Ducati.org forum banner
21 - 40 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Well done Scotty. You gave the guy a fair chance to come clean and sounds like he didn't. Good to then help potential buyers with a bit of valuable intelligence on the bike.
I know I'd be very appreciative of the extra info if I were looking to buy a valuable bike, car, or something else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Basically, the seller should have declared the bike's history. If the damage was largely cosmetic, but expensive to repair, that might not be a turn off for many buyers because the damage wasn't structural (eg, bent/cracked frame) and it would likely be safe to ride.
If the damage was serious, the seller has a chance to prove the bike was repaired back to a road-worthy standard by an accredited workshop.
Either way, the buyer has the basic right to know the full history to allow them to judge whether the bike is a) safe to ride with no hidden, deadly, surprises; and b) represents fair value.
To me it's that simple.
And Desmos are bloody expensive to repair!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts
I do see where you coming from Wilks but to be fair to the OP, I don't think that he set out to flame the discounted price or the merits of buying a repaired bike, but rather that if you are a buyer, be aware that's it's had a repair of sorts. But I get he could of used better words to make this clear.

Your point is interesting though, if a green frame came up at a discount following a repair job but the bike looked and performed like comparables, would you buy? I would. I think the issue is where it's a newer bike people are concerned, but say an older bike not so much. I'd buy a repaired 888SP4 in top nick at 25% off even if it had been crashed. As long as the repair is good.

Wouldn't others do the same?

Bit like my grandpas old axe with the new handle.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
I do see where you coming from Wilks but to be fair to the OP, I don't think that he set out to flame the discounted price or the merits of buying a repaired bike, but rather that if you are a buyer, be aware that's it's had a repair of sorts. But I get he could of used better words to make this clear.

Your point is interesting though, if a green frame came up at a discount following a repair job but the bike looked and performed like comparables, would you buy? I would. I think the issue is where it's a newer bike people are concerned, but say an older bike not so much. I'd buy a repaired 888SP4 in top nick at 25% off even if it had been crashed. As long as the repair is good.

Wouldn't others do the same?

Bit like my grandpas old axe with the new handle.....
I get where the Op is coming from and that is a good thing . Stat wright off bikes will never hit the road again as the frame has been compromised in some way not the same as a repairable write off .
I was more in question with the title "don't touch it" as I was interested why .
If someone prefers a pampered bike with full history that is fine but if a bike is 20K cheaper than the next bike it's still worth a look IMO .
I got 60K for mine with 1 year warranty left and it was not easy to get had it apart plenty of times and there is nothing complicated with them that can't be fixed and still make it a worth while bike .
I guess we see many bikes out the track being crashed and repaired and to me it's not a thing never seen one unsafe old bikes new bikes really no difference .
It's all good just a difference of opinion and yes the seller should be forth coming with the history when asked .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Scott, did you ever have any intention on purchasing the bike or are you a typical tyre kicker and time waster?

Because we're only hearing your side of the story and not the sellers. He probably picked you from a mile away and gave you nothing, I'd do the same.

I've been in the vehicle repair industry for well over 20 years and I know a thing or two about write off's and insurance companies.

As an example, a BMW workshop quoted a HP4 for an insurance claim and it came in circa 26K as they wanted to replace the frame because of stone chips. Chime in insurer moving the bike to another repairer who struggled to get circa 14k of repairs on the same bike.

There is little doubt the Desmo went to a Ducati dealer and was over quoted as usual coupled with parts delays and price so the simple fix was to write it off. potentially the client was a pedantic pain in the arse not helping his cause.

Now we come to the WOVR. The simple fact, if it's on the WOVR there is NOTHING structurally defective to prevent it from being put back on the road safely. If it's a stat, then it has some further damage but this doesn't guarantee it's unsafe either but authorities play on the cautious side.

Then NSW, everything is a STAT regardless how little damage and is horrifying seeing some bikes being a STAT for cosmetic damage.

I think you're being a bit of a twat about it, not everyone shares the same view as you, so move on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
Scott, did you ever have any intention on purchasing the bike or are you a typical tyre kicker and time waster?

Because we're only hearing your side of the story and not the sellers. He probably picked you from a mile away and gave you nothing, I'd do the same.

