127 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH$14k Cayman with nothing wrong?
Leading reported evidence
Use 20...ab29816u784936
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.
Leading evidence: 'Use 20...ab29816u784936' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'he would want' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check i relist it' (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
If the tech at the company truly wanted to make it his own, I suspect he would want to keep it for awhile and we will not be seeing this for sale any time soon.
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
You based it upon finding particles of metal in the filter and instantly assumed it was the IMSB.
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
The guy who owned the Cayman is probably the real victim here, but no one will ever be able to prove that.
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
I suspect some of them were his victims over the years.
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.
Suggestion
My ASSUMPTION is that seller and his mechanic both felt that it would cost $5K - $10K to tear the engine down, make any necessary repairs, replace potentially compromised parts, and clean the engine thoroughly enough to feel confident that both the root cause AND any problems resulting therefrom would be eliminated.
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.
Suggestion
First Let me say to Slakker, You have called us out on this forum that we were not above board, when it is YOU, Slakker, that posted on this thread that you were going to flip this car with nothing more than cleaning the sump and an oil and filter change.
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.
Suggestion · Original poster
But I would think that you would do a little more due diligence than seeing particles in a filter before recommending a loyal customer take a $13k loss on their car.
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.
Suggestion
Wouldn't it be better to just have a policy that you buy other shops' catastrophic diagnosis vehicles if you want to get into the repair & resell business?
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.
Suggestion
In fact, PCA members are usually very knowledgeable, many are of expert status on particular cars, PCA members talk to each other, relate their experiences about who they have service and repair their cars.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
he would want
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
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
If the tech at the company truly wanted to make it his own, I suspect he would want to keep it for awhile and we will not be seeing this for sale any time soon.
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.
127 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 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: 20261026T091943Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
https://rennlist.com/forums/vehicle-...ing-going.html
Found some small metal particles and is now accepting half because a mechanic said it needs a full rebuild. I can't figure out if it's a scam or if someone should tell this guy a few small particles are not catastrophic.
I think
"some small metal particles"
is the big wild card in this situation. Metal? What type of metal? Ferrous? Non-ferrous, but copper? Aluminum? I would hope that the "mechanic" was much more specific, and this guy is just being cryptic because a) he doesn't understand the specifics or b) he's too lazy to spell it out in hist post. Either way, there's more research needed for a potential buyer.
freind just picked up a 99 boxster in similar fashion. Pretty sure he paid something like 2k for it. Hard top included!
the original owner said there was metal in the filter. freind did oil change and found plastic in it in. Not metal. Looks like timing chain guide rail material, dropped sump plate and found more plastic. No metal.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/966x608/imsfailuredisplay_23fa69a369c93dba0147d709d7484262d5466d8c.jpg
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/450x194/71303468_5eeed045d056af9e26aeca3cc98d488c2229667d.jpg
Haha. This is getting interesting. Shop bought it out from underneath me. Offering them a little extra to be able to do a quick flip. $50 bucks says they wouldn't do it if I offered them $4k extra.
Also had a conversation with the owner and told him exactly what I think is going on. Recommended he take it to another shop for a second opinion before taking a bath on the car.
It's another case of reporting to the customer "metal in the filter", quoting $15k to replace the IMS, mostly labor because the crank has to be split, and oh by the way we didn't save the filter for you to look at.
"What, somebody else is going to buy it? No, you better just sell it to us so you don't end up screwing that guy."
It's good karma that I didn't get it. I really don't want to profit off other people's stupidity.
I once too had the disease of buying multiples of the same car or a derivative. Now that I'm cleared of it, I really do not understand it any more. :shrug: I mean you can only drive one at a time. "Collector" cars are exempt of course.
I had no plans on "collecting" cars. Originally I asked for a picture of the metal in the filter to see if I could help the guy out. The '06 IMS has such an extremely low failure rate that it didn't make sense that the shop was condeming the engine off of some metal in the filter. Especially since, as I later found out, the car had gone 5,000 miles since the last oil change. Here's the response I got:
Slakker:Can you send a picture of the particles found to #emailaddress#?
