Buying 40+ year old RR's is about to become more difficult

[Midland Performance & Retro]

If you treat buying a 40+ year old car the same as treat a 5, 10 or 15 year old car then you’re doing it very wrong. And if you need to rely on MOT history or even use it as a guide for buying a 40+ year old car, then you’re probably not cut out for buying, owning and running classic cars...

[reliantreviver]

So what do you suggest. Travel the length of the country to view each potential purchase?

Hardly viable when there are plenty of 40 year old cars that are only worth a pittance.

The MOT history serves as a pointer if nothing else.

I trust then that you don't even bother to look at it? Are you suggesting the information is of no value?

[Darkspeed]

For me the advisory lists on MOT are a usefull indication of the type of owner(s) that a car has had - i's another tool when making comparisons against a sellers description of a car and comments that have been noted by a third party - Endless lists of warnings about bearings and brakes and corrosion - countered by the description of exellent condition as new etc. does assist when taking a view on a potential purchase. But it's just a tool, and not to be taken as hard facts. Just a a clean bill is no indication of a perfect example.

In the general market a cars value would certainly be enhanced in many eyes if it had a continuing record of optional tests and service records and similarly a car with no evidence of tests and history would be looked at as as lesser. It would seem prudent if you have a valuable car to keep that record intact.

At the end of the day it is, and always has been "buyer beware" - Buying a 40+ car will only be more difficult for those that really did not have much of an idea of what they were looking at or buying in the first place. MOT or not that was always the case and those people were/are always going to get burned.

[rattlecan]

Mar 10, 2018 9:16:43 GMT reliantreviver said:

So what do you suggest. Travel the length of the country to view each potential purchase?

Hardly viable when there are plenty of 40 year old cars that are only worth a pittance.

The MOT history serves as a pointer if nothing else.

I trust then that you don't even bother to look at it? Are you suggesting the information is of no value?

That’s exactly what you had to do a few yrs ago, because it was not available. I have NEVER looked at mot history on any car ever, other than just a look at the certificates once I get to the sellers.

[reliantreviver]

Ah but now the unscrupulous seller can't simply "lose" them.

It's a shame that recent data protection reviews have meant that the MOT station location is no longer visible. Even that information can be of use in building a picture about a vehicle's history.

Mileage discrepancy is one of the main things that crops up from MOT history.

I recall buying an old Reliant Robin from a rough trader type. It was whilst viewing it that I came across a damp folder of history in the back foot well. A quick leaf through the MOTs showed it had been round the clock twice! News to both of us that was.

I suppose there are two main heads to this. Previous MOT history and what that is worth. But also current road worthiness and what bearing a valid MOT has on that.

For the latter I agree there is little replacement for a physical inspection on the day. But the former has such value in so many cases of painting a fuller picture about a vehicle.

[BellyBuilder]

Mar 10, 2018 8:24:15 GMT daslandroverman said:

Mar 8, 2018 19:15:44 GMT strikey said:

easy solution here...you see a 40+ y/o car you want to buy , ask the seller to m.o.t it .... simples!! "exempt" should be re-phrased as "optional"! its not brain science/rocket surgery.

Whilst it varies a little in different states, I believe the Australian system makes some sense here.
Whilst basically 'exempt', vehicles are requiredm to undergo their equivalent of an MOT after a change of ownership before the new owner is permitted to register/use it on the road, with the onus on the driver to keep it up to spec inbetween times.

A requirement like this in the UK system for exempt cars would make some sense, and possibly encourage vendors to have a vehicle tested as an extra 'selling point'.

It would also stop people wheeling vehicles back out onto the road after 20 years parked up with an MOT fail and carrying on regardless.

It doesn't get past the lack of MOT history but at least there's someone keeping an eye on things.

The Aussie system sounds a lot better than what ours will be, so why didn't we adopt that?

Lets just put it this way, there's 2 people who have answered this thread I hope I never end up buying a car from!

[BellyBuilder]

Mar 10, 2018 10:40:46 GMT rattlecan said:

Mar 10, 2018 9:16:43 GMT reliantreviver said:

So what do you suggest. Travel the length of the country to view each potential purchase?

Hardly viable when there are plenty of 40 year old cars that are only worth a pittance.

The MOT history serves as a pointer if nothing else.

I trust then that you don't even bother to look at it? Are you suggesting the information is of no value?

That’s exactly what you had to do a few yrs ago, because it was not available. I have NEVER looked at mot history on any car ever, other than just a look at the certificates once I get to the sellers.

You must either have a lot of time on your hands to go round the country looking at badly described motors thinking they're gold, and/or be the biggest know-it-all in the history of car ownership?!

Next thing you'll be saying you never look at pictures of the car, ask the seller any questions or go for a test drive!

What books on this subject have you got published btw as I'd like to read them?

You buy cars the complete opposite to the way I do.

[ChasR]

Mar 10, 2018 8:44:54 GMT Midland Performance & Retro said:

If you treat buying a 40+ year old car the same as treat a 5, 10 or 15 year old car then you’re doing it very wrong. And if you need to rely on MOT history or even use it as a guide for buying a 40+ year old car, then you’re probably not cut out for buying, owning and running classic cars...

