Quote:
Originally Posted by tooloud10
I agree with most of that, just not the part where the CPO process shouldn't flag non-factory holes in the bodywork based on speculation of what they were used for.
The fact that a dealer or previous owner took the easy route to satisfy legal requirements in their region doesn't make it any less damage to an otherwise good car. I actually believe this kind of thing is exactly what CPO was designed to address.
What if the holes weren't for a plate but for an aftermarket laser jammer or additional driving lights? What makes the damage any different?
|
It could be that a decent dealer might flag license plate holes but I believe its highly doubtful since they are mostly expected. If they did flag it on a report, it would simply be an open disclosure and nothing more, sort of a CYA type of goodwill building attempt but nothing would be done about it unless the buyer made it a contingency.
You're right, the fact that someone took the easy way out doesn't change the facts, the holes are still there, but it also doesn't change the responsibility of the seller. I also first thought highly of the CPO process but have learned over several buys not to expect much
Personally I think CPO is more of a marketing tool and money grabber. Still, I do look for CPO's when buying used but have lowered my expectations. I do not believe CPO was designed to flag license plate holes because what a CPO flags is supposed to be remedied and not something mandated by states. A buyer can make the holes a bone of contention to the purchase price but my guess is a dealer will just laugh them out of the dealership and sell the car to someone else when the market is a sellers market.
Just trying to keep this about license plate holes and not other owner induced acts. We can agree to disagree, good forum discussions don't need to end in agreement.