I've been in the vehicle repair industry for well over 20 years and I know a thing or two about write off's and insurance companies.

As an example, a BMW workshop quoted a HP4 for an insurance claim and it came in circa 26K as they wanted to replace the frame because of stone chips. Chime in insurer moving the bike to another repairer who struggled to get circa 14k of repairs on the same bike.

There is little doubt the Desmo went to a Ducati dealer and was over quoted as usual coupled with parts delays and price so the simple fix was to write it off. potentially the client was a pedantic pain in the arse not helping his cause.

Now we come to the WOVR. The simple fact, if it's on the WOVR there is NOTHING structurally defective to prevent it from being put back on the road safely. If it's a stat, then it has some further damage but this doesn't guarantee it's unsafe either but authorities play on the cautious side.

Then NSW, everything is a STAT regardless how little damage and is horrifying seeing some bikes being a STAT for cosmetic damage.

I think you're being a bit of a twat about it, not everyone shares the same view as you, so move on.
Stu,

Let me help you out. I am anything but a tyre kicker

I have probably owned more Ducati's than you have had hot dinners, never assume it will make you look a complete ar5e.

I am actively looking for a Desmo however the difference is I am not going to overpay (Just have a look at the difference in prices on Bike Sales to gauge how wide the asking prices are) I also have a personal stance on bikes/cars and anything else declared a write off. Call it life experience

As I already disclosed I emailed the seller and ask pretty specific questions about the history having purchased the Bike History report (Not something tyre kickers normally do) and he failed to be transparent on his answers. Alarm bells start to ring for me at that point.

We can measure the length of our undercarriages when it comes to experience with vehicle write off's, I used to own an Insurance company so any time you want to pull up a sand bag let me know.

Because the seller was less than honest we can't guarantee anything including your misguided comment that "there is little doubt the Desmo went to a Ducati dealer"

It could easily have been the scenario I feared which was that the bike had extensive damage hence the write off decision.

We both know different garages will have wildly different quotes for repair which doesn't help buyers when considering buying write off's.

Surely a reasonable "genuine" seller would have photo's and info related to the repair which he would share to justify and demonstrate the work done?

I love the fact you think I am being a twat about it.

This isn't my first rodeo, I took the stance to "Warn" the forum members about the history of the bike as I would hope others would do for me.

Now if you are the kind of person who thinks it is ok to flog bikes with write off history to unsuspecting members of the public AND fail to disclose the history when asked then my choice to raise the issue is probably the right one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
fucking hell, this went wrong quickly. OP did a stand up job making potential customers aware of a bike that the vendor was unwilling to be truthful about.

Hold on to your panties and I'll tell you exactly what was wrong with it, if it ever saw a Ducati dealer. and if it didn't? I'd never touch it anyway. Report from Ducati coming tomorrow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
fucking hell, this went wrong quickly. OP did a stand up job making potential customers aware of a bike that the vendor was unwilling to be truthful about.

Hold on to your panties and I'll tell you exactly what was wrong with it, if it ever saw a Ducati dealer. and if it didn't? I'd never touch it anyway. Report from Ducati coming tomorrow.
How come ? Some Ducati dealers I would not let change my oil .
These bikes have no warranty so making any sort of claim is not going to be a issue .
I don't think it's a fair way to judge a bike without inspecting it yourself personally . Just saying .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
I stand by my previous comment, you're being a twat.

There is ZERO reason for you to tell people not to touch the bike, sure let us know it's on the WOVR but let the purchaser make the decision on whether they want the stigma of a WOVR status or not.

Once again, you're telling us your side, the seller is no where to be seen to quantify their position on the sale. It's plausible they purchased the bike already repaired and re-registered which would also excuse them from having evidence of previous damage. Where was the bike located and where was it's WOVR status registered?

You owned and insurance company? Well, actually it's not impossible for a small time person to start an insurance company. So how did it work out for you?

By the way, your stance to 'warn' people has gone well and beyond just a warning. You've made every assumption under the sun that there is something 'wrong' with the bike with little more evidence than a return email you weren't content with. It also stands to reason you wanted a bargain, hence why you made the enquiry and then got all upset, high and mighty even though the advertised price let alone the sale price reflects the WOVR status.

