POLL Would you buy a Cat D write off?

[Pingu]

I believe the car was less than a year old when it happened. List price £28k minus a years depreciation, so possibly £11k of repairs / car hire etc

That would be one hell of a whack. I'd be checking for structural damage. I struggle to believe a 1yo car would be written off as Cat D unless it was drowned. Even if every panel was keyed, it would be worth repairing.

 

[Stevo7682]

Going by the last few posts I would agree cat d ( which is non structure) would have to have a fair bit of damage done then you would expect a higher written off category.

There is one other explanation why a fairly new car would be given a cat d.

If it was a stolen / recovered.

A lot of stolen/ recovered vehicles get written off by insurance companies even if only minor damage to the likes of door and ignition locks.
Main reasons are that it can be costly to replace locks / keys etc due to transponders for immobiliser etc also insurance companies don't want future come back for unseen damage ( to the likes of engine, clutch drive train etc ) after being driven like a hooligan by some yobo.
Or the insurance company had paid out for it being nicked and then it re surfaces so insurance gives it cat d and sells it on.

Stephen.

 

[mrscalex]

Repair costs aren't the only consideration though. The insurance company looks at all costs. Eg recovery from Scotland to Kent £500. Hire car for 8 weeks at £400 a week for equivalent car £3,200.

And they will have their eye on the salvage value of the car that could have been sky high at that time.

 

[mrscalex]

If it was a stolen/recovered Cat D/N then nowadays at least it will be on the vehicle check.

I'd strongly recommend running it through eg mycarcheck.com and ensuring it is a Cat D, when it was made a Cat D and whether it shows the stolen marker. I wouldn't ever trust if it was just the seller telling me the info. I run any car I buy or I'm thinking of buying through mycarcheck.com anyway.

 

[mrscalex]

And add another non-repair cost. Storage costs possibly.

 

[Stevo7682]

Yes would agree on the check as I know Lynne's is Cat d and why
But it does not show on the log book
Here is the government censored version

About 12yrs ago we owned a seat alhambra it got hit on the nearside damaged doors write off cat d because of high mileage i bought it back new doors ,vic check ( no longer required) and new mot and that was it back on the road legally less than 2 weeks after accident but my logbook was returned with a bit at the bottom that said it was a write off and when I got the vic check done .

 

[SYMZ3]

If a Z3 had Cat D (now known as Cat N) damage in the last let's say 10 years it could be from as little as someone breaking wind on the bonnet. That's almost not an exaggeration.

If a car has Cat D damage in the first say 3 years of it's life then it suggests something rather more extensive and expensive.

2 important things to remember:

• Cat D is non-structural and doesn't even need to relate to an accident. It could have been keyed extensively for instance requiring a full £3-5k respray
• Cat D is a financial convenience for the insurance company. They will write a car off that needs £500 of repairs if it's cheaper for them to do it once they account for processing overheads like staff time and hire cars.

But in no situation would I ever consider a Cat D to be a scrapper based on physical concern that it could never be repaired satisfactorily. The key things is to make sure it's been repaired properly.

Even Cat C doesn't have to be a scrapper (and often isn't on newer cars). And sometimes there are thin margins between Cat C and Cat D. I have a Cat C Z3 I rebuilt myself (no alignment jigs required) which should have been a Cat D as there was no structural damage. Cat A and Cat B are the only Cats that are definitely, always scrappers.

I bought a repaired Cat D Peugeot 2008 for my daughter. It allowed me to buy a lovely car that there was no way she would have had otherwise - no way would I have put her in a car that was unsafe. It needed a new headlight, a front end respray and a new stub axle/suspension for good measure where it would have hit a kerb. It went on the 4-wheel opti-line after I bought it and all perfect. However being a newer car I wouldn't have bought it unless I could satisfy myself of the damage originally done. In this case I knew from a combination of the seller and reading the repair.

One other thing to bear in mind. A 1 year old car be absolutely crumpled all round but not written off because it's viable for the insurance company to fund a repair. That's exactly what happened to my brother's from new Z3 in a motorway shunt. It was repaired to an exceptionally high standard and no record exists of what happened on the car's history.

Back to your friend's possible purchase. A 3.0 Sport Cat D'd at 1 year old would have suffered some wide-spread/extensive (not the same as serious) damage to be written off. Does that make it a bad car - no way if it was done properly. Does it matter anymore on an 18 year old car. For Cat D I'd say probably not. In fact there is a risk of getting hung up on this when there are more important things to check out. The big factor for me would be price. Cat D doesn't reduce value as much as Cat C does. I'd expect to pay 75-80% of normal value. My bottom line - it's a brilliant way to pick up a cheap older car. Or a cheap newer car if you can satisfy yourself it was all repaired properly. But make sure you pay the right price. And make sure you never pour a ton of money into a Cat D (or even more so Cat C) as you'll never see it back again like you might a non Cat'd car.

however, how many people would buy that car? That’s the issue...

