on a lift, he'll take a picture of every leak and rust spot he fan find, again without context. We'll take a test drive, but he's not driving the car. He has no idea how it feels or how things are working. He mostly wants to know if it accelerates, stops, and shifts. He won't notice alignments, or misfires, or harsh shifts or anything like that. But his report will probably be full of stuff that he couldn't possibly know.

 

If he's an individual, perhaps he calls you and tells you what he's found. Maybe he's straight with you, maybe he's skewing the results somewhat for the same reasons as a big company (see below). You'll never know, though. It's not like you'll ever see the car yourself, right? Sometimes you get a good inspector who talks to you while he's looking at the car, as he's doing it, and maybe you get a better picture that way. I don't know, it's only happened once at our shop.

 

If he works for a big company, he submits his photos and questionnaire to the home office where another "expert" actually writes the report, never having seen the car at all. This is where the scam shifts gears--for the most part, the inspectors themselves are pretty earnest, if grossly inexperienced. But the home office isn't interested in helping me sell a car or helping you buy a car. (I've even had inspections where the customer received photos of a different car than the one I was selling.)

 

No, the inspector's real job is to generate profits and minimize liability. Rather than risk you buying the car and finding something that they should have discovered (liability and litigation) they tend to go extra hard on the cars. They'll tell you about how the paint flaws are indicative of a failing paint job. They'll say that any rust bubble is a sign of major issues below the surface that will be very expensive to fix. Every leak turns the engine into a ticking time bomb. They are going to give you problems without context and make you afraid to buy the car. If you don't buy the car, there is no liability. Simple! Better yet, the customer thinks the inspector is a hero saving him from a turd, and will use him again. One inspection turns into two or three or four. Again, you'll never see the car, you'll never know the difference. The customer counts it as a satisfactory experience.

 

And the only people who notice this pattern are guys like me, and obviously, we're crooks and don't like honest inspectors doing an honest job for honest customers. It's pretty clever, no?

 

Just as an example, Lemon Squad's recent report said the paint was falling off this car and it needed a new interior. Buyer declined to buy saying he didn't want a project.

 

 

 

Here are some of the sage comments we've received from various inspectors:

 

·        While inspecting my personal 1929 Cadillac: “Is this a kit car? It has roll up windows. That’s not correct. All Cadillacs have power windows.”

·        When arriving to inspect an Orbit Orange 1970 Pontiac GTO convertible: Looks at subject car and says, “Wow, I didn’t know they made orange Mustangs!”

·        When looking at a 1970 MGB: “Who makes MG?” and “I thought all MGs were front-wheel drive?”

·        Inspecting a 1968 Corvette and turns on the windshield wipers, then turns off the ignition key instead of the wiper switch. Wipers obviously stop in middle of windshield. Makes note: Wipers broken, do not park correctly.

·        Sees wiper marks on windshield. Makes note: Windshield cracked.

·        During the test drive of a 1964 Lincoln Continental convertible: “Is this car a manual or automatic transmission?”

·        Evaluating 1941 Cadillac with Hydra-Matic transmission. “Car does not stay in place when parked--transmission needs to be rebuilt.” (Early Hydra-Matic transmissions did not have a Park position, only Neutral).

 

I would wager that we've had more than 500 pre-purchase inspections since we opened for business 10 years ago. I can count on one hand, maybe one hand and two fingers, how many have turned into sales. That isn't because I've somehow managed to find the only 2000 crappy cars in the world. If someone calls a generic inspection company or commercial inspector, I know there's no deal. It's a total waste of 2-3 hours of my time. I have to do it because I don't want to be known as someone with something to hide, but inspections kill deals and they waste a ton of everyone's time. We put the car on the lift, we stand there and answer questions, we demonstrate features, and we go for a ride. And three hours later, the inspector leaves and I've wasted half a day not selling a car. Meanwhile, both the inspector and the inspection company have used my inventory and my time to make money for themselves.

