Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

WA Does A Dealer Need To Disclose A Repairable Write Off?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Glekichi, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. I'm trying to sell my bike at the moment and a potential buyer ran a check and discovered that the bike is listed as a repairable write off that has been repaired and inspected.

    At first I thought it had to be an error, because the date of the entry was in between me purchasing the bike and it being shipped from the dealer in WA to here in SA. After several calls to the SA and WA transport people, however, it is now looking more and more like the dealer did the dodgy.

    When I purchased the bike from a dealer I was under the belief that they had to disclose things like that, so I did not run any checks myself. In fact, even if I had, the date of entry was AFTER the purchase, so there is no way I could have picked up on it.

    I actually paid a premium for this particular bike because I wanted a tidy example of a Honda Hornet 250, which is not the most common of bikes, and now I'm stuck with one that is going to be incredibly difficult to sell at a decent price.

    The repairs do appear to have been done correctly and is signed off as such, but I'm still not happy about this at all.

    I have found information for other states, but I can't seem to find information that shows a dealer must disclose any write-off history in WA in particular.

    Can anyone point me in the right direction?
  2. Other members might be able to point you in a more accurate direction, but I would start with the Consumer Competition Act (replaced the Trade Practices Act). I think that this type of transaction is one where the CCA would apply, although I'm not certain.

    Also, how close are the dates between purchase and write off? It's one thing to accuse a dealer of misleading and deceptive conduct etc, but couldn't the dealer just turn around and accuse you of having it written off as the date is noted after you purchased it? Remember it's not what you know, it's what you can prove....
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Ring the dept of fair trading in WA, they will tell you.
  4. Interesting. Let us know the outcome.

    I think you have reasonable claim against the Dealer as it was listed after date of purchase.
    This may have just been sheer laziness not neglect but you didn't get what you paid for.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. that's weird esp when the date was after purchase.

    When I bought the bike off the dealer here, they did a title search and actually showed the bike had clear title and not been written off, it's on a piece of paper that came with my contract of purchase
  6. Purchase date was 16/8, write off/inspection date shows as 27/8, and the bike was put on a truck headed this way on the 30/8. At the time I was told that there were delays with the truck. It was originally supposed to be delivered much earlier.

    Spoke to the dealer yesterday and he couldn't explain it - told me he will look into it more though. Not holding my breath.

    I'm waiting for business hours in Perth to call their consumer people
  7. When shopping in Qld the dealers have always said they are obligated to disclose if it has been writtne off previously.
    Common sense would say its the same in each state, wait, I shouldn't think so radically.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Call me suspicious, but 11 days is plenty of time for someone to ride the bike after you bought it, crash it, fix it, get a check done and then put it on a truck to you 3 days after...
  9. 2Loud was right.... don't think so logically.

    Word from WA consumer protection is that they do not have to disclose a previous economic write off.

    That still leaves they mystery of why I've ended up with a bike with a write off history (and therefore crap resale value) that did not exist when I signed the purchase contract.

    Still waiting to hear what the dealer has to say.
  10. It sounds like you might still have a good case against the dealer with consumer protection. Not disclosing that the vehicle is written off it different front selling you the vehicle, then writing it off and still delivering it to you.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. The only reason I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt is that there could be a delay between the inspection and the record itself (according to the WA licensing people), and therefore the previous owner might have had it fixed, then traded it, without the dealer's knowledge.... its a bit of a stretch, but its the possibility thats stopping me abusing the dealer at this stage.

    I don't know how to find out these details, but I'm working on it.
  12. Not having to disclose is one thing.

    Having it noted as repairable / write off after purchase is dodgey.
  13. Unlike other states, in WA the vehicle does not have to be listed as a previous written off vehicle. The onus is on the buyer.

    Link: Road Traffic (Written-Off Vehicle Register] Regulations 2003.
    Link: Written-Off Vehicles (Department of Transport)

    • Like Like x 1
  14. It seems I was never going to find a reference to them being required to disclose the information when there is no such law. There isn't much reference to them NOT needing to disclose it, either... understandably I suppose.

    The consumer protection representative said it sounds like I would have a good case, but I would need to take it to a magistrate myself - i.e. to claim against losses for the difference between the resale value of what I signed a contract for (no write off history) vs what was delivered (write off history).

    Still waiting for the dealer's explanation/response.

    What do you other netriders think would be fair from the dealer to correct this?

    e.g. Dealer buys the bike back at market value for a private sale of a bike without the history?
  15. I would take an offer for the difference, its not fair to buy back the bike because of the long distance unless you are willing to pay for the shipping.

    Expect to haggle for the difference, part of the game. I would ask for 15% and settle for 10%.
  16. In NSW dealers have to disclose vehicle on the WOVR.

  17. Hi,
    I too bought a bike from a dealer in vic park perth w.a.
    2002 Aprilia rsv1000 . The bike was not disclosed as a repairable
    write off and in 2009 there was no register in WA.
    The bike was supplied with an independent report by dealer.
    Shortly after purchase the bike developed starting probs
    at switch,a shimmy when cornering , exhaust leak at crack at can.
    The front wheel had been welded uncertified have a report to say
    DO NOT use from wheel re conditioner.
    I also found that some one had used body filler on a hole in the tank
    in time the solvent in petrol ate away the filler and leaked fuel on to the motor.
    The licensing authority claims the bike passes on the day as does the
    dealer and consumer affairs are useless. I even took the dealer too court
    and got a small settlement and never got paid.
    So ALL I can say is good luck .
  18. That's rooted. You need Tracey Grimshaw!
  19. After months of chasing this, it appears I am out of luck.

    WA consumer protection seem to think the date listed on the PPSR is simply the date it was certified as roadworthy again, so I cannot prove when it was actually written off.

    Under WA consumer law it is acceptable to sell a write off as long is the bike is road legal when it is delivered, even if it was still not even inspected as roadworthy at the time of sale. (Assuming the consumer protection stance about the collision occurring prior to the sale).

    The dealer is unapologetic about not disclosing the write off.

    Mods, is it acceptable to name the business?
  20. From my limited knowledge of such things, if you don't ask the question they don't have to tell you anything, and even if they do, they can word things so as not to be legally responsible. For example, many years ago a car salesman could get away with "To be best of my knowledge, but I'm not a mechanic, there is nothing wrong with this car".