Owener: Sorry, I can't do it right now. Autowerkes, where the car is, and knows their stuff (owner Bruce Powers is a member of PCA and has track trophies), says, the metal fragments are small, and metallic. Unless the particles are from the timing chain and gears, the only diagnosis is, they are from the IMSB. Re the price, I'm lowering it to $10,000, where I think the car will sell. Thanks for your interest, Ed
So I told him I'd take it. When I asked Autowerkes for a picture of the metal, they made excuses that it was in a bag and they'd have to see if they could get it. I then told them I had purchased the car and to finish the PPI. They took my credit card and said they would let me know if there was anything else but that the car was in really good condition. They also asked me how much I paid which I thought was strange. 2 hours later, the owner called me back and apologized, but that he had instead sold the car to Autowerkes. He agreed he'd gone back on his word but he was sorry and that's how it was.
So yes, I was willing to bet my $10,000 that there is nothing wrong with the car and that this is another typical service shop scam like we have seen before. I would have bought the car, dropped the sump, and sent the oil off for analysis. Then I would have filled it with DT40, driven it 3,500 miles, and repeated the same process. If everything checked, I relist it with UOA result and pictures of the sump and filter at the time of the last change.
It's easy to say now but the only part of the whole thing that doesn't fly was my rationalization that if he wasn't going to listen, and somebody was going to make a profit, it might as well be me. I've always taught my kids that somebody elses actions are never an excuse for your actions. Your values should stay steadfast no matter the circumstances. Sometimes it is tough to practice what you preach though. I saw this as a quick way to get right side up on my "car hobby" and jumped at it.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/185x272/divorce_3748499d7d27396bf72d52b612205e2f6dda27a7.png
I'm so sick of all the gullible people and the people that use PCA membership to mean anything other than just that. Meaning some place way too much faith on this aspect alone, thinking one can be trustworthy or somehow more knowledgable than other non member people. Its just like those people that try to sell something on the internet and say they are christian and go to church weekly.
$10k gamble would've been worth it in my eyes and thanks for being honest. I think a lot of us would've done the same if we had the cash laying around for a local sales transaction.
The whole thing does seem a bit suspect in my eyes too.
I hope this guy doesn't get Chemo for himself or anyone in his family without getting a second opinion first if it ever comes to.
Wow. That is unbelievable. The guy goes from 'supposedly' thinking he has a great running car to letting it go for next to nothing after one shop says they found metal in the filter? No skepticism or second opinion. No red flags when the same shop that found the metal offers to buy it. Some people just were born to make other people rich.
I have no idea of who or where Autowerkes or Bruce Powers is but after reading this thread, whether he and his shop are in fact innocent or not, if I ever find myself in the position of potentially using their services I will likely take a pass and look for another option.
This is unfortunate in many respects for all involved (or potentially involved) and could have been easily avoided by the shop either substantiating their findings (which isn't really anything they are obligated to do for any of us) or ideally not being involved in the subsequent purchase of the affected vehicle.
Most Porsche shops I know around here have more work than they can handle and don't seem to be hurting at all, but maybe it's not like that everywhere. Doesn't seem worth it to make a few thousand dollars on an automatic-equipped Cayman but what do I know.
The internet's a big place. Stories like this linger.
Ha, yeah, when I see that I either immediately get visions of Tammy Faye Bakker or worse start thinking about Bishops diddling little kids. Not exactly positive role models to emulate...
First Let me say to Slakker, You have called us out on this forum that we were not above board, when it is YOU, Slakker, that posted on this thread that you were going to flip this car with nothing more than cleaning the sump and an oil and filter change. We must respond to your innuendo and impuning of our shop.
Our long time customer (multiple cars, many years) had his Cayman in because he was selling it and the prospective buyer wanted the oil filter cut apart and examined. We did so and found small shiny ferrous flakes in the filter media. We saved the filter in a baggie and put it in the trunk, installed a new filter and informed both the owner and the prospective buyer along with emailing pictures. The owner of the car has the option of getting a second opinion.
The car's owner was thinking of having us do the repairs. Which means once the engine would be disassembled we would be showing him the parts in his engine. We have to back up our initial findings and diagnosis with actually showing the customer the failure. There is tremendous veracity in having a customer present for disassembly and examination of internal parts.
Unlike you, that can throw out all sorts of BS on this forum and never have to back it up.
