A slow-news day at The Telegraph?
preview.tinyurl.com/o5s3bg
|
A slow-news day at The Telegraph?
Yes, I thought that!
When I was looking for a Landcruiser 18 months or so ago, I found that almost all the 1-year old stock in Toyota showrooms was ex rental. Most had missed their 10,000 mile service and were showing 13,000 or so. Sales people would not be drawn on whether this voided the 3-year warranty.
|
Providing the warranty is ok, what's the problem?
Rental cars will have had lots of different driving styles, meaning that they will have been run in effectively.
|
I have to admit that I was a bit suprised by the main story in today's DT. There's more going in UK and World than a scare about ex-rental cars! I don't think that the source matters but a missed service possibly invalidating the 3 year warranty would be a major concern, to me.
|
|
So what's new!!What's the difference between a company name in the logbook or a hire firm??
|
where do they think ex hire cars go? UFO's come and swallow them all up?
|
Many people end up paying £1,000 over the top - the difference between and ex-rental Focus and a genuine 1 owner car.
I bought an ex Hertz car in 1995 for £8K, 9K miles for my boys to go to Uni.
It was £1200 less than non rental 12 month old car
In 1999 I paid £15K for a 2,000 mile car from a large Scottish chain and was hoodwinked - paid about £2000 over the odds as it was ex-rental. Trading Stds were useless and SMTA could not find against their largest member - not bought from them ever again!
|
|
it's just a reminder about the lack of honesty and integrity rife in that industry...many of those in the game think it's a quaint idea that anyone should be 'up front' and straightforward when professionally selling a car....whereas may of those buying them sincerely wish there was such a system and deeply resent the notion 'too bad, you should have done more of your homework' is the only real response you'd get when/if you complained about it
|
Yep, deliberately misleading the buyer is the problem.
And by the way, it can be hard to find good stories for Monday's morning papers because many of the usual sources - courts, councils, Houses of Parliament, 'official' bodies of many types - rarely work on Sunday.
|
|
It's a company name in the logbook NOT a private owner.
|
|
|
2 years ago I thought of a Mondeo Estate.
A local Ford Emporium had lots but my first condition was not to be ex-rental.
Salesman - "we do not know where our cars come from" - lies as AVIS/Hertz was the source of most cars.
I had no more questions as I had established they were liars and left.
Motorpoint admitted they had lots of ex-rentals but I bought brand new from them.
|
I used to use a main dealer that was 150 miles away from where I live, (popped in there one day when visting my father), liked the salesman's 'way' and once i'd built a rapport with him, kept using him and did so for nearly 7 years. When it became time to change my car, I'd ring him with my criteria.. and trusted him to get it right. Trust went the other way, because if he had to trailer a car a 100 miles to his dealership because i'd said i'd have it on the phone, subject to me looking all over it, he didn't want me to become all 'unnecessary'.
The last one I bought, when the log book came through, had Avis as the previous owner. Car was fine, kept it 2 years, never had a problem. I take on board all the comments about the varied running in a rental car has...but....that's not the issue. He should have told me. It was underhand...and ruined the customer/salesman relationship. Never went there again.
It's the difference between grab a quick sale now and not care whether they come back or look after and nurture the customer so they'll become loyal and keep coming back through the door. I genuinely don't undertsand why option 2 isn't more common, big companies in other fields do it nowadays...and make a fortune...e.g. Amazon, First Direct, John Lewis etc.
Edited by Westpig on 14/09/2009 at 12:22
|
|
I bought a Ford Direct Mondeo estate some years ago. Six months old with 6000 miles. It was ex-Hertz. Cheap too. It went on to do 128 thousand miles before I sold it with only routine servicing and maintenance. It was a good car. Wouldn't hesitate to buy one like it again if it fitted my criteria at the time. My current car, a similar model, had been privately owned before I had it. It has proven equally reliable . Can't say I could identify any difference really.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had an exrental Uno that came from Jersey, great car, ran like a swiss watch, had it 7 years. Also had an ex-company Mondeo another great reliable motor. Knew the ownership history of both. Few months ago bought a Sedona, rejected it for repair problems, the kicker was when the V5 arrived it was ex-hire. Salesman reassured me it was a KIA management car. Just a downright barefaced lie. Refused refund, after a loy of legal wrangling, managed to convert money into new Octavia. Steep learning curve for me, I can only think I got carried away with the "buying experience". Next car will NOT come from this dealership, and paperwork will be microscopically examined, O and i bought a paint depth guage. What also threw me was the salesman was an ex work colleague so there was a level of trust there, which made me drop my guard a bit. Problem with ex hire is the mileage/warranty issues as mentioned, misfueling, and driver abuse, so yes they should have an element to cover for this in the price, as opposed to well looked after private.
|
I've had an exrental Uno that came from Jersey great car ran like a swiss watch had it 7 years.
