Flood-damaged cars being sold?

Excerpts from [url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112870560978162920.html[/url]

Some 570,000 vehicles were damaged during the two hurricanes. There's
a risk that many could be retitled and then resold to unknowing buyers
all around the country.

The problem of "title washing" - retitling vehicles to remove the red
flags or "brands" that indicate the car or truck has been damaged in a
collision or a natural disaster - isn't new. For instance, it's
possible to move a car that has been totaled - and had that fact
marked on the title - into another state and obtain a new, clean
title. The vehicle can then be resold or run through an auction, where
a car dealer could buy it for sale on the used-car lot.

Compounding the problem is that states don't have uniform definitions
of terms used to flag the kind of damage done to vehicles, and they
don't have consistent practices when it comes to providing title
information to vendors that sell title information to dealers and
consumers. The lag time between when a title is recorded or revised
and when that information becomes available can be as much as two
months.

Insurance companies should be required to make the
vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles that are totaled available
to the public.

The NADA has tried and failed to get tougher anti-title-washing
legislation at the national level. Some state motor vehicle agencies
aren't necessarily in favor of giving away valuable data or making
investments in data systems to provide real-time access just so a
for-profit vendor like CarFax can make more money. The vehicle-repair
industry isn't necessarily in favor of titling rules that would make
it impossible to resell a rebuilt car.

In the aftermath of the Katrina tragedy, consumers should beware. The
NADA, the National Insurance Crime Board and car makers are trying to
make it harder for hurricane-damaged vehicles to find their way into
consumer's driveways. Car makers are killing the
vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
which should make it impossible to retitle those cars. The NICB has
said it is cataloging flood-damaged vehicles to create registry of
cars and trucks that shouldn't be resold.

The NADA has posted a 10-point checklist of red flags that can alert
consumers that a vehicle could be a flood-damaged car in disguise.
Among the clues: rust on screws in the interior; grit or mud under the
hood, in the alternator or in other crevices; faded upholstery; and
water stains under the carpeting.

Checking a vehicle's title history could turn up that it was recently
registered in one of the states hit by the hurricanes, even if the
title doesn't explicitly say it was damaged.

NADA Checklist -

[url]http://www.nada.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Newsroom/News_Releases/2005/flood_damage_9-14-2005.htm[/url]

In article <squjk198244f0nt4mf6viockb4k7cahoja@4ax.com>, Steve
<mhyt@fpoh.inv> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Excerpts from [url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112870560978162920.html[/url][/color]
[color=blue]
> ...Car makers are killing the
> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.[/color]

This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.

Thank you for posting, Steve.

Brent

>> ...Car makers are killing the[color=blue][color=green]
>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.[/color]
>
> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.[/color]

The wise thing to do when buying a used car is to have it inspected by a
reputable mechanic.
But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it has
been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:19:29 +0000, Bassplayer12 wrote:
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> ...Car makers are killing the
>>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.[/color]
>>
>> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
>> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
>> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
>> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.[/color]
>
> The wise thing to do when buying a used car is to have it inspected by a
> reputable mechanic.
> But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it has
> been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?[/color]


We sold cars from the floods in Pennsylvania. The only real trouble we had
was, one person tried to start the car before checking the fluid levels
and broke the engine.

Other than that (and luckily we had a LONG stretch of hot, sunny days!) we
took out the interior, opened the doors and trunk, cleaned it and dried it
well and put in a new engine. The car ran great. Course, it took almost a
whole week to check it out, because we had to open everything and check it
out.

Like anything else, once it dried out, it was OK. We sold it AS A FLOODER
for about 20% under book. Actually, the new owner lucked out; the only
engine we had that was correct had 32,000 miles, into a 76,000 mile car!

We also had a BMW 740i that we bought for one of the boss' buds. Same
thing, we dried it out and cleaned it well, but this one had starting
problems and he sent it to the BMW dealer. Last I saw, it was running
fine. It needed a new radio (hah! Radio! This was like a computer operated
Entertainment system!). Still, he wound up getting a $40,000 car for about
$22,000.