Or not wasting your time. It's a guide but not something set in stone as Darkspeed said IME. To completely ignore seems a little brash going by your advice above.

I've seen some right hashups I've avoided buying thanks to it. I.e someone says "this car won't require much for an MOT", yet a week prior to advertising it the car had a failure list longer than your arm with a good few hundred quid required in parts. If you want to take the chance on such cars before you're "cut out for it" as you so eloquently put it you can be my guest .

What do you use as your yardstick then? It would be interesting to hear this from a garage owner; Or do you travel the country for cars going purely on the seller's word?

[rattlecan]

Mar 10, 2018 11:43:09 GMT BellyBuilder said:

Mar 10, 2018 10:40:46 GMT rattlecan said:

That’s exactly what you had to do a few yrs ago, because it was not available. I have NEVER looked at mot history on any car ever, other than just a look at the certificates once I get to the sellers.

You must either have a lot of time on your hands to go round the country looking at badly described motors thinking they're gold, and/or be the biggest know-it-all in the history of car ownership?!

Next thing you'll be saying you never look at pictures of the car, ask the seller any questions or go for a test drive!

What books on this subject have you got published btw as I'd like to read them?

You buy cars the complete opposite to the way I do.

Wow, talk about dog with a bone. I’m not, as you put it, the biggest know it all in history, but I am a mechanic & have been for 35 yrs, so I don’t need anyone else to tell me what’s good & what’s not. Now I don’t know how many cars you buy, but personally I don’t buy one every week, or month or even year, so I would hardly have to go riding around the country.
I own 4 classics, one bought from a friend in 2001, literally ninety secs from my house, another from twenty miles away in 2006, the third, was probably 150 miles away, but mint low miles in 2008, the forth from KGF classics which I saw on this very forum, which is about an hour from me in 2014.
Now going to see a car, on average once about every 3 yrs or so is hardly a big deal & you can get a very good idea whether it interests you before you go. As I said in my first comment having an mot or lack of will be of little or any issue

[BellyBuilder]

Mar 10, 2018 12:17:41 GMT rattlecan said:

Mar 10, 2018 11:43:09 GMT BellyBuilder said:

You must either have a lot of time on your hands to go round the country looking at badly described motors thinking they're gold, and/or be the biggest know-it-all in the history of car ownership?!

Next thing you'll be saying you never look at pictures of the car, ask the seller any questions or go for a test drive!

What books on this subject have you got published btw as I'd like to read them?

You buy cars the complete opposite to the way I do.

Wow, talk about dog with a bone. I’m not, as you put it, the biggest know it all in history, but I am a mechanic & have been for 35 yrs, so I don’t need anyone else to tell me what’s good & what’s not. Now I don’t know how many cars you buy, but personally I don’t buy one every week, or month or even year, so I would hardly have to go riding around the country.
I own 4 classics, one bought from a friend in 2001, literally ninety secs from my house, another from twenty miles away in 2006, the third, was probably 150 miles away, but mint low miles in 2008, the forth from KGF classics which I saw on this very forum, which is about an hour from me in 2014.
Now going to see a car, on average once about every 3 yrs or so is hardly a big deal & you can get a very good idea whether it interests you before you go. As I said in my first comment having an mot or lack of will be of little or any issue

So you're a mechanic that doesn't buy cars regularly commenting on why others who do buy cars on a regular basis should disregard the MOT history!

How about I tell you what you should be doing mechanic-wise mate? I'm sure that would be a great example of a 'dog with a bone'.

[rattlecan]

Mar 10, 2018 12:38:04 GMT BellyBuilder said:

Mar 10, 2018 12:17:41 GMT rattlecan said:

Wow, talk about dog with a bone. I’m not, as you put it, the biggest know it all in history, but I am a mechanic & have been for 35 yrs, so I don’t need anyone else to tell me what’s good & what’s not. Now I don’t know how many cars you buy, but personally I don’t buy one every week, or month or even year, so I would hardly have to go riding around the country.
I own 4 classics, one bought from a friend in 2001, literally ninety secs from my house, another from twenty miles away in 2006, the third, was probably 150 miles away, but mint low miles in 2008, the forth from KGF classics which I saw on this very forum, which is about an hour from me in 2014.
Now going to see a car, on average once about every 3 yrs or so is hardly a big deal & you can get a very good idea whether it interests you before you go. As I said in my first comment having an mot or lack of will be of little or any issue

So you're a mechanic that doesn't buy cars regularly commenting on why others who do buy cars on a regular basis should disregard the MOT history!

How about I tell you what you should be doing mechanic-wise mate?

[br 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[BellyBuilder]

^ smartest thing you've said on this thread mate.

Anyway, now you're done, back to the subject.