 

[mrscalex]

however, how many people would buy that car? That’s the issue...

Buy what car? I'd genuinely buy any repaired Cat C or Cat D if a) it was repaired correctly and b) it represented the best value for money compared to non Cat. I'm very happy if other people are turned off the idea as it means more choice for me! I'm just trying to explain how the system works rather than convince anyone. It's not for everyone that's for sure.

 

[mrscalex]

Yes would agree on the check as I know Lynne's is Cat d and why
But it does not show on the log book
Here is the government censored version

View attachment 142717
About 12yrs ago we owned a seat alhambra it got hit on the nearside damaged doors write off cat d because of high mileage i bought it back new doors ,vic check ( no longer required) and new mot and that was it back on the road legally less than 2 weeks after accident but my logbook was returned with a bit at the bottom that said it was a write off and when I got the vic check done .

Correct. Only Cat status shown on V5 and when it happened - the Write-off line below. Vehicle check required to get the stolen info - the Stolen line below. Here's the relevant section from mycarcheck.com.

 

[Eddie Zedder]

HPI check has been carried out, just shows the Cat D in 2003 (not a mention of it on the V5) and that it is currently SORN, which my friend was unaware of when he test drove it .

 

[mrscalex]

HPI check has been carried out, just shows the Cat D in 2003 (not a mention of it on the V5) and that it is currently SORN, which my friend was unaware of when he test drove it .

DVLA data/approach changes. It may be that they didn’t record stolen on the check data then or maybe it just wasn’t. It might be if the previous owner has had it 10 years they didn’t show it on the V5 then.

 

[ktnez99]

Quick q: if bought, is the insurance thereafter hiked up by insurance companies?

 

[mrscalex]

Quick q: if bought, is the insurance thereafter hiked up by insurance companies?

Strangely - no.

 

[Toby]

Quick q: if bought, is the insurance thereafter hiked up by insurance companies?

No they don't, however if you have a further accident that writes it off, they don't pay market value.
Also, if after a CAT insurance claim, the car is exported, then imported the CAT marker is removed.
Something that often goes on to beat the system.

 

[137699]

I have owned many Cat D (now N) in my time and in fact have one in the fleet at the moment.
You have to accept they are worth less when you come to sell them, so therefore pay less when you buy it.

But if it's passed 17 MOTs since the damage (and CAT D is only cosmetic damage anyway) then it's really not a risk at all.

 

[Joss]

Yes - and throw one of those Cobra body kits on it

 

[mrscalex]

Yes - and throw one of those Cobra body kits on it

Don't forget you will spend the same on doing the conversion but the car will likely not be worth what a non-Cat is. Cats need care taken in putting money into them unless you plan to keep them for ever or at least a very long time.

 

[MalcQV]

I have owned many Cat D (now N) in my time and in fact have one in the fleet at the moment.
You have to accept they are worth less when you come to sell them, so therefore pay less when you buy it.

But if it's passed 17 MOTs since the damage (and CAT D is only cosmetic damage anyway) then it's really not a risk at all.

This,
I have had an Alfa GT that was CAT D as my daily. I have a pal that has had two Ferrari F355's (amongst other Ferraris) and both CAT C's. After my mate had brought them both to concourse condition they were better than when they left Maranello. He still has one (Spider) but he sold the first for 3x the value he bought it.

Thing is just like any other car you check the history and maintenance, if you need to get a professional inspection however this one has it seems passed several MOT's since. I would buy it if the price is right.

 

[Cyruskint]

My car (2002) had a similar "write-off" in 2009. The bills say it had a new front bumper and presumably ancilliary trim, but it then continued to change owners until I got it. I cannot tell how good the original repair was as the bumper it came had a left to right gash in the centre, cunningly hidden by the number plate (certainly changed by the cunning but not-quite-so-honest owner).
I don't regret buying it (it was a reasonable price - and the record of it's 2009 repairs wouldn't have informed me of the damage to the bumper anyway). I have some work to do on it, but my local independant BMW specialist feels it's nothing too heavy.
BTW I bought it 2 years ago and have covered about 5K miles. Only issues have been a yaw sensor and another failed sensor (just a fgew weeks ago) that kept setting the alarm off every time I unlocked the car. Both now fairly cheaply fixed.

 

[Pingu]

This,
I have had an Alfa GT that was CAT D as my daily. I have a pal that has had two Ferrari F355's (amongst other Ferraris) and both CAT C's. After my mate had brought them both to concourse condition they were better than when they left Maranello. He still has one (Spider) but he sold the first for 3x the value he bought it.

Thing is just like any other car you check the history and maintenance, if you need to get a professional inspection however this one has it seems passed several MOT's since. I would buy it if the price is right.

I would imagine that there are lots of high value cars that are Cat Ds and many Cat Cs. It doesn't take much to write-off a Fezza. There's a guy on PH who is very open about his collection and lent his car to a mate who had a slight bump (and it was slight) and it cost >£300k to repair.