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:45:32 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> graced
this newsgroup with:
[color=blue]
>On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:19:29 +0000, Bassplayer12 wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> ...Car makers are killing the
>>>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>>>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.
>>>
>>> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
>>> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
>>> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
>>> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.[/color]
>>
>> The wise thing to do when buying a used car is to have it inspected by a
>> reputable mechanic.
>> But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it has
>> been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?[/color]
>
>
>We sold cars from the floods in Pennsylvania. The only real trouble we had
>was, one person tried to start the car before checking the fluid levels
>and broke the engine.
>
>Other than that (and luckily we had a LONG stretch of hot, sunny days!) we
>took out the interior, opened the doors and trunk, cleaned it and dried it
>well and put in a new engine. The car ran great. Course, it took almost a
>whole week to check it out, because we had to open everything and check it
>out.
>
>Like anything else, once it dried out, it was OK. We sold it AS A FLOODER
>for about 20% under book. Actually, the new owner lucked out; the only
>engine we had that was correct had 32,000 miles, into a 76,000 mile car!
>
>We also had a BMW 740i that we bought for one of the boss' buds. Same
>thing, we dried it out and cleaned it well, but this one had starting
>problems and he sent it to the BMW dealer. Last I saw, it was running
>fine. It needed a new radio (hah! Radio! This was like a computer operated
>Entertainment system!). Still, he wound up getting a $40,000 car for about
>$22,000.[/color]


flood damaged vehicles are retitled as "Salvage" and as such carry no
warranty's of *any* kind. Additionally, many states will NOT let you
retitle the vehicle, even after inspection.

Just "drying it out" isn't going to solve a lot of problems with
flooded vehicles. One of which is hidden rust in the frame which can
seriously damage the integrity of the cars crumple zones.
Additionally, any materials such as seats, cushions, carpeting,
insulation and headliner need to be completely replaced or mold can
set in. Also, since a flooded vehicle can have all kinds of
(polluted) water it was subjected to, including chemicals, salt and in
the case of New Orleans, rotting bodies, you're really gambling that
you won't have any serious health related issues later on.

Personally, I wouldn't touch a flood damaged car. You have no idea
what kind of problems, both in functionality and safety you'll end up
having...and whatever you *think* you've saved upfront could end up
costing you TONs of money on the backend to repair/replace.

I can't believe the people with little or no conscience that just
think ripping out the carpeting, replacing the engine and hoping for
a "lot of sunny days" to dry out the body rot will make it as safe
as a non-flood damaged car.

"Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
[color=blue]
>But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it has
>been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?[/color]

Certainly. Rust & water stains in the trunk. Debris in the vent system. You just
have to look...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:12:53 -0400, [email]HarleyVa@nospam.com[/email] wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:45:32 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> graced
> this newsgroup with:
>[color=green]
>>On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:19:29 +0000, Bassplayer12 wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>> ...Car makers are killing the
>>>>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>>>>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.
>>>>
>>>> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
>>>> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
>>>> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
>>>> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.
>>>
>>> The wise thing to do when buying a used car is to have it inspected by a
>>> reputable mechanic.
>>> But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it has
>>> been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?[/color]
>>
>>
>>We sold cars from the floods in Pennsylvania. The only real trouble we had
>>was, one person tried to start the car before checking the fluid levels
>>and broke the engine.
>>
>>Other than that (and luckily we had a LONG stretch of hot, sunny days!) we
>>took out the interior, opened the doors and trunk, cleaned it and dried it
>>well and put in a new engine. The car ran great. Course, it took almost a
>>whole week to check it out, because we had to open everything and check it
>>out.
>>
>>Like anything else, once it dried out, it was OK. We sold it AS A FLOODER
>>for about 20% under book. Actually, the new owner lucked out; the only
>>engine we had that was correct had 32,000 miles, into a 76,000 mile car!
>>
>>We also had a BMW 740i that we bought for one of the boss' buds. Same
>>thing, we dried it out and cleaned it well, but this one had starting
>>problems and he sent it to the BMW dealer. Last I saw, it was running
>>fine. It needed a new radio (hah! Radio! This was like a computer operated
>>Entertainment system!). Still, he wound up getting a $40,000 car for about
>>$22,000.[/color]
>
>
> flood damaged vehicles are retitled as "Salvage" and as such carry no
> warranty's of *any* kind. Additionally, many states will NOT let you
> retitle the vehicle, even after inspection.
>
> Just "drying it out" isn't going to solve a lot of problems with
> flooded vehicles. One of which is hidden rust in the frame which can
> seriously damage the integrity of the cars crumple zones.
> Additionally, any materials such as seats, cushions, carpeting,
> insulation and headliner need to be completely replaced or mold can
> set in. Also, since a flooded vehicle can have all kinds of
> (polluted) water it was subjected to, including chemicals, salt and in
> the case of New Orleans, rotting bodies, you're really gambling that
> you won't have any serious health related issues later on.
>
> Personally, I wouldn't touch a flood damaged car. You have no idea
> what kind of problems, both in functionality and safety you'll end up
> having...and whatever you *think* you've saved upfront could end up
> costing you TONs of money on the backend to repair/replace.
>
> I can't believe the people with little or no conscience that just
> think ripping out the carpeting, replacing the engine and hoping for
> a "lot of sunny days" to dry out the body rot will make it as safe
> as a non-flood damaged car.[/color]