You owned an insurance company, tell us the average percentage reduction in value applied to a vehicle on the WOVR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
I stand by my previous comment, you're being a twat.

There is ZERO reason for you to tell people not to touch the bike, sure let us know it's on the WOVR but let the purchaser make the decision on whether they want the stigma of a WOVR status or not.

Once again, you're telling us your side, the seller is no where to be seen to quantify their position on the sale. It's plausible they purchased the bike already repaired and re-registered which would also excuse them from having evidence of previous damage. Where was the bike located and where was it's WOVR status registered?

You owned and insurance company? Well, actually it's not impossible for a small time person to start an insurance company. So how did it work out for you?

By the way, your stance to 'warn' people has gone well and beyond just a warning. You've made every assumption under the sun that there is something 'wrong' with the bike with little more evidence than a return email you weren't content with. It also stands to reason you wanted a bargain, hence why you made the enquiry and then got all upset, high and mighty even though the advertised price let alone the sale price reflects the WOVR status.

You owned an insurance company, tell us the average percentage reduction in value applied to a vehicle on the WOVR.
I love "Keyboard" warriors! Feel free to PM over your mobile number and we can discuss this like "Adults" :jerkoff:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
How come ? Some Ducati dealers I would not let change my oil .
These bikes have no warranty so making any sort of claim is not going to be a issue .
I don't think it's a fair way to judge a bike without inspecting it yourself personally . Just saying .

Ok first I fully understand the part about Ducati dealers, especially in such a large country as yours where the network is sparse and you have so little choice with dealers. I think many Ducati owners, especially outside of Europe simply don't know that the dealer network is actually nothing more than a connected group of private businesses authorised to sell and maintain Ducati products but are not in fact part of the Ducati company. So yeah, I get that comment because not all dealers are created equal.

But in this case I think it's fair to point it that it appears to have been written off twice within the warranty period.



I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of any of this but if i were a potential owner I would want to and I think that if the vendor did not disclose this info freely there is something disingenuous about it. I'd not sell you a five grand bike without telling you if I knew it had been down the road let alone one I was asking ten times that for.

So yeah if this had not been through the Ducati dealer network and documented? I'd not be happy with it, and that Wilks, is as best a way I can answer your 'Why?' question. In these circumstances it all seems odd.

As I say, I'm awaiting the vehicle's history from Ducati for no other reason than it's all starting to get a bit rude over a post I think was a public service.

Is it fair to judge a bike without seeing it? Probably not, but is it fair to make assumptions about a bike when you know that there is pertinent information that the vendor is seemingly and deliberately not disclosing? I'd say so, enough to be suspicious at least. Caveat Emptor as they used to say in Rome.

And here's the kicker for me. If it's so cheap as to be well below market value then any potential buyer who didn't ask "what's wrong with it?" needs his head examined because if you were told 'nothing' and get a shock later at least you have a legal case for being mis-sold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
Ok first I fully understand the part about Ducati dealers, especially in such a large country as yours where the network is sparse and you have so little choice with dealers. I think many Ducati owners, especially outside of Europe simply don't know that the dealer network is actually nothing more than a connected group of private businesses authorised to sell and maintain Ducati products but are not in fact part of the Ducati company. So yeah, I get that comment because not all dealers are created equal.

But in this case I think it's fair to point it that it appears to have been written off twice within the warranty period.



I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of any of this but if i were a potential owner I would want to and I think that if the vendor did not disclose this info freely there is something disingenuous about it. I'd not sell you a five grand bike without telling you if I knew it had been down the road let alone one I was asking ten times that for.

So yeah if this had not been through the Ducati dealer network and documented? I'd not be happy with it, and that Wilks, is as best a way I can answer your 'Why?' question. In these circumstances it all seems odd.

As I say, I'm awaiting the vehicle's history from Ducati for no other reason than it's all starting to get a bit rude over a post I think was a public service.

Is it fair to judge a bike without seeing it? Probably not, but is it fair to make assumptions about a bike when you know that there is pertinent information that the vendor is seemingly and deliberately not disclosing? I'd say so, enough to be suspicious at least. Caveat Emptor as they used to say in Rome.