The owner of the Cayman also asked us if we new of a business that might be interested in the car as is. We contacted three other business and gave the owner their feedback and their contact info.
One of our technicians said he would be interested in buying the car. He contacted the owner and and they came to a tentative agreement to sell/buy. Our technician and the car's owner have a high level of trust due to the many years of work and interaction with each other. That trust would not be there if not for the forth right way we have conducted ourselves and our business over those years.
Who the owner decides to sell the car to and why is his decision. He is not bound to sell to Slakker or anyone else based on a offer over the phone. Part of who he decides to sell to could be who he feels comfortable with, distance, etc. Slakker's own words on this forum shows he is the one looking to flip this car and take advantage of some unsuspecting future buyer. But that is NOT what he told the car's owner he was going to do with the car.
Slakker, you have also disparaged our customer to make him look stupid and us less than honorable on this forum. Other's, not knowing the whole situation then climbed on the bandwagon.
Being a member of PCA and involved in our club means that as a person representing my company, Autowerkes, I am in front of other members all the time. When I make a statement, I will be held accountable to what I say; I am held accountable to what I do and it will reflect on me and our business. Being involved in PCA pulls no wool over anyone's eyes. In fact, PCA members are usually very knowledgeable, many are of expert status on particular cars, PCA members talk to each other, relate their experiences about who they have service and repair their cars. It behooves us to be good people and conduct ourselves honestly.
We will continue to conduct ourselves in a forthright and honest manner, as we have for the past 37 years. We think highly of PCA members and in no way is our customer to be disparaged as you have done.
But you can just move on after saying that we were perpetrating a scam and our customer is stupid. Not so stupid to see through who you were and what you were going to actually do.
Our technician that is buying the car will be dis-assembling the engine and showing the previous owner the failed part, because our customer is interested and wants to see and we want to show him.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/glee/images/e/ef/Becky-Oh-Snap.gif/revision/20150130170531
Pretty decent reply by the shop. even handed and generally straightforward. to defend slakker though, I don't think he intended to resell the car without disclosure of the potential issue.
Either way, I'm a bit surprised that the shop was ready to condemn the motor so quickly
Hi Bruce. Thanks for coming on and telling your side of the story. One quick clarification though is I think you didn't read my post very carefully. My plan was to examine the sump, get a UOA, and document it. Then drive 3500 miles, pull the sump again, get another UOA and document it. All of which would be posted on this forum so that a potential buyer would have all of the facts. You can check out my two '99 threads and other posts to see that I not only post the preventative maintenance I've done, but also the stupidity of using the wrong gas, twice. I have a lot of character flaws but lack of transparency isn't one of them.
Now then, as a customer of Autowerks, I would like to registered a complaint with the owner who I assume is you. I engaged your company to perform a PPI on a car for me that was in your shop that I was purchasing. I had reached an agreement with the car owner to purchase the car for $10k as long as no other major issues were found. I put this in writing and verified verbally with the owner twice to prevent paying for the PPI and then having the owner back out.
I then immediately called and talked to Johnnie (your shop foreman?), told him I had purchased the car pending completion of the PPI, and requested completion of the PPI along with photos of the particles in the oil filter. Johnnie took my credit card information, phone number, and told me the car was very nice and he didn't think there were any other issues. One thing that I thought was strange was he asked how much I was purchasing the car for. I just assumed it was curiousity and told him. We agreed he would call back with the results. An employee of your company then contacted the owner and convinced him that he should sell to your employee, for the same price I had negotiated, instead of me. I consider this unprofessional and unethical. I trusted your shop with information, after engaging it for business, and one of your employees used it for their gain. To have your insult me, a customer, in my home forum with your very first post on Rennlist just adds insult to injury.
Now then, I would also like to speak to you on a professional level. As has been stated on this board, I think it is a HUGE conflict of interest for a shop, or their employees, to purchase a vehicle, at less than half of market value, that they have diagnosed as catastophically damaged. Especially when the car runs and drives perfectly without issue. In addition, your shop provided no proof to the customer of the diagnosis. You based it upon finding particles of metal in the filter and instantly assumed it was the IMSB. Even though the '06 IMSB's have less than a 1% failure rate. You did not recommend further due diligence of examining the sump. You did not recommend having the metal analyzed via an Oil Analysis ($28!!!!) to see if it was even the same metal type as the IMSB. Your shop conveniently declared that it was one of the single most hyped failures in Porsche engine history.