I can. This car came with a 60 day warranty and we had a policy of buy
back in the event the customer was not happy with the car. i explained
the salvage title and the flood damage. I have a perfectly fine conscious,
and fully informed the buyer of the condition of the car and what we did
to it.

The water was below sides of the car, the headliner and seats were
untouched. The carpet was wet.

Hidden rust in the frame? Guess you don't drive your car in the rain, eh?
The damage from a flood, if handled PROPERLY is NO WORSE than driving in a
bad rain storm. We didn't just clean the thing up and put it on the lot,
we gave it a thorough going over and roadworthiness check. We went to
drain the rocker panels, but there wasn't any water in them; they were
dry, so we shot some oil in there.

You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
talking to.

"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.10.10.14.43.31.372453@ae86.gts...[color=blue]
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:12:53 -0400, [email]HarleyVa@nospam.com[/email] wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:45:32 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> graced
>> this newsgroup with:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:19:29 +0000, Bassplayer12 wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> ...Car makers are killing the
>>>>>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>>>>>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
>>>>> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
>>>>> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
>>>>> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.
>>>>
>>>> The wise thing to do when buying a used car is to have it inspected by
>>>> a
>>>> reputable mechanic.
>>>> But I wonder if a flood damage vehicule shows any signs of it? If it
>>>> has
>>>> been well cleaned, is there a way to tell?
>>>
>>>
>>>We sold cars from the floods in Pennsylvania. The only real trouble we
>>>had
>>>was, one person tried to start the car before checking the fluid levels
>>>and broke the engine.
>>>
>>>Other than that (and luckily we had a LONG stretch of hot, sunny days!)
>>>we
>>>took out the interior, opened the doors and trunk, cleaned it and dried
>>>it
>>>well and put in a new engine. The car ran great. Course, it took almost a
>>>whole week to check it out, because we had to open everything and check
>>>it
>>>out.
>>>
>>>Like anything else, once it dried out, it was OK. We sold it AS A FLOODER
>>>for about 20% under book. Actually, the new owner lucked out; the only
>>>engine we had that was correct had 32,000 miles, into a 76,000 mile car!
>>>
>>>We also had a BMW 740i that we bought for one of the boss' buds. Same
>>>thing, we dried it out and cleaned it well, but this one had starting
>>>problems and he sent it to the BMW dealer. Last I saw, it was running
>>>fine. It needed a new radio (hah! Radio! This was like a computer
>>>operated
>>>Entertainment system!). Still, he wound up getting a $40,000 car for
>>>about
>>>$22,000.[/color]
>>
>>
>> flood damaged vehicles are retitled as "Salvage" and as such carry no
>> warranty's of *any* kind. Additionally, many states will NOT let you
>> retitle the vehicle, even after inspection.
>>
>> Just "drying it out" isn't going to solve a lot of problems with
>> flooded vehicles. One of which is hidden rust in the frame which can
>> seriously damage the integrity of the cars crumple zones.
>> Additionally, any materials such as seats, cushions, carpeting,
>> insulation and headliner need to be completely replaced or mold can
>> set in. Also, since a flooded vehicle can have all kinds of
>> (polluted) water it was subjected to, including chemicals, salt and in
>> the case of New Orleans, rotting bodies, you're really gambling that
>> you won't have any serious health related issues later on.
>>
>> Personally, I wouldn't touch a flood damaged car. You have no idea
>> what kind of problems, both in functionality and safety you'll end up
>> having...and whatever you *think* you've saved upfront could end up
>> costing you TONs of money on the backend to repair/replace.
>>
>> I can't believe the people with little or no conscience that just
>> think ripping out the carpeting, replacing the engine and hoping for
>> a "lot of sunny days" to dry out the body rot will make it as safe
>> as a non-flood damaged car.[/color]
>
> I can. This car came with a 60 day warranty and we had a policy of buy
> back in the event the customer was not happy with the car. i explained
> the salvage title and the flood damage. I have a perfectly fine conscious,
> and fully informed the buyer of the condition of the car and what we did
> to it.
>
> The water was below sides of the car, the headliner and seats were
> untouched. The carpet was wet.
>
> Hidden rust in the frame? Guess you don't drive your car in the rain, eh?
> The damage from a flood, if handled PROPERLY is NO WORSE than driving in a
> bad rain storm. We didn't just clean the thing up and put it on the lot,
> we gave it a thorough going over and roadworthiness check. We went to
> drain the rocker panels, but there wasn't any water in them; they were
> dry, so we shot some oil in there.
>
> You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
> you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
> talking to.[/color]

