Misrepresented?

[63Electra]

I bought my 63' Electra 2 door on Ebay. In the Auction it was stated to have "Original black paint" The car arrived, and As I began to work on it I realized that it was originally a white car. Is it Wrong of me to ask for compensation for this? I still like the car but I am bummed out that the car is not as it was stated in the Auction. What would be fair compensation for this if any?

[Guest my3buicks]

While the owner should have stated that it had a repaint, If it was a good job, the current owner may not have been savy enough to even realize it had a repaint - but you should have asked prior to bidding for paint codes etc from the car to verifiy as much as you could. I have never bought a car without verifying this info. I would also venture that once you paid for the car, have it in your possesion, and have started work on it to find this out, it's really to late to do anything about it. Remember the old saying "let the buyer beware"

[imported_buick5563]

I would say, unfortunately, "too bad". The seller would of course say they had no idea. I have bought three cars on ebay and all of them to a certain extent were, let's say, "under-represented". Now granted, I have never bought a car for more than $4,000 sight unseen, but (and forgive me if you did), I wouldn't pay more than I was "willing to lose"( to borrow a gambling term), without seeing the car first. Certainly, Four Grand is a lot of money, but I was ready for the consequences if it was a total P.O.S.

I say enjoy the car, and welcome to the Forum.

Mike

[63Electra]

The seller Would have had to be blind to not know this. Once you open the gas filler door, It becomes obvious that the paint wasn't original. looking at the areas around the Door Hinges It becomes even more Obvious. Anyway, I'm going to enjoy the car, and the repaint was pretty Nice. It was probably done about 25 years ago and done Right but Nonetheless, I planned on Entering the car in shows as an unrestored original, but this makes it so I cannot do so.

[63Electra]

I think "Work on" is a term I used too broadly. I should say "Inspected" I haven't done any actual work to the car yet due to the reason that I was afraid to Void any validity I had to my claim.

[NTX5467]

In the case of purchasing a "used car" of any variety, you might find a color you like (as you did), but the value of the vehicle is NOT related to color (inside and/or out), but to the general condition of the vehicle (cosmetic and mechanical items, "indicated" odometer mileage, especially). In verifying anything prior to a "distance purchase", requesting documentation (including rubbings of the data plate(s)) is reasonable to do, yet probably should be done ONLY by a serious purchaser and a reasonable amount of compensation for this request might be offered). If I was a seller, though, sending a potential purchaser the VIN would not happen, but other information on the data plate (options, trim, color) would be supplied upon request.

As for the "repaint" issue, in a different-than-produced color . . . that could be a deal-breaker in an on-site purchase, but in a distance purchase it might be a little harder to make happen (especially after you've exchanged funds and taken physical delivery of the vehicle). As Keith mentioned, requesting the color code information would have plainly indicated the repaint situation. Whether the seller was aware of the repaint situation (if it was a nice enough repaint to pass for OEM) or not could be open for discussion, but in reality, it's now a little too late for that discussion to happen.

In reality, it might not be completely "pure" in your eyes, but it's still what it is and you can enjoy it for that. Even if the paint was OEM (in black), it would probably require a good bit of effort (and expense?) to get it really shiney. Not to mention making it much thinner in build thickness in the process of rubbing and buffing before wax. I would suspect a decent repaint would increase the value of the vehicle to what you paid for it (not knowing, of course, what you paid for it). End result, you've still got a Black Buick.

Personally, I'd be more concerned as to what might have prompted the color change. Was it due to prior owner preference? Was it due to a somewhat serious collision repair (with a front sheet metal clip of another color, or other body part replacement with a replacement part of another color, or patch-paneled rust repairs)? THOSE would be things I'd be much more concerned about than a color change in itself. Besides, if it's a factory color for that year (yes, there are several different shades of black on cars!!!), it'll be legal for BCA 400 Point System judging.