The crazy thing is, we get this same story on this Forum, different flavor, about every month or two. Two of the four responses when the car owner posted his story and his car for sale were recommending he get a second opinion. That's because everyone is sick and tired of seeing people get duped by this crap. Could the IMSB be in the process of failing? Sure. But I would think that you would do a little more due diligence than seeing particles in a filter before recommending a loyal customer take a $13k loss on their car. I have had particles in both of my filters (two '99s, one with an 06 crate M96 replacement) at times and you can go look in the Blackstone oil analysis thread to see precisely what the content was because that's where I posted the results.
And as to the technician that is going to pull apart the engine now that he has purchased it to verify the IMS is bad. If it's not, is he going to pay the additional $13k that the car is worth if his cursory diagnosis is wrong?
I don't have a dog in this hunt and can't/won't tell Bruce how to run his shop (I did like his answering though, many would not have written anything, it gives him credibility), but in general a policy of not letting employees purchase customer's cars that were found by the same company to be worth less than full retail for whatever reason but especially without absolute and unquestionable verification (i.e. hole in the block for example) would go a long way toward completely eliminating ANY suspicion on the part of anyone.
Slakker's question about if the IMS bearing is found to be completely intact and the metal is from something much easier to replace (or is normal) is a good one, what happens then? It doesn't matter what the issue actually is to answer this question as it's theoretical at this point.
Other industries have such policies regarding client sales, being in real estate it is definitely frowned upon (at best) to take advantage of a client (even if the intent is to help) and purchase a property for one's own portfolio or to resell later if there is a perceived issue with it or if there is inside knowledge regarding the seller's finances. Sure, it helps the client out now (or at least that's the justification), but one could just as easily help the client by selling it to an unrelated party for whatever the market will bear without then having any potential blowback. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, it does, definitely, but people talk and they have long memories. Better just to avoid it, if your reputation is good there is no need to go for the big kill, you'll be amply rewarded just by being good at what you do. The tech in question here could just as easily buy and repair any number of rollers that pop up on here for far less than any regular person.
Me too. Way back in my young and naive days, I got totally scammed out of a car by a shop that claimed the repair would be more than the car was worth.
So, I sold the car to the shop owner for next to nothing. I later found out that he wanted the car for himself, because it was a limited edition with rare options.
either do I.
but IF what Slakker said is true, the shop buying it out from under him after he negotiated price and paid for ppi is shady AF. if Slakker kept his biz to himself, he'd probably be in a cayman now.
I applaud both sides for telling their sides and views.
As my father was a small business owner, he had to always make revisions to his business process and policies due to new things or unforeseen things that came up. Members here have also seen revisions from people like Jake over the years.
This maybe one of those things where Bruce might have to change his policy and only have employees buy a car outside of work in their own setting and not have it affiliated with the company in any way.
As for the car owner, business wise, if he signed a contract, he should've honored it. However in this case, it seems his heart was stronger and decided to go with who he trusted and knew the longest. It could be a similiar situation like selling a car and feeling good taking a loss to sell it to your nephew for example.
Well the deal is done so no use in crying over spilled milk here.
This is done all the time in real estate...hopefully with proper disclosure. In addition, I would assume that the real estate agent would not charge the seller a commission which could potentially save the seller thousands over another similar offer to a third party represented by another agent.
I'm firmly with Slakker. When he contracted with the shop to perform the PPI, they owed him certain fiduciary responsibilities that they clearly neglected. It cost him time, money and a potential profit, only to possibly enrich themselves. If they are willing to go this route, what else are they capable of doing?
Slakker...did they actually charge you for the PPI?
I don't think he ACTUALLY PAID for the ppi. The shop only took his credit card number. But, it would be interesting to know that tidbit.
And how is a Rennlist Member ("edq882") allowed to sell a car to another Rennlist Member (Slakker) and then renege on a deal? Without ramifications. I thought that's what protects us a paid Rennlist Mambers? A mod should infract Rennlister "edq882" at the very least, and ban at the most severe.