For once, a sweeping generalization is accurate.
--

- Philip

The only time a title is branded is when it is totaled by an insurance
company. If the owner does not have comprehensive coverage, as is likely
the case with the majority of older vehicles, the owner can simply clean it
up and sell it.

mike hunt


"Steve" <mhyt@fpoh.inv> wrote in message
news:squjk198244f0nt4mf6viockb4k7cahoja@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> Excerpts from [url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112870560978162920.html[/url]
>
> Some 570,000 vehicles were damaged during the two hurricanes. There's
> a risk that many could be retitled and then resold to unknowing buyers
> all around the country.
>
> The problem of "title washing" - retitling vehicles to remove the red
> flags or "brands" that indicate the car or truck has been damaged in a
> collision or a natural disaster - isn't new. For instance, it's
> possible to move a car that has been totaled - and had that fact
> marked on the title - into another state and obtain a new, clean
> title. The vehicle can then be resold or run through an auction, where
> a car dealer could buy it for sale on the used-car lot.
>
> Compounding the problem is that states don't have uniform definitions
> of terms used to flag the kind of damage done to vehicles, and they
> don't have consistent practices when it comes to providing title
> information to vendors that sell title information to dealers and
> consumers. The lag time between when a title is recorded or revised
> and when that information becomes available can be as much as two
> months.
>
> Insurance companies should be required to make the
> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles that are totaled available
> to the public.
>
> The NADA has tried and failed to get tougher anti-title-washing
> legislation at the national level. Some state motor vehicle agencies
> aren't necessarily in favor of giving away valuable data or making
> investments in data systems to provide real-time access just so a
> for-profit vendor like CarFax can make more money. The vehicle-repair
> industry isn't necessarily in favor of titling rules that would make
> it impossible to resell a rebuilt car.
>
> In the aftermath of the Katrina tragedy, consumers should beware. The
> NADA, the National Insurance Crime Board and car makers are trying to
> make it harder for hurricane-damaged vehicles to find their way into
> consumer's driveways. Car makers are killing the
> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars. The NICB has
> said it is cataloging flood-damaged vehicles to create registry of
> cars and trucks that shouldn't be resold.
>
> The NADA has posted a 10-point checklist of red flags that can alert
> consumers that a vehicle could be a flood-damaged car in disguise.
> Among the clues: rust on screws in the interior; grit or mud under the
> hood, in the alternator or in other crevices; faded upholstery; and
> water stains under the carpeting.
>
> Checking a vehicle's title history could turn up that it was recently
> registered in one of the states hit by the hurricanes, even if the
> title doesn't explicitly say it was damaged.
>
> NADA Checklist -
>
> [url]http://www.nada.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Newsroom/News_Releases/2005/flood_damage_9-14-2005.htm[/url]
>
>[/color]

Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
snip[color=blue]
>
>You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
>you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
>talking to.[/color]

Hachi, he may have been thinking of salt water flooding, in which
case (I'd think) that a modern car'd be toast.

I do know that a radio dropped into salt water (if it's kept in
it) can be saved by copious washing with fresh water...but not
otherwise...also the radio must have been turned off before
flooding.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

I doubt ant dealership has any need to sell off water damaged new vehicles.
Most dealerships carry $500 deductible comprehensive coverage. Insurance
companies must pay replacement cost, which means the dealer will receive
invoice and earn a profit on any flood damaged vehicles even after the
deductible is applied.

mike hunt


"Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:101020050710479679%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...[color=blue]
> In article <squjk198244f0nt4mf6viockb4k7cahoja@4ax.com>, Steve
> <mhyt@fpoh.inv> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Excerpts from [url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112870560978162920.html[/url][/color]
>[color=green]
>> ...Car makers are killing the
>> vehicle-identification numbers of vehicles damaged on dealer lots,
>> which should make it impossible to retitle those cars.[/color]
>
> This is the first moment I've realized that the danger extends to new
> cars too if they're shuffled among ethically challenged dealers. It
> should have been evident, but somehow it wasn't. I guess my sense of
> trusteworthiness dates to a gentler time.
>
> Thank you for posting, Steve.
>
> Brent[/color]

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:11:59 +0000, Gord Beaman wrote:
[color=blue]
> Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
> snip[color=green]
>>
>>You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
>>you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
>>talking to.[/color]
>
> Hachi, he may have been thinking of salt water flooding, in which
> case (I'd think) that a modern car'd be toast.[/color]

Might be.

If you've been watching the news about the Northeast, we got flooded this
weekend. Thankfully, I live on high ground.

Interesting to see what comes up for sale in the next few weeks!
[color=blue]
>
> I do know that a radio dropped into salt water (if it's kept in
> it) can be saved by copious washing with fresh water...but not
> otherwise...also the radio must have been turned off before
> flooding.[/color]

Fzzzzzzzzzt!

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:[color=blue]
>I doubt ant dealership has any need to sell off water damaged new vehicles.
>Most dealerships carry $500 deductible comprehensive coverage.[/color]

Seems kinda surprising that dealers would carry that low a deductible.
Trading dollars with insurance companies is generally not a profitable
enterprise...

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:29:07 GMT, Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> graced
this newsgroup with:

<snip>
[color=blue][color=green]
>> I can't believe the people with little or no conscience that just
>> think ripping out the carpeting, replacing the engine and hoping for
>> a "lot of sunny days" to dry out the body rot will make it as safe
>> as a non-flood damaged car.[/color]
>
>I can. This car came with a 60 day warranty and we had a policy of buy
>back in the event the customer was not happy with the car. i explained
>the salvage title and the flood damage. I have a perfectly fine conscious,
>and fully informed the buyer of the condition of the car and what we did
>to it.[/color]

...60days? That's very fair of you but that doesn't mean something
related to the car's flooded condition still won't crop up months
later. You willing to take the car back a year from now? How about
if the car is involved in an accident and the electrical system
doesn't function properly (e.g. airbags) because of electrical
corrosion or other water related damage?
[color=blue]
>
>The water was below sides of the car, the headliner and seats were
>untouched. The carpet was wet.[/color]

...I don't know if any insurance company that would total a car and
retitle it as salvage for that little water damage. Something ain't
right here....
[color=blue]
>
>Hidden rust in the frame? Guess you don't drive your car in the rain, eh?[/color]

...I do..and if you compare a flood damaged car retitled as salvaged
vehicle as no worse than driving in the rain, I think you've already
answered my question on where your ethics are. Cars are designed to
withstand rain, the exterior components of the vehicle is designed to
resist that type of water exposure. The *interior* components,
including the engine compartment, are not.