 

Statistically, to have that large a failure rate suggests that I'm right or that my cars are all crap. Since I know that not all the cars were crap, that says to me that there's something else going on beyond simple inexperience or ignorance, especially among the national companies.

 

Like I said, nobody believes me because I'm a scumbag car dealer. I'm the problem. So nobody looks too hard at the inspectors themselves, regardless of the outcome. Believe me or don't, I don't care. But in my experience, which outstrips every single one of you by several orders of magnitude, most inspections are a waste of time at best and a rip-off at worst.

 

 

Edited September 17 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[Bhigdog]

Well see now, that right there lends a whole bunch of credence to your blanket statement.

Thanks for that insight, Matt....bob

[Dodge55Royal]

AVOID GATEWAY AT ALL COSTS!!! I bought a car from them about 10 years ago and it used a quart of oil every 50 miles. This was after they said it didn't use any oil. I ended up buying another engine and installing that one instead. They have dozens of complaints on the BBB website regarding cars being misrepresented and needing thousands of dollars in repairs as soon as they were delivered to their new owners. For more info go to BBB.org and search for Gateway Classic Cars. They have locations all over the country so click on each one to read the complaints....

 

 

[Century Eight]

This kind of reminds me about the discussion you have before you go to the track or the slots…Don't gamble more than you can afford to loose.  I have found that when I am looking for that ‘gotta have” car, there are always more out there in the event that you don't get to buy the first one.  

 

I have the advantage of being retired, and time to travel, and I know that time is money.  But i think one should go travel to see the car with your own eyes before dropping more money than you can afford to loose.  I get it that this is not always possible in every case. But airline flights are not really all that expensive when you consider dropping ten, eleven, or even forty thousand dollars on a car you can see in a day or two with your own eyes.   If you travel to see a car and it doesn't work out, consider yourself lucky.  You just saved yourself a whole bunch of aggravation for just a few hundred bucks.  This way you’re not mad at some nameless inspector that you had to pay.  Instead, you got to see the country and had a few nice dinners yourself.  This way there is no second guessing and you just might be happy with your new treasure.

[TAKerry]

Matt, that sure puts things into perspective. Do you receive a copy of these reports as well?

 

As far as a blanket statement of do not buy from _______,  I think there is a risk with any 'old car' regardless of where its purchased. I also think that unless you are buying what Ed calls a 'big boy's toy' that has had a restoration from a known, competent company you are going to find some kind of issue with a car. Even more so when for example the buyer is looking for a deal. These are old cars! My car is pretty nice, and runs and drives great. Leaks no oil and always starts right up. But the speedo doesnt work, the tach doesnt work, the radio doesnt and the a/c doesnt work. All fodder for someone saying they got a POS if I were to sell it.

I think if I were to spend more than about $2500. on a car I would look at it in person. Just as Century 8 just outlined. If a person cannot take off from a busy work schedule to look at a car over a long weekend then how are they ever going to have time to enjoy said car?

[R Walling]

 I bought a 56 Chevy once that had good looking patches welded on the floor.

 They were very neat, and all the welds were ground smooth (there was no floor mat in place)

 

 When I got it home and inspected the underside, it was a total disaster of torn and jagged rot. 

 I ended up replacing the whole flood from toe board to trunk lid!

[trimacar]

Matt makes some great points.  I can only tell you one of my experiences, with the disclaimer that I am NOT a professional appraiser.  I have, however, bought and sold a couple hundred cars in my life, mostly prewar (WWII) and from 1902 tthrough 1973.

 

Through a friend, I was recommended to go look at a 50's Jaguar, it was about 40 miles from my house.  Arrangements were made, I was really only secondary opinion, as the would-be buyer had already hired a professional appraiser.

 

Arrived at the building, beautiful facility in the middle of very wealthy horse country near me.

 

Professional appraiser started inspecting car, put it on a lift, crawled all around it, taking notes and pictures.