I agree with you 110%. Had an employee pulled that sort of bullsh!t in my shop I would fire them on the spot. Very poorly handled by these peeps. Integrity and honesty is hard to come by and when you are dealing with people pulling this stuff, it tells you a lot about the company and the people it has on staff.
I don't see a difference. Once I give a business my credit card info for payment...it's paid for. It also creates a contract for services.
I just wonder if they actually charged him.
Hey, my personality didn't come out until after the deal went sideways. :P
And for the record, the car owner was very good to deal with overall. He's a sweetheart of an old guy. I've been involved in transaction before where everyone just quits talking to you and now that's annoying. But he had the courtesy to call and tell me over the phone. I got VERY aggressive in trying to convince him to change his mind (that's when my personality came out.) He even answered the phone when I called him back 30 minutes later to apologize for being so aggressive. I've changed my mind on deals before, it happens, no big deal.
I hope not. They haven't even sent me the results yet!
+1
The one thing about the deal falling apart was not having to drive a Cayman S tip for 3500 miles. If I'd fallen in love with it and decided to sell my '99 DD, Alpine would never let me live it down!
I wonder how many times "Bruce" and his employees have pulled this scam to boost their profits?
Please note this is clearly a
rhetorical
question
.And a legitimate
doubt
given what has been written.
This kind of thing has happened to me many times... one example...
Had an intermittent problem with an $8,000 Sony HD color reference production monitor. We sent it to a Sony independent service center in Atlanta. We specifically asked for an estimate before rendering any work on it. They normally charge one hour of labor (i.e. $100) for an estimate.
Later that week, the service manager called my engineer and said the display module would have to be replaced and the cost would be about $3,000. (and you thought Porsche parts were expensive!) Anyway, when my engineer told me that, I almost flipped out of my chair. I said, "That's almost half of the cost of a new one!" I told the engineer to reject service and he did. Later that afternoon the service manager called and said they'd "take it off our hands for the cost of the estimate". At this point, you could see the blood rushing up my neck. I'm like... "Let me get this straight, they're willing to wave the $100 fee if we give them our $8,000 monitor?" Engineer says, "yep!" I told him, "you rush down there and retrieve our monitor and note anything that looks broken or not reassembled correctly."
That was 10 years ago and that monitor has worked flawless ever since and problem hasn't showed up. Ha!
x2
However since we have the VIN:
WP0AB29816U784936
One of us with a lot of time on our hands at RL can monitor the used car market to see if it reappears for sale down the line and see what kind of reasoning it's being sold for.
If the tech at the company truly wanted to make it his own, I suspect he would want to keep it for awhile and we will not be seeing this for sale any time soon.
I have no direct interactions with him or his shop, but I have heard the shop mentioned previously by different people and always in a good light.
I think it's definitely in a grey area here that opens the door for their reputation to be attacked, but I think the simpler answer is that the seller was offered more by a local entity that he knew and viewed that as an easier path than selling to an unknown quantity in another state.
I think it's crappy on the shop's part to make a counter offer on a car that they have been asked to do a PPI on (regardless of details about this specific case). I also think it's pretty crappy of the seller to have a deal in hand and then pull out like that.
I haven't seen it said so I'm guessing that no deposit was put down on the car before calling about the PPI. If that is true I still think that is a crappy move by the seller to not at least give the option for a counter, but with no money exchanged it is just words.
So from my perspective mistakes were made on all sides.
1) Shop pulled a dick move by making a counter offer on a car they knew an agreement was in progress on.
2) Seller was kind of a dick to accept another offer and/or not give Slakker an option to counter.
3) Slakker should have put down a deposit with the seller to ensure that it was a legally binding transaction (seller could have stick screwed him over and just returned the deposit, but he'd have clear legal options if he want to use them). He also should have kept his mouth shut when the shop got interested about the sale.
That's my $0.02 that no one wants
If there was a dick move, it was on the part of the seller. The seller could have easily told the shop, "No, I have committed to selling the car to that guy you're doing the PPI for." Instead, he reneged on an oral agreement (at least as described by Slakker) to sell the car to one party and instead sold it to another.
