Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most posts I have read re:CarFax are from people who have trusted their reports and ended up buying lemons only to have Carfax dodge its buy-back guarantee through loop holes.
My situation is somewhat opposite. I bought vehicle that had been stolen and recovered un-damaged but Carfax shows as total loss due to severe damage, then underneath it refers to a title problem. I never rely on Carfax, if I'm considering a used vehicle, of which I've owned several, I take the vehicle to my mechanic or a qualified alternate for inspection. I had vehicle inspected by dealership before I purchased and confirmed no accidents/damage, just normal were for 99K miles (brakes, belts, water pump leak), made repairs and have driven beautiful vehicle for past year+/-.
However, I would now like to sell vehicle in preparation for re-locating and was asked for Carfax report which showed misleading data. Killed sale due specifically to Carfax report "insinuating", without details, that re-built title can only indicate gross physical damage. Also showed vehicle as "total loss" and checked overly generalized box showing "accident/severe damage" with no clarification that the insurance co. listed the vehicle as total loss based on their having paid out, not on fact that vehicle was ever physically damaged.
At the very least Carfax should be required to clearly explain that there are circumstances under which a re-built title does in no way indicate physical damage to vehicle.
Those considering using Carfax should Goggle customer satisfaction for them, its very enlightening. Its more great marketing than useful service. Pay the extra nickel, have the vehicle inspected your self, you can always do VIN check at one of the less expensive Carfax competitors.
Yeah. There is a dealer near me here in PA that basically specializes in vehicles that were in accidents but where the damage isn't reported on carfax/autocheck and the title is clear. They sell for pretty cheap, probably to unsuspecting people a lot of the time.
I can spot some of them from just looking at them and seeing the mismatched paint.
I am curious to hear from anyone who has direct, qualified, knowledge of how we may force Carfax to provide correct info, substantiate their ratings with the report data on which they make determination and be help accountable, monetarily, for providing inaccurate data as verified fact when that is not the case. Their incorrect report data HAS prevented sale of my vehicle and it seems very little to ask that they be held responsible. At the very least they should be REQUIRED to include all specifics and data sources upon which their report is based. If a home inspector inspects my home they give detailed report, sign the report AND stand behind it.
At the absolute minimum, Carfax should be required to clearly display a disclaimer on their reports explaining that in many cases their reported data can be incomplete and/or erroneous and should not be relied upon as a perspective customer's sole source of data due to its unavoidable inaccuracies.
Maybe a class action suit by those who have been directly damaged by Carfax falsities!
I recently searched for a good used car and I bought a subscription to Autocheck.
I quickly learned that almost all the used cars for sale locally had been transferred to Colorado from flood prone areas, e.g. Houston, New Orleans, Florida, Carolinas etc.
So I wondered why had those cars been moved? Nothing in the report said that they had been flooded but it made me highly suspicious.
So I gave up and bought a new car instead.
When it comes to used cars, the best thing is to buy it directly from the original owner and decide if you can trust that person.
I am curious to hear from anyone who has direct, qualified, knowledge of how we may force Carfax to provide correct info, substantiate their ratings with the report data on which they make determination and be help accountable, monetarily, for providing inaccurate data as verified fact when that is not the case. Their incorrect report data HAS prevented sale of my vehicle and it seems very little to ask that they be held responsible. At the very least they should be REQUIRED to include all specifics and data sources upon which their report is based. If a home inspector inspects my home they give detailed report, sign the report AND stand behind it.
At the absolute minimum, Carfax should be required to clearly display a disclaimer on their reports explaining that in many cases their reported data can be incomplete and/or erroneous and should not be relied upon as a perspective customer's sole source of data due to its unavoidable inaccuracies.
Maybe a class action suit by those who have been directly damaged by Carfax falsities!
If you look at the language, it never says, "The vehicle had frame damage." It says, "Frame Damage Reported." Is FICO/Equifax/Transunion responsible if something reports wrong on a credit report? They provide you the means to correct/dispute it, just as the credit reporting agencies do.
Also, for what its worth, in over a year working at a dealership, I only saw 1 car out of hundreds of trade ins that had information on it that the customer disputed (and he was probably being honest; the car was bought and traded in the midwest yet had a wreck reported in Florida.)
Seems like a 2 hr inspection by the dealer before I bought and after I had stipulated that it was stolen and recovered un-damaged should be reliable. It was for me and the vehicle has been a dream since purchase a little over a year ago. At my mechanic for regular services I have had him go over the car wit a fine tooth comb. It appears that the vehicle was stolen for its airbag since no professional can find any sign of physical damage of any kind and the ONLY problem is that the radio controls on the steering wheel don't work.
Carfax reported the ins. co. total loss due to their paying out for theft, not due to a total loss due to damage. Carfax just extrapolated so they can check their "accident/severe damage" box on their form. Over-simplified to a point that its accuracy is unreliable.
Nuf said! If you're considering a used car, have it checked by a pro. and don't expect someone else to do all the work for you. They're just marketing other folks, partial, info as incomplete fact.
Have NEVER used Carfax or any other of this type when I have bought a car... Don't see the need to pay for something that might or might not tell me anything.. I drive the car, look it over, ask questions, etc.....
right, how would carfax know of something that wasn't reported to them? that's why it is always best not to rely solely in a single carfax or autocheck report, who knows other sources like NMVTIS might have the information abt it
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pay the extra nickel, have the vehicle inspected your self, you can always do VIN check at one of the less expensive Carfax competitors.
Action against Carfax?