And here's the kicker for me. If it's so cheap as to be well below market value then any potential buyer who didn't ask "what's wrong with it?" needs his head examined because if you were told 'nothing' and get a shock later at least you have a legal case for being mis-sold.
Zoot,

Thanks for the post, just to point out and to provide balance I don't think it has been written off twice in the Warranty Period.

The way the records are maintained and printed shows 2 entries, one for the initial Write Off and the second about 1 year later (Roughly because I dont have the report in front of me and your pic in your post didn't load for me) is the Inspection for it to be deemed road worthy again.

At first glance it looks like 2 seperate cases but they are in effect the same.

Happy to be a man about it and take the moral high ground:

Should the original post have been titled "Do Not Touch" in hindsight no because it has been taken out of context and that is my opinion.

Do I stand by letting people know of my concerns, absolutely and I would hope others would do the same, of course.

It seems like there is a much more open attitude to confirmed write offs here in Oz (Not what I am used to) and that is a learning point for me.

Regards

ScottyB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,331 Posts
Thanks Scotty. As I said i don't understand it as that report is not in a format i'm familiar with. If you would like me to alter the post I fine with that. Otherwise i'll just add a great big I COULD BE WRONG, I OFTEN AM here :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
Discussion Starter · #37 ·
Thanks Scotty. As I said i don't understand it as that report is not in a format i'm familiar with. If you would like me to alter the post I fine with that. Otherwise i'll just add a great big I COULD BE WRONG, I OFTEN AM here :)
Happy for you to leave as is mate, no apology required. It is an easy mistake to make.

Give my regards to the team at Ducati UK when you next speak to them.

Although they will just think I am some "Small time" person who made up owning an Insurance company on a forum and probably won't remember me...lol ;)

Sorry couldn't resist.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
I love "Keyboard" warriors! Feel free to PM over your mobile number and we can discuss this like "Adults" :jerkoff:
Is that because you've already sent your number to me?

Fark me, any more showboating from you and I will be sick :loser:

If you were as important as you say you are, I probably would have heard of you or you would have been around these woods far longer than me...twat.

Either way, it's probably been purchased and shipped OS for sale at a tidy profit and it's WOVR don't mean shit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Ok first I fully understand the part about Ducati dealers, especially in such a large country as yours where the network is sparse and you have so little choice with dealers. I think many Ducati owners, especially outside of Europe simply don't know that the dealer network is actually nothing more than a connected group of private businesses authorised to sell and maintain Ducati products but are not in fact part of the Ducati company. So yeah, I get that comment because not all dealers are created equal.

But in this case I think it's fair to point it that it appears to have been written off twice within the warranty period.



I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of any of this but if i were a potential owner I would want to and I think that if the vendor did not disclose this info freely there is something disingenuous about it. I'd not sell you a five grand bike without telling you if I knew it had been down the road let alone one I was asking ten times that for.

So yeah if this had not been through the Ducati dealer network and documented? I'd not be happy with it, and that Wilks, is as best a way I can answer your 'Why?' question. In these circumstances it all seems odd.

As I say, I'm awaiting the vehicle's history from Ducati for no other reason than it's all starting to get a bit rude over a post I think was a public service.

Is it fair to judge a bike without seeing it? Probably not, but is it fair to make assumptions about a bike when you know that there is pertinent information that the vendor is seemingly and deliberately not disclosing? I'd say so, enough to be suspicious at least. Caveat Emptor as they used to say in Rome.

And here's the kicker for me. If it's so cheap as to be well below market value then any potential buyer who didn't ask "what's wrong with it?" needs his head examined because if you were told 'nothing' and get a shock later at least you have a legal case for being mis-sold.
I get the point it was getting a bit a bit personal hence the reason i tried to pull it back a little .
Its not my style :)
Scotty if you want a new bike a know of one for sale I will try to hook you up with the owner . Pm me .
Please note not for bargain hunters .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
there are a few here. You kinda have to learn to live with it as it appears to be condoned.
Not condoned it's just a difference of opinion nothing wrong with it .It's a forum ? I don't get that .
Do you actually think that anything in this thread deserves a warning from the admin ? I just don't see it .
I am happy to be lead to it .
 
21 - 40 of 47 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top