 

I did a much more casual inspection.  I noticed things like panel fit, some paint bubbling issues, some upholstery issues, all very evident to the eye.  I didn't spend much time on mechanics, other than to note a few obvious issues with leaks (hey, it was a Jaguar!) and again, some obvious things.

 

Went back home, and from memory typed up my, again, casual report, and sent it to would be buyer.  I enjoyed the experience, got to meet a nice collector and see a wonderful car collection, and didn't charge a penny.

 

Would be buyer contacts me a few days later, says he decided not to buy car, at the price asked (top of the market and then some) he wished car to be in better shape. 

 

He further stated that my report contained numerous problem areas which the PROFESSIONAL, multi-hundred dollar, report, did not include., including absolutely no mention of the paint bubbling issues.

 

I'm not saying that it's money wasted getting a professional appraisal, but as Matt mentions, they have a different agenda than the buyer himself.  You rarely will be happy buying a car you haven't inspected yourself, and gotten the "feel" of whether it's a jewel or a dog.

[Dr B]

I second the advise to personally look at any car you are buying.  Yes, there are people out there who can and do buy cars sight unseen and are willing to roll the dice depending on how much money is at stake or how rare the car is.  Or hire an "unknown" person to look at the car for them.  For me, there are a couple of people I trust (and I mean a couple=2) who are experts in very narrow car niches, or know the specific car, and know all the strengths and weaknesses of those cars, and can tell me whether the car is priced to condition and will not be a money pit. I have committed to purchasing a few cars before I personally saw them. I have had only one 'miss', that car needed more work (and $$$) than expected, not a complete disaster, but took some of the fun out of it. Overall, I have had a great track record buying this way.

 

Interesting story, about 10 years ago I was considering buying a car and had numerous discussions with the owner and reviewed lots of pictures.  I talked to my "expert" on this cars and he was comfortable this was a good car and a reasonable price.  When I told the owner I wanted to buy the car, he insisted I had to come and see the car and he would not sell it to me before I did.  So, I bought a round trip ticket on the MLK Monday holiday, flew out in the morning, saw the car, bought it, went for lunch with the owner, and flew home. The previous owner and I still keep in touch and we remain friends. So, sometime, seeing the car and meeting the owner can be a positive experience.

 

Robert

Edited Wednesday at 04:10 PM by Dr B (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, TAKerry said:

Matt, that sure puts things into perspective. Do you receive a copy of these reports as well?

 

No, I don't get to see the inspection reports. On the rare occasion when the buyer actually calls to say he's not buying (usually by saying, "I'm not looking for a project, I want a car I can drive right away,") I've asked for them to send me a copy of the inspection report. Most companies have gotten clever and hide the reports on their own websites behind a one-time-use password so the customer can't simply forward a link to me. On a few occasions the customer has been nice enough to print the report and mail it to me, which is how I found out about the Bonneville, for example. It doesn't change anything when I try to explain how the report got it wrong, of course, because I'm the lying cheater and the inspector is the angelic voice of truth, but at least I can get a little window into what the customers are seeing. The report on that Bonneville, for example, did indeed say that the paint was failing and that the interior was worn.

 

Interestingly, two weeks later another customer engaged Lemon Squad to inspect that same Bonneville, and they dutifully called to see if they could set up another inspection. YOU ALREADY HAVE A REPORT, USE THAT ONE. IT'S THE SAME CAR.

 

I have pointed this situation out to one inspector whom I like, and once I laid it out like I did above, the inspector (that is, the sub-contractor for the large national inspection company) was flabbergasted. Several of these guys are actually good inspectors whose efforts are erased by the report writer at the home office. This guy tried to go up the chain and express his surprise and outrage at the situation that I laid out for him. Guess who didn't show up the next time someone called that particular inspection company?

 

I will admit that this is all speculation on my part. There's a lot of circumstantial evidence, but that's all I've got. I'd love to be wrong. I just don't think I am.