By observation, ANYTIME you purchase a used vehicle, you can ask all of the "Who owned it? Did they buy it new? Has it been wrecked? Did it use a lot of oil? Does the motor smoke or make funny noises?" type of questions, which might yield some honest answers (depending upon how much the current owner knows about the vehicle), BUT you still have to use your gut instincts as to whether you are getting accurate information (in total or in varying amounts) BEFORE you make the purchase decision. Even if you'd had somebody go look at the vehicle for you, you're still trusting their judgment and assessment of the situation (for a fee, typically), so that might not give you what you're after anyway. Kind of like, in concept, to buying a part at a swap meet from a total stranger.

I really think you need to be looking at things other than the repaint issue on the vehicle, with all due respect. Use this experience as a learning tool for the future. Get the vehicle as nice as it can be, running as well as it can, drive it, and enjoy it. Then, hopefully, you've increased the value enough that you can sell it and get something that you can personally inspect prior to purchase. Who knows, you might like this Black Buick more than you suspected and want to keep it?

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Pete Phillips]

I would at least send the seller an email telling them that you are disgusted with their inaccurate description of the car, and you can also give them some negative feedback on Ebay. Yes, sometimes it is impossible to tell if a car has its original paint or not, but as you say in this case, it sounds like it is pretty obvious.

I've been on the other side of that fence, though. I sold a 1974 Mercedes 240-D on Ebay in January. The buyer asked if there was any floor rust on the car. I had never seen any rust on the car (Texas car since new).There was no rust on the outside body, so I pulled up the carpets and gave a quick look at the floor, which was completely solid and fine under the carpets. Keep in mind, this was a $1700 sale, and the buyer did not come see the car in person. When the car arrived at the buyer's home up north, he e-mailed me a couple weeks later and demanded $300 from me, to repair some rust that he had found underneath the back seat cushion. I had never thought to pull that up and look at it, and on a $1700 car, I felt it wasn't worth spending a long time going over the car with a fine-toothed comb--you expect some flaws in a $1700 car--at least, I do. Nevertheless, this guy threatened to blackmail me with a bad ebay feedback, if I didn't send him $300. So, I sent him a check for that amount, but couldn't help feeling that I had been taken advantage of somewhat. I'm sure he felt the same way, but my point is, sometimes the flaws in a car are very hard to spot, even on the part of the seller.

Pete Phillips

Sherman, TX

[Guest brh]

Bummer, I almost got nailed many years ago on an "all original" car myself. 1966 Buick Skylark Convert. Went to go look at it and it was parked in a body shop red flag number 1. Opened the hood and the engine was perfectly detailed, maybe red flag number 2 or the guy just wants the car to bring a good buck. Pulled it out in the light, nice and straight, but the color did not look like the right shade. Took it for a ride, acted like low mile original. Started poking around cause it did not look like the right shade of red for 66, pushed one of the rubber stops aside--bingo!! There was the correct color. When I confronted the owner, he did a lot of back pedaling. Took a pass on the car. But for a 9500 dollar car back in 1986, my thought was it had better be original. Last car I took a look at ya could put your finger through the frame--needless to say I don't buy until I see. Ya just hate to hear people getting burned, hope you enjoy the car.

[63Electra]

Here it is. I should have posted a pic last night.

The Rally Wheels were acceptable to Me Because I still have my grandma's Hubcaps

I plan on putting them On Ebay soon. they are in good shape.

I plan on keeping it my grandma had one when her and my grandpa first moved to California, so I plan on keeping it, Hers looked champagne pinkish in the picture I have seen but It could be the photo technology from the 60's. My grandpa never liked driving it because it was a woman's color and the minimal headroom for a car of the size made him feel cramped.

Since It Isn't original, did Buick Ever Make Two Tone 63' Electras?

[Guest Tom]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Since It Isn't original, did Buick Ever Make Two Tone 63' Electras? </div></div>

Yes, Electra's were available in two-tone where the roof was a different color than the rest of the car. According to the '63 Buick color brochure, a black body could have been combined with a different color roof in either arctic white, silver, desert sand, (beige), fawn mist (tan metallic) or bronze mist.

[Guest BJM]

That Champagne color was a GM color during that time frame for sure. One of our members from St. Louis that has since passed away Hank Deglman, had a 62 Electra convertible in that rose/mauve/champagne color and most agreed it was a nice paint color.

[Guest brh]

Know you are not happy with your experience getting the car but gotta tell ya its one nice looking 225!