11 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHCeriticate of Conformity - Porsche Belgium - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Leading reported evidence
Use porsche in belgium
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
I've recently bought an approved used Porsche in Belgium.
Ceriticate of Conformity - Porsche Belgium - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Use porsche in belgium' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'document they provide will be identical' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Use porsche in belgium' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause · Original poster
And it seems very likely the document they provide will be identical to the one I already have.
Ceriticate of Conformity - Porsche Belgium - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Coverage and how to read this overview
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
11 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
PistonHeads: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T190023Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I've recently bought an approved used Porsche in Belgium. A certificate of conformity was supplied with the car by the official Porsche dealer but the VCA believe it's not a valid document as the format is different to that which they have on file.
Porsche Belgium is insistent that the document is original. They have forwarded another CoC which relates to a Porsche of similar age (2012), which is identical to the one provided with my car. They halve also attached the CoC for a brand new vehicle - this is slighltly revised.
Unfortunately, The VCA still won't accept it as being valid. I'm stuck in the middle! I could order a new CoC from Porsche GB but this takes a month to return and costs £106. And it seems very likely the document they provide will be identical to the one I already have.
Any help or details of personal experience appreciated?
rasputin2015 said:
I've recently bought an approved used Porsche in Belgium. A certificate of conformity was supplied with the car by the official Porsche dealer but the VCA believe it's not a valid document as the format is different to that which they have on file.
Porsche Belgium is insistent that the document is original. They have forwarded another CoC which relates to a Porsche of similar age (2012), which is identical to the one provided with my car. They halve also attached the CoC for a brand new vehicle - this is slighltly revised.
Unfortunately, The VCA still won't accept it as being valid. I'm stuck in the middle! I could order a new CoC from Porsche GB but this takes a month to return and costs £106. And it seems very likely the document they provide will be identical to the one I already have.
Any help or details of personal experience appreciated?
If you PM me a copy, I can tell you whether it looks right - I've got two sligthtly different versions. Feel free to redact the chassis number if you prefer
Vin numbers removed.
Here's part of the CoC for a brand new Porsche from Porsche Belgium:
And the part CoC for a 2012 car which is the same as the CoC provided with my car:
VCA are saying my CoC isn't valid but Porsche Belgium say it is. I'm stuck in the middle of a whole heap of bureaucracy! VCA insist that the CoC should have the coloured Poorsche logo of the latest CoC.
The "SCAN OK" refers to the document being scanned into the Belgiun DVLA equivalent database etc. The new version CoC doesn't have this because it's yet to be registered.
Porsche GB have confirmed the validity of my CoC to the VCA, but the VCA still refuse to accept the document!!! You couldn't make it up!
I've requested contact details for the the director of the VCA.
Your front pages look a little different to mine, but overall they do apepar to be the 51 or 52 item CoC certificates. Not sure how you can progress this.
One of mine was a recent request fulfiled in February.
As I say, Porsche GB have confirmed that the CoC is the genuine article. Initially the VCA wanted confirmation from Porsche GB that it was. Now they have done so, it seems this isn't adequete.
Absolute craziness.
The VCA are suggesting that because the logo isn't coloured (as in the later document), that it's not a genuine C of C. I'm assuming that the requirement for a coloured logo and/or watermarked paper came along subsequent to the cars production date - I've asked the VCA to confirm the date when the current certificate of conformity legislation framework article 18 section 3 came into being?
As I say, Porsche GB and Porsche Belgium have confirmed it's a genuine C of C which in many EU member states are provided with a Porsche vehicle from time of manufacture. Porsche GB are ordering a new C of C for me because they feel the VCA are being unreasonable (free of charge). This still means that I'll have to wait a month for it.
Porsche Belgium and Porsche GB have been as helpful as they can be.
I have a Jan 2011 CoC in my possession issued by Land Rover that I've just checked. It was printed (double sided on 100 gramme/inch) Land Rover watermarked paper, but its entirely monochrome and unimpressive looking. It includes the text 'only valid on watermarked paper'.
My main issue....I was directed by a manager at the VCA to contact Porsche GB for validation or otherwise of the certificate of conformity. After examination and cross-referencing, they confirmed validity to the VCA. The VCA then decide that this still isn't good enough - so why waste my time and the time of Porsche GB when they were only going to ignore the advice? I assume because they didn't anticipate the response they received!!!
It'll be sorted, Porsche GB have requested a duplicate c of c, but it's nonsense!
I've just put my case to a VCA Board Member but won't hold my breath for a positive outcome. Next step will be their complaints procedure.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