[TAKerry]

I guess the buyer owns the report but if using that as a reason to not buy, common courtesy would be to forward the report to you. Then again, the people that are using a misguided inspection report may not end up being one of your best customers anyway! Weed out the bad eggs.

 

I have a customer going through kind of the same thing trying to sell his house. By reading the inspectors report one would think to run away! The guy has been living in the house for the last 30 years with no problems, why do they all come to surface now? Same deal, different product.

[60FlatTop]

11 hours ago, Century Eight said:

Don't gamble more than you can afford to loose.

The question is, have you quantified how much you can afford to lose?

 

Since the turn of the century and the availability of purchasing cars at a distance online I have accessed my risk and done quite well.

 

My hobby cars have always been in the $10,000 value range. 1970's to the present that amount adjusted for inflation is quite consistent. Somewhere between 2000 and 2005 I calculated that I could sustain a $3,000 loss annually without affecting the family as a whole. My question is "Can I keep my loss at a maximum of $3,000 if this car doesn't meet my expectations?". I also know that it is pretty hard to have a 100% loss. Three of my four collector cars were purchase sight unseen. One 22 years ago, one 12 years ago, and one two years ago. I think I am head of the game. Six or eight have been sold and I don't recall a significant loss on any but I do remember some pretty good profit.

 

I have an 85 year old morning coffee friend who likes visiting the local casinos. We figure he averages about $6000 per year on his  hobby and I spend about the same. Neither of us is a big hitter in our field, but we are serious players.

 

I had the Buick celebrity, John DeFiore  look at an Escalade project for me back in 2021. That was an exception but it was close to his location. I ended up buying a low mileage Avalanche in my usual manner instead.

 

When I see a car I am interested in I expect it has needs and I have a good idea of the value of a "Nice" one. I know that the most I can expect is what I pay for. No delusions.

 

The most recent car I bought had a value "to me" spiffed up of $10,000. No price guide, questions, or analysis, Just what car I buy with 100 $100 bills held up and fanned out to a seller. The work I knew I would have to do or predicted was work I wanted to do myself and be in full control of. Right now my total is right about $7,000 with shipping and state fees. It would be really hard to sink another $3,000 into the car and I consider it show ready. And I love driving it.

 

I often repeat that my satisfaction in the hobby lies in my lifelong continuity of involvement. There were not interim decades where I lost touch.

[West Peterson]

Our company, Classic Car Appraisal Service, was started by my father in 1974. We have done thousands of appraisals and pre-purchase inspections. I've also been trained in auto body repair and refinishing, have restored my own cars, shown my cars, and have judged at National shows.

 

While I, too, believe a buyer should put his own eyes on the car, that can't always take place, or the buyer is not familiar enough with cars to do the inspection themselves. 

 

In my opinion, it's more important to find the right appraiser, or someone with whom you can trust. Ask for credentials. How long has the appraiser been in the hobby? Has he judged at marque club events, or AACA, or CCCA? Any experience restoring cars? Etc.

 

We do not scam our customers, and there are plenty of legitimate reasons to hire an appraiser. I'm tired of hearing that appraisers are scammers. But I guess I'm more tired of having to apologize for those appraisers who give the rest of us such a bad reputation.

[West Peterson]

14 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

The inspector comes to look at the car. He typically takes a photo of every cosmetic flaw he can find, usually without context. Some photos are so close that you can't even tell where the item might be on the car or how big it is. If it's up on a lift, he'll take a picture of every leak and rust spot he fan find, again without context. We'll take a test drive, but he's not driving the car. He has no idea how it feels or how things are working. He mostly wants to know if it accelerates, stops, and shifts. He won't notice alignments, or misfires, or harsh shifts or anything like that. But his report will probably be full of stuff that he couldn't possibly know.

 

 

 

In regard to photographing every defect, it goes without saying that it would be very important to do so, but as you point out, there needs to be context, and the location needs to be known.