When I was selling Fords just after I left school in 1992, we would occasionally get batches of ex-rental mkIII Fiestas from Jersey. All around a year old with anything between 3,000 and 6,000 miles on the clock, all 1.3LX manuals in various metallics. They were in most cases in 'as new' condition once they'd been valeted.
Jersey's blanket 40 mph speed limit meant they were unlikely to have been raced, and this was borne out by engines and gearboxes that often felt as tight as the brand new examples we'd drive from the compound. No attempt was made to hide their origins - they sat on the forecourt wearing their J plates (we re-registered them as part of the sale process) and priced at good 30% saving over new list. They were unbelievably popular, and we could sell them as fast as we could lay our hands on them. In fact, we had customers leaving details with us for when we got more in. One batch of ten had five pre-sold when they arrived.
I don't recall any ever coming back with problems, and I don't ever recall driving one that didn't look and feel like a brand new car.
|
|
|
Both of the nearly new cars that I have bought have been "ex-management" - I.e. ex-rental. I've had no problems with either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merely another reminder of the dodgy horse-trading origins of much of the motor trade.
|
>>I bought a Ford Direct Mondeo estate some years ago. Six months old with 6000 miles. It was ex-Hertz. Cheap too
Ex Rental is OK if it is cheaper - it is not necessarily a bad car but it is not a pristine low mileage truly one owner car.
|
Ex-rentals can be very good. Despite the possible downside of many different drivers the upside can be that it has been kept clean, valeted regularly and had its fluids and tyres checked often and appropriately. Some private cars do not get treated as carefully.
The one I bought was immaculate. Maybe I was just lucky of course.
|
The one I bought was immaculate. Maybe I was just lucky of course. >>
Nope. Par for the course.
Now that the secret is out due to the Telegraph, and if the OFT forces all 2nd hand cars to have their source declared, will it mean:
1. price of nearly-new non-ex-rental cars goes up
2. price of nearly-new ex-rental goes down
|
|
|
>Rental cars will have had lots of different driving styles, meaning that they will have been run in effectively. <
Well, you can believe that if you want.
It's a bit like saying the car has had 200 caring owners - or hoping it has...
Edited by mike hannon on 14/09/2009 at 13:17
|
>Rental cars will have had lots of different driving styles meaning that they will have been run in effectively. < Well you can believe that if you want. It's a bit like saying the car has had 200 caring owners - or hoping it has...
Nope - experience on here, and my own, proves that this is the case. Nothing wrong with an ex rental car. The one we bough has even been out the country to europe (I found the letter of authority in the handbook) That car, one of those terrible renault things that are always breaking down, went on to do 47k faultless miles before we sold it. Its still doing stirling service.
|
Nope - experience on here and my own proves that this is the case. Nothing wrong with an ex rental car.
Well our experience was different. An awful car and had a major problem which meant we had a courtesy car, too small and thirsty, for weeks until it was sorted out. This on a car only a few months old. Didn't keep it a year in the end.
|
|
|
|
We have had 2 used cars that could have been rental. I say "could" because I did not ask, Corsa had been owned by he Vauxhall dealer for just over 12 months.
A Sierra thet never missed a beat in 5 years.
A Corsa that was similarly faultless for four years.
What is the big deal UNLESS the buyer asks if it was ex-rental and was TOLD that it was not.
Judge a car on condition.
|
|
|
Are ex-rentals cheaper?
Is the reason they (ex-rentals) are cheaper because they were originally bought in huge numbers cheaply from the manufacturers so, therefore, they can be turned over (re-sold) again at 9 months old cheaper by passing on some of the original factory volume discount?
I, for one, wouldnt pay a premium AT ALL for a 1 year old 1 private owner car as compared to an ex-rental.
Besides, the dealer that took the car in of the private punter probably had to offer him/her a bit more for it after 1 year to take the sting out of the depreciation and to get him in to another shinet new car! LOL!
|
|
|
|
|
