Flood Car in NC

[bighops2000]

I recently went to an auto auction and bought a 94 explorer loaded. I got it for $1950. BTW this is about 2 or 3 thousand dollars less than what to others went for. But the seller was ready to cut it loose. I didnt care it was loaded and I knew I could fork out a few thousand dollars to get it running and looking like new because I was planning to keep this car forever. And something was obviously wrong since it was so cheap.

As my mechanic was repairing the car he showed me signs of flood damage. I also found my own signs. I know I bought it "AS IS" and that's fine with me. I carfaxed it and came to the conclusion that the previous owner was more than likely the person who flooded it. My question is what do I do if the title was clean. Someone knowingly lied on the flood damage part of the title. I'm doing my own forensic investigation (i watch too much tv) to find out who the owner/liar was. Also I think the seller at the auction knew too since he let it go for so cheap and he is in the business so Im sure he can spot flood cars with his eyes closed.

I want to take everybody down. (And keep my new explorer). Where do I start?

 

[racer72]

The only requirement to report a vehicle as flood damaged would be if an insurance claim was made for the damage. If there was no insurance claim, there would be no salvage title and nothing on the Carfax report.

Where do I start?

Google "caveat emptor". You have no cause against anyone.

 

[JETX]

I want to take everybody down. (And keep my new explorer). Where do I start?

You start by stopping. You have no claim against anyone as there is NO obligation to report flood damage sold by the owner.

 

[bighops2000]

The only requirement to report a vehicle as flood damaged would be if an insurance claim was made for the damage. If there was no insurance claim, there would be no salvage title and nothing on the Carfax report.


Google "caveat emptor". You have no cause against anyone.

I didn't read the whole thing yet but the second sentence says "The only exception was if the seller actively concealed latent defects" and there is all black spray paint that was used to hide the rust under the car. It looks like it was recently done as it would normally have spots of fading and chipped paint. Thanks for the advice but what about "Title Fraud". and the Auction's "AS IS" policy states "No arbitration unless unannounced salvage history, frame damage, or cracked block".

BTW, the "Take everyone down (and keep my new explorer)" part was a joke...I can't stand to even look at the car now that I know it's been swimming. In response to JetX I accually do need to do something becuase if I sell the vehicle I am knowingly selling a flooded car with an inacurate title

 

[ceara19]

I recently went to an auto auction and bought a 94 explorer loaded. I got it for $1950. BTW this is about 2 or 3 thousand dollars less than what to others went for. But the seller was ready to cut it loose. I didnt care it was loaded and I knew I could fork out a few thousand dollars to get it running and looking like new because I was planning to keep this car forever. And something was obviously wrong since it was so cheap.

As my mechanic was repairing the car he showed me signs of flood damage. I also found my own signs. I know I bought it "AS IS" and that's fine with me. I carfaxed it and came to the conclusion that the previous owner was more than likely the person who flooded it. My question is what do I do if the title was clean. Someone knowingly lied on the flood damage part of the title. I'm doing my own forensic investigation (i watch too much tv) to find out who the owner/liar was. Also I think the seller at the auction knew too since he let it go for so cheap and he is in the business so Im sure he can spot flood cars with his eyes closed.

I want to take everybody down. (And keep my new explorer). Where do I start?

So you KNEW there was OBVIOUSLY something wrong with the vehicle (other then the fact that it was a FORD, I assume), yet you were SHOCKED when you found out (surprise, surprise) there WAS, in fact, something OBVIOUSLY WRONG with the vehicle?!?!?!

 

[Zigner]

I didn't read the whole thing yet but the second sentence says "The only exception was if the seller actively concealed latent defects" and there is all black spray paint that was used to hide the rust under the car. It looks like it was recently done as it would normally have spots of fading and chipped paint.

A latent defect is a "...defect not discoverable even by the exercise of ordinary and reasonable care."* You took the car to a mechanic (ordinary and reasonable) AFTER purchasing it and the mechanic found the evidence. Thus, this is not a "latent" defect.
Additionally, a "latent defect" could be construed to mean a defect which was present at manufacturing...

You have no case...



*information from http://www.answers.com/topic/latent-defect

 

[ForFun]

Although the thread is several days old, I'll respond because it was resurrected and because, depending on the facts, the OP may have some recourse after all (both criminally and civilily)

§ 20‑71.3. Salvage and other vehicles – titles and registration cards to be branded.
(a) Motor vehicle certificates of title and registration cards issued pursuant to G.S. 20‑57 shall be branded in accordance with this section.

As used in this section, "branded" means that the title and registration card shall contain a designation that discloses if the vehicle is classified as any of the following:
(1) Salvage Motor Vehicle.
(2) Salvage Rebuilt Vehicle.
(3) Reconstructed Vehicle.
(4) Flood Vehicle.
(5) Non‑U.S.A. Vehicle.
(6) Any other classification authorized by law.

h) A branded title for a salvage motor vehicle damaged by collision or other occurrence shall be issued as follows:
(2) For motor vehicles more than six model years old, a branded title shall be issued if the cost of repairs, including parts and labor and excluding the cost to replace the air bag restraint system, exceeds seventy‑five percent (75%) of its fair market value at the time of the collision or other occurrence.


§ 20‑71.4. Failure to disclose damage to a vehicle shall be a misdemeanor.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any transferor of a motor vehicle to do any of the following:

(2) Transfer a motor vehicle when the transferor has knowledge that the vehicle is, or was, a flood vehicle, a reconstructed vehicle, or a salvage motor vehicle, without disclosing that fact in writing to the transferee prior to the transfer of the vehicle.

(d) Violation of subsections (a)...of this section shall constitute a Class 2 misdemeanor.

 

[You Are Guilty]

There is a (huge) difference between a "flood vehicle" (i.e. branded title) and a vehicle that had some "flood damage" that was repaired.

 

[ForFun]

There is a (huge) difference between a "flood vehicle" (i.e. branded title) and a vehicle that had some "flood damage" that was repaired.

Definitely (that's why I wrote that the OP may have recourse depending on the facts -- i.e. he also may not have recourse depending on the facts).

From the law that I quoted in my other post, it appears that the definition of "flood vehicle" is a vehicle that was flooded where the cost of repair exceeds seventy‑five percent of the vehicle's fair market value at the time of the flood. I didn't see any other definition.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Definitely (that's why I wrote that the OP may have recourse depending on the facts -- i.e. he also may not have recourse depending on the facts).

From the law that I quoted in my other post, it appears that the definition of "flood vehicle" is a vehicle that was flooded where the cost of repair exceeds seventy‑five percent of the vehicle's fair market value at the time of the flood. I didn't see any other definition.

Granted it's a Ford, but assuming the spray paint cost $4.50, I imagine the truck was worth more than $6

Rather than re-read this entire post, was the truck even issued with a salvage title?

 

[ForFun]

Granted it's a Ford, but assuming the spray paint cost $4.50, I imagine the truck was worth more than $6

LOL!

I think the OP needs to find out when the vehicle was flooded, and what repairs were made in order to determine whether the vehicle should have been issued a salvage title.

Rather than re-read this entire post, was the truck even issued with a salvage title?

No, and I think that's what has irked the OP (i.e. he may not have purchased the vehicle had he known).

 

[Zigner]

No, and I think that's what has irked the OP (i.e. he may not have purchased the vehicle had he known).

OP bought a vehicle for $2-$3,000 under what it would sell for "normally". OP knew he'd have to make repairs. As the saying goes...you get what you pay for.