 

In regard to not driving the car... there's no excuse for that if its a running operable car. Why did the inspector not drive the car??? Only once did I not drive a car I was inspecting for a PPI, and that was because I had just fallen off a ladder and was too injured to do so. The buyer was from overseas, and couldn't put his own eyes on it.

[Dan Reed]

I purchased a collector car from Classic Auto Mall in Morgantown as did a buddy of mine. They have their own lifts that they offer to put the car on for a potential buyer. They also provided me with a work-light to make all of my underside inspection (this is in conjunction to the actual test-drive).  It also allowed me opportunity to take detail photos of the entire underside. Not owning a lift myself, this was quite helpful. If I ever had a curiosity to how certain suspension, exhaust, or any other mechanical components looked or were arranged I simply pull up the file folder containing the dozens of photos I took while the car was on the dealer's lift. Seems like a good business to me. I'm not familiar with Gateway, so I cannot comment on why they would not have at least one customer inspection lift.

[Matt Harwood]

54 minutes ago, West Peterson said:

But I guess I'm more tired of having to apologize for those ... who give the rest of us such a bad reputation.

Welcome to the club.

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, West Peterson said:

In regard to photographing every defect, it goes without saying that it would be very important to do so, but as you point out, there needs to be context, and the location needs to be known.

 

In regard to not driving the car... there's no excuse for that if its a running operable car. Why did the inspector not drive the car??? Only once did I not drive a car I was inspecting for a PPI, and that was because I had just fallen off a ladder and was too injured to do so. The buyer was from overseas, and couldn't put his own eyes on it.

 

I suspect driving the car is a liability issue for them.

 

As far as context, almost nobody does it and certainly not the big inspection companies. I wish they would. Most inspection reports are little more than an exhaustive list of flaws, which, taken in aggregate and without any other information, can be scary and make a car look like it is rife with problems. They never mention any positives at all. If you receive a report with 20-30 photos of chips and scratches that are so close-up that they look like significant damage, the lack of context may make you think the car needs expensive paint work. If an inspector is unfamiliar with the operation of an older car with a carburetor, his report may say something like, “Vehicle is hard to start, would not idle properly, and blows smoke.” Again, such a detail sounds alarming and may indicate significant mechanical issues.

 

Or not.

 

How does context help? Imagine if the photos show all those scratches, but the inspector’s report also says, “Nice 80-year-old original paint with the usual signs of use but nothing that detracts from the overall appearance and none of the scratches requires immediate repair to prevent further deterioration.” Now you understand that yes, there are some blemishes on the car, none of them are serious enough to need professional repair. Or if the inspector’s report says, “Typical carburetor start takes some extra cranking to compensate for the choke but once the engine is warmed up and the choke is open, it runs properly.” Now you understand that the engine is healthy and simply uses old technology (carburetor and choke) instead of modern fuel injection. In short, context transforms a report from being only about the bad aspects of a car to being a complete picture.

 

Inspectors could do their jobs better. Most simply don't want to because it's not as profitable.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 05:24 PM by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[1912Staver]

I was never a " inspection consultant ", but rather a mechanic at two different quite specialized repair / restoration shops. One British cars, the other 1973 and earlier Mustangs / Shelby's , with a pretty strong emphasis on the factory high performance models.

 From time to time I would be asked { usually by existing customers looking to buy an additional car or upgrade their existing " collector " car } to evaluate a car that was for sale. Living up here in Canada the #1 concern was always rust and previously repaired rust. The cars were usually all at least 25 years old at the point I saw them and about 80% local cars , 20 % California or similar South Western imports. 

 The mechanical condition was a somewhat secondary concideration in most cases. Being a lot more straight forward and quite a bit less expensive to put right than rusted shells. Also a fair number with previous collision damage, once again the whole spectrum of repair quality. 

 Most had repair work that varied from top notch to quite poor " fix ups ". I would take a very good look underneath and note what I saw. Both work I felt was needed, and previously repaired areas.