[rattlecan]

Back on subject ‘buying a 40 yr old retro, is about to become more difficult’ ........... as said by many others, no it won’t

[Rob M]

Mar 9, 2018 22:36:11 GMT BellyBuilder said:

Mar 9, 2018 12:24:53 GMT slater said:

Rude? You just don't like the facts

What does MOT history tell you? It had a hole in the sill 3 years ago? It doesn't tell you if the owner wagged it up with newspaper and filler or forked out for a full restoration. It doesnt tell you that it didn't have a hole in the other sill 5 years ago but the owner wagged it up before the test. Its meaningless really there's no substitute for examining a car when you buy it. If your spending big money the owner shouldn't mind you getting it up on the ramps for a good inspection first.. That way you might actually be able to see what condition it's in!

I was thinking more aggressive than rude, but fair enough!

The MOT history tells you quite a lot if you actually read into it. That hole in the sill would be the first thing I'd look at on the car, and how well it's been done would make me look a lot more closely at it.

I'd also ask the owner who fixed the sill and listen for excuses, ask to see the receipt if he had it done 'professionally', watch him breaking out in a sweat etc.

I never said anything about not inspecting a car before I bought it so no idea where that statement of yours came from?

Just out of interest, how many cars have you gone round to inspect and have got them up on ramps? I've never bought a car off anyone with a ramp or access to one!

Who said anything about spending big money either? A lot of assumptions made by yourself there. You've no idea what I buy/have bought and for what £££.

I've been buying cars, driving them, fixing them and selling them for 36 years and I have been doing so because it gives me the right 'orn.
It is, without a doubt, second only to great sex and, probably greater in so much that after ragging the a**e off of your car you do not feel obliged to give it a cuddle afterwards.
All pointless to the thread but the argument and counter argument for and against is now ridiculous.
I have NEVER solely relied on an MOT to verify whether the car I was buying was not a crock of s*** anymore than I would believe every word that the seller was telling me.
I have also been on road trips to pick cars up that I have bought blind, except for the odd pic and chat with the seller, and have bought well, in the main, and also bought bad, in less of a measure.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ALL ABOUT FOR CHRISSAKES!!!!!!!!!
Ive bought turds, I have bought diamonds and I've bought the boring and the exciting and I regret nothing!
The title of this thread 'Buying 40+ year old RR's is about to become more difficult' is the biggest misconception since Clinton told Lewinsky to 'Sack his cook'
The MOT exemption will change nothing for enthusiasts who have been buying for eons, it will change nothing for buyers who pay due dilligence when inspecting a vehicle and it will change nothing for buyers who expect that, at some point in their hobby, they will be blindsided at least once buy a seller who just happens to be a bit smarter on the day. It happens.
The MOT and the ability to delve into a vehicles history is just an indication. Nothing more.
To suggest that it is some kind of litmus test for buyers to go and view with greater confidence is naivety to the point of negligence.
Here is the deal. To most of us nothing will change. To the rest, the MOT exemption will cause frantic checks online, much gnashing of teeth, sweaty palms and sheer panic.
Nobody is being forced to buy MOT exempt cars.
As it has always been, CAVEAT EMPTOR.

[BellyBuilder]

Mar 10, 2018 12:58:32 GMT rattlecan said:

Back on subject ‘buying a 40 yr old retro, is about to become more difficult’ ........... as said by many others, no it won’t

Yes. It's about to possibly become more difficult for those that are actually buying cars. Not those that have bought 4 cars this millenium, some of which have been bought from shiny car garages.

I bought more cars last year than you have this millenium, and I was very thankful for the mot history, even though none of them had an MOT. I'll let you figure that one out (or just give up again and put a row of emojis).

[BellyBuilder]

Anyway, getting back to the thread, this has been a very interesting subject on the psychology of a RR car buyer.

There seem to be 2 camps - one that likes to have the information (and will probably miss it when its gone), and others that don't value it.

I know which one I'm in - you can never have too much information when looking at a car before you even contact the seller.

Best of luck to those buying RR's in the future in either group!

[astranaut]

It is a little bit worrying, I sold my 74 Beetle as it had 2 pages of corrosion related fails, back in 08. It got an MOT in May last year, with 6 advisories for corrosion (that were previous fails) That car to get to half of the rot would have needed a full strip down and resto, so alarm bells would be ringing in my head if after 10 years it got a pass but a load of advisories still. But it's above all about common sense I guess.

[andyborris]

Mar 10, 2018 13:09:12 GMT Rob M said:

Mar 9, 2018 22:36:11 GMT BellyBuilder said:

It is, without a doubt, second only to great sex and, probably greater in so much that after ragging the a**e off of your car you do not feel obliged to give it a cuddle afterwards.

You don't cuddle after "ragging"? You heartless ba**ard!

[BellyBuilder]

^ You're getting me confused with Zeb. No cuddling after ragging is a Norfolk tradition so I understand ;->

[andyborris]

Opps, sorry. Used the quote and deleted a little too much! And that explains why my Brother in Law, who let me drive his air cooled 911 looked at me funny, when I cuddled it after a ragging, he lives in Norfolk!

Or perhaps he just didn't expect me to rag it so hard..... !