[color=blue]
>The damage from a flood, if handled PROPERLY is NO WORSE than driving in a
>bad rain storm.[/color]

....you're kidding right? PLEASE tell me you're kidding. You're
trying to tell me that a car, sitting in standing water over it's roof
suffers no more damage that a "bad rain storm"???

[color=blue]
>We didn't just clean the thing up and put it on the lot,
>we gave it a thorough going over and roadworthiness check. We went to
>drain the rocker panels, but there wasn't any water in them; they were
>dry, so we shot some oil in there.[/color]

...oh.jeez..sorry, I didn't know that the through "going over" included
inspecting the rocket panels. Well then! I guess I give it 5 stars!
It most definately road worthy if the rocker panels are dry.

[color=blue]
>
>You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
>you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
>talking to.[/color]

all kidding aside..

....I never said ALL used car dealers...Just the ones that try and
convince the public that they're getting perfectly safe cars that have
been salvaged as being no more damaged than "being driven in a bad
rain storm". Automobiles titled as "salvage" are auctioned off for
*parts*. They aren't intended to be resold as used cars. I do commend
you that you aren't trying to fool the public into thinking they're
*not* getting a flood damaged vehicle. Too many unscrupulous people
do. Also, I do admit that not ALL vehicles titled as flood damaged
may be damaged at all, but merely grouped in a batch of cars (for
example a new car dealers lot that was flooded), that were declared
total losses for the sake of time for the insurance company. For
example, in New Orleans and in the surrounding area, many dealerships
were under (or partically) under water, and insurance companies just
didn't have the time to inspect every single car on the dealers lot,
so they just declared ALL of the cars totalled when in reality, some
of them may have never suffered any damaged at all. THOSE are good
deals if you can find them, you just have to be absolutely sure what
you're getting.

The important point, IMHO, is that the buyer clearly understands
exactly what they're getting (and not getting for that matter), when
buying a vehicle that's been titled as a flood damaged vehicle.
Remember that any vehicle declared totalled has no manufacturers
warranty, even if its 2 days old with zero miles. Also, many
problems, especially electrical, can show up many many months later
and can have reoccurring problems that can cost the buyer thousands of
dollars to fix.

Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:11:59 +0000, Gord Beaman wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Hachiroku <Trueno@ae86.gts> wrote:
>> snip[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>You're absolutely right! Unscrupulous dealers SHOULD be ferreted out. But
>>>you seem to lump ALL used car dealers together without knowing who you're
>>>talking to.[/color]
>>
>> Hachi, he may have been thinking of salt water flooding, in which
>> case (I'd think) that a modern car'd be toast.[/color]
>
>Might be.
>
>If you've been watching the news about the Northeast, we got flooded this
>weekend. Thankfully, I live on high ground.
>
>Interesting to see what comes up for sale in the next few weeks!
>[color=green]
>>
>> I do know that a radio dropped into salt water (if it's kept in
>> it) can be saved by copious washing with fresh water...but not
>> otherwise...also the radio must have been turned off before
>> flooding.[/color]
>
>Fzzzzzzzzzt![/color]

Oh yes! Fzzzzt bigtime...I had a 13 ft speedboat with a 65 HP
Merc engine on it, I had mounted the 12V car battery up under the
bow (for balance). The boat got swamped in a storm and that 12
volt battery absolutely TRASHED the electronics on the engine,
there was an electronic box on it with lots of control circuits
potted inside. It had about a dozen metal studs coming out of the
potting material and about half of those studs had heavy wire
going to them...most of them were burned off flush with the
potting stuff, wrecking the unit, I found wire after wire burned
off all over the damned motor...took me months getting it
repaired and only took about 20 minutes to install a good fuse in
the line to prevent a recurrence... :)
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)