At that point if the car was sound from a rust / previous repair point of view I would move on to the mechanicals. 

If the car had expensive sheet metal or frame repairs needed { Triumph TR 6's and MGA's for example } we would ask the customer to take a " guided tour " of the car up on a hoist. 99% of the time the customer once shown the problem areas would decide against the purchase. Only one time did the customer disregard what I showed them and bought the car anyway. A 67 Mustang convertible that looked great on the outside but was actually quite rusty in the front sub frames and torque boxes etc. Wife loved the car and it did run and drive very well. But in the medium future was going to need quite a bit of money spent. { floors and rear 1/4 's  had been quite well done at some point in the past. 

 Of the cars that I thought were reasonably sound a good number of them were purchased. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 05:36 PM by 1912Staver (see edit history)

[West Peterson]

4 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

I suspect driving the car is a liability issue for them.

 

As far as context, almost nobody does it and certainly not the big inspection companies. I wish they would. Most inspection reports are little more than an exhaustive list of flaws, which, taken in aggregate and without any other information, can be scary and make a car look like it is rife with problems. They never mention any positives at all. If you receive a report with 20-30 photos of chips and scratches that are so close-up that they look like significant damage, the lack of context may make you think the car needs expensive paint work. If an inspector is unfamiliar with the operation of an older car with a carburetor, his report may say something like, “Vehicle is hard to start, would not idle properly, and blows smoke.” Again, such a detail sounds alarming and may indicate significant mechanical issues.

 

Or not.

 

How does context help? Imagine if the photos show all those scratches, but the inspector’s report also says, “Nice 80-year-old original paint with the usual signs of use but nothing that detracts from the overall appearance and none of the scratches requires immediate repair to prevent further deterioration.” Now you understand that yes, there are some blemishes on the car, none of them are serious enough to need professional repair. Or if the inspector’s report says, “Typical carburetor start takes some extra cranking to compensate for the choke but once the engine is warmed up and the choke is open, it runs properly.” Now you understand that the engine is healthy and simply uses old technology (carburetor and choke) instead of modern fuel injection. In short, context transforms a report from being only about the bad aspects of a car to being a complete picture.

 

Inspectors could do their jobs better. Most simply don't want to because it's not as profitable.

 

 

 

I fully agree.

I would recommend to anyone needing a ppi or appraisal to find an independent appraiser who does there own report. Anyone who just fills out a form and sends it to the "home office" is probably not going to give you an accurate report. Not fair to the buyer, and not fair to the seller.

[Reicholzheimer]

I have to believe the auto inspections are like a home inspection. If you like the car enough you use the inspection to bring the price down.  

[West Peterson]

20 minutes ago, Reicholzheimer said:

I have to believe the auto inspections are like a home inspection. If you like the car enough you use the inspection to bring the price down.  

 

Yes. You could. If the seller failed to inform the buyer of all the defects. When i sell a car, I tell all. The car usually gets sold to the first person that comes to see it, because he has nothing to negotiate. Nothing to point to that he doesn't already know about. And almost without fail, I'm told the car is in much better condition than I led him to believe.

[TTR]

I agree with both Matt & West, just like in restoration or numerous other professions, there probably are more crooks, hacks and scammers in appraisal/inspection service or antique/classic/used car sales businesses than knowledgeable and trustworthy providers.

 

Using due diligence to choose one is as important as the subject vehicle itself.

 

I've probably mentioned it before, but having had brokered or consulted on hundreds & subsequently inspected thousands of vintage vehicles on behalf buyers, mostly because an inability to do it themselves due to living hundreds or thousands of miles away, including on other continents.

Almost every individual has contacted me through word-of-mouth recommendation(s) from those I've assisted before and in 99+% cases have been pleased with it.

 

As for the OPs dilemma, I can understand why the seller is hesitant and objects to someone bringing their own & unknown lifting equipment.

I probably wouldn't agree to it without pre-approving said equipment, the person operating it and clear terms of liabilities in case of any potential damages caused by lifting.

 

As far as I'm concerned, PPI* in general is or should be the last thing to do after everything else is done and agreed on, including price**, only to verify sellers claims/disclosures and best if contracted with someone, preferably a shop with necessary equipment, experience & familiarity with the make/model or at least the type of vehicle in question to do it professionally.

And generally the entity performing the PPI, be it an individual or a shop, should be agreed upon by both parties, but usually all costs, including transportation to/from it and other liabilities fall on buyer

 

* Like with so many other misconceptions in this hobby & industry, there's a difference between appraisal***, general & pre-purchase inspections, but most people don't seem to know or understand what they are. 

 

** Obviously, the price can always be re-negotiated IF PPI reveals notable undisclosed concerns/issues/problems, but trying to obtain & use PPI results beforehand is just moronic in my opinion and likely a waste of time for both the buyer & the seller.

 

*** For example, years ago, I had to deal with a substantial insurance claim on behalf of a clients vintage car due to a major collision damage and not only the 3-4 of the insurance company's own adjusters/appraisers, but the internationally highly regarded independent appraiser they (the insurance company) also contracted to assess my estimates appeared almost completely inept to provide any sensible assessments of their own.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 09:20 PM by TTR (see edit history)

[69merc]

My first comment would be to avoid Gateway, even if their car is ok it is probably mega-overpriced.  If it's not mega-overpriced, than there are some serious problems with it.

 

My second comment is regarding appraisers.  SOME of what Matt says is true.  I used an appraiser when buying my 69 Merc.  It was in Fort Lauderdale, and I am in NE Ohio.  I tried every conceivable calculation for going there is person, but it just wasn't workable. (beside; what are the chances you are going to spend a lot just to look at a car, and then pass on it??) Yet this was the car I thought had the most potential for making me happy. Luckily it wasn't at one of those big crooked Gateway type dealers, but just a tiny independent used car lot.  I hired an appraiser from a local (Fort Lauderdale) appraiser association, but he was on his own, and I always dealt directly with him, never saw any trace of a large appraiser co. lurking in the background. He did everything Matt said, meaning taking LOTS of high definition pics, especially of flaws, which I was also interested in.  He didn't drive the car, but went for a test drive.  He didn't put the car on a lift.  The dealer was very helpful, and worked well with the appraiser.  Some of the problems the appraiser noted were fixed by the dealer right away. (this was in 2019 when the car was 50 yrs. old.)  He wrote up a very helpful appraisal, including all sorts of current comps with their pics.  (I was already aware of them.)  Because of his appraisal I thought the car was worth buying sight unseen. (I was burnt a decade earlier from one of those Gateway type dealers in Orlando.) 

 

There were no surprises when the car arrived, and in fact, thought it seemed better.  However, because of not actually driving during the test drive, he might have uncovered what turned out to be my biggest headache with this car; the brake system was contaminated with both DOT 3 and DOT 5 fluid.  That created a situation where you could stop ok, with adequate forethought and time, but panic stops would not go well. (in retrospect, not sure if I would have detected this myself during a test drive either, as I had the car for a couple of weeks or so before realizing the brakes had a serious problem.)  So in the 5 yrs. I've owned this car, I've come to really like it a lot, and those original appraisal pictures have come in handy on several occasions. (you know, when you find something and go "when did this happen??") Also, the appraisal itself should help if anything happens to me and the car needs to be sold, plus it helped with my Collector Car insurance valuation. I would absolutely have an appraisal done again, if I were buying a remote car.  But I don't foresee ever wanting to buy again...😎

 

Some interesting final notes, the appraiser had no idea what price the dealer had on this car, but his appraisal valued it at double that!  All of the original paperwork came with this car, including an appraisal done in 2010 (when the original buyer/owner passed, done by his wife.) I paid even less than what that appraisal said!  So my take away is that like Antique's Road Show, the appraisers, while claiming to be conservative, might actually be really generous. 🤪

[kgreen]

I think the crux of this thread is more about the poor performance of third party car inspectors; generally speaking.  Matt has raised some very pertinet points.  The inspector should be working for me, the buyer.  By that I mean don't tell me not to buy the car or load me with opinions that will sway my evaluation of fact.  Tell me what you can determine as to the extent and quality of any repairs or modifications.  More importantly for me is rust history and other body conditions exist that might indicate real problems.  Speaking of the lack of value in opinions, I grew up in the rust belt.  Back then if a car cast a shadow then the rust was not too bad.  When speaking to someone in the south or west they think surface rust on an exhaust hanger is a deal breaker.

 

The second take-away from this conversation is unrealistic buyer expectation.  When buying a vintage, special interest car that is something say over 40 years in age, one should expect a certain amount of deferred mechanical work .  It's quite likely that difficult maintenance items like resealing a rear end, transmission or engine are examples of expected deferred maintenance.  The buyer who expects his purchase of a 40 year old car to drove off the lot trouble free has unrealistic expectations.  It would be an interesting comparison of expectation between two buyers, one with mechanical ability, the other with no mechanical ability.

 

 

 

[60FlatTop]

This is quite an evolving topic. Makes me want to watch "Chicago" again.

 

 

[kgreen]

Yeah, think I'll change the title

 

 

 

[DavidinCA]

Not letting someone bring a portable lift to inspect a car seems pretty reasonable to me.  The potential for problems with that set up seems pretty high.  On the other hand, asking if you can being the car to a shop with a lift to inspect it seems a much better plan even if the shop needs to get paid for however much lift time you need to use.  

 

I think a pre-purchase inspection is like buying any other service, you need to find someone knowledgeable who you trust.  If you believe the dealer to be fundamentally dishonest, then do business with someone else.  Doing business with people who are not trustworthy is a headache and best avoided.  

 

As Matt pointed out, the inspector has every incentive to point out every possible issue to avoid liability so it makes it particularly important to read the report with that in mind.  It’s like a home inspector who finds tons of issues and by then end of the report you are amazed the house is still standing, let alone occupied.  The inspector doesn’t want to be on the hook for something real or imaginary that wasn’t in the report.  

 

In addition to the points Matt makes, if you have a suspicious mind, there could also be dealers who might offer an incentive to the inspector if the car sells, which is back to finding someone you know and trust to do an inspection and avoiding buying from someone you think is dishonest.

 

.

[60FlatTop]

15 minutes ago, kgreen said:

Yeah, think I'll change the title

 

I would agree to a title change being of value, especially for future reference. Each comment has points worth considering.

 

I have mentioned my initial key to evaluating a "finished" car a couple of times in the past. No need for a lift or certified qualifications. I walk right up to the driver's door and look down into the window channel. Lacking fur strips and rubber wipes, cockeyed shiny screw heads, primer and paint overspray, and general disarray are very common. That is usually enough to give me an idea of attention to detail and willingness to spend time and effort on the rest of the jobs that were done on the car. I stared paying attention to that detail in the early 1990s. It makes a good first sort.

 

Little things you get to know. I have a 1964 Riviera that I did a color change on in 1980. Upon completion I noticed a thin strip of original color between the quarter window edge and the roof gutter. Like to know how many others have overlooked that same spot over the past 45 years. I can tell you it's a bunch.

 

On the pre-purchase inspection, I would say most of the services, not all, are designed to a perceived value price schedule. The vast majority of people I know in the hobby would not be very likely to part with more than $500, probably closer to $300, so that's what they get. I can see some of them blustering about the third or 4th time they got a bill for another potential purchase. "Spent all that money for nothing" the imagine is in my mind right now. Of course I am the guy who never owned a hard earned nickel in my whole live so I get a chuckle.