That the seller decided to dump the car for $10K because there was some glitter in the filter is the Seller's prerogative - some of us think that's lunacy; others would jump on the "full teardown" bandwagon. $10K for a car with a good engine is a STEAL; $10K for a $20K Porsche needing a crate motor or a full rebuild (knowing what we know about the pricing of M96 rebuilds) is a gift. While I can't say I would have decided to dump the car, I can understand why the seller would. The only part of this entire thread that I cannot understand is how the seller rationalized backing out of a deal with one party and selling it to another party for the same price. If someone else had offered significantly more money, backing out would STILL be a dick move, but at least I'd understand the motivation.
My guess is that the seller in this case opted to do business with someone he knew rather than someone on the Internet he doesn't know - so he backed out of the deal with Slakker. Perhaps the shop employee told the seller that he'd want the car if the deal with Slakker fell through, and the seller opted to sell to someone he was familiar with and felt he could trust...but like most of the content in this thread, that's just unsubstantiated hypothesis.
My humble answer - Convenience.
The guy (buyer mechanic) was local and willing to fork out the money without a whole lot of trouble. The seller prolly didn't want to fool with any more haggling over the car and was ready to let the water flow under the bridge and move one.
And I agree, serious conflict of interest that could potential damage the reputation of the business as word spreads. Unfortunately, Slakker did not shake hands and give a deposit. But even then, until the full amount is paid and BOS is signed, anything can happen. Sucks! I've had many car deals go bad when the seller sells it behind my back before I had a chance to hand over the money.
I agree.
However I think the seller's motivation/reasoning could've been that I've taken all my cars to this shop and have formed a good relationship with them over the years. I don't want to jeopordize that good relationship and also want to give something back vs. no history or care with the buyer(Slakker). It doesn't make it right and I'm in no way condoning this type of behaviour but just trying to get in the mind of the seller on what he could've been thinking which then doesn't make it such a clear cut case IMO.
Either way, everyone can move on...
Agree with gnat's analysis.
#1 bad actor is the shop. As Gonzo pointed out with the real estate transactions, it's unethical in at least two ways: 1) offer to buy a car you gave a catastrophic diagnosis on especially with no further verification, and 2) offer to buy a car out from underneath the guy you've been hired by to perform a PPI.
Slakker, you should've trusted your instincts and told the shop you were paying $20,000 for it.
FWIW, I suspect that IMSB failure diagnosis is wrong. Why? The conventional wisdom regarding the low failure rate and the tech's eagerness to buy the car.
BTW, nothing that Bruce said in his post leads me to believe that this shop is above making a fake or incorrect diagnosis. He sees no problem with what his tech did in buying the car out from under a PPI customer. Ironically, he paints slakker as unethical.
And then there is the trap of the moral equivalency : because Mr. S chatted about his plans he was somehow a deserving victim. The hierarchy of values that are the basis of decency seem to be ignored. And which of the parties seems most straightforward ?
You read too much into things I think.
That he should have kept things to himself doesn't mean he deserved to be screwed over, but it certainly open the door for said screwing.
The business of money is full of people saying the wrong thing at the wrong time for their opponent to take advantage.
So no he didn't deserve what the shop did, but he could have made it harder for them to screw him over.
Agreed. I'm much better at post game analysis than real-time play calling. My assumption was that the shop was crooked. If that was true, then having them finish the PPI offered no gain and gave them time to react and cover. I should have just wired the guy the money and taken my chances. It would have increased the risk a bit but also it would have increased my chance of success.
However, I no longer believe the shop is crooked I think they just handled this entire situation very poorly. Also, as stated when it first fell apart, I believe it was good karma that I didn't get it. I'm not a big fan of making money at someone else's expense.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/600x430/karma_is_a_bitch_0c99a84bf03d3737f8d251d3c35da0acab909829.jpg
I was wondering why you'd bother having a PPI done on a presumed-bad-engine $10k car.
I agree with the second half of that statement. I have no problem calling them out based on what the shop itself has admitted to doing. I would not do business with any shop that thinks it's OK to snipe a car out from underneath a customer who is paying that shop to perform a PPI.
Because wrong.
Last year, I went to a luncheon for car guys being hosted by a retired car dealer in his garage/car collection/man cave. He had a new car franchise dealership here in KC from the late 1960's until about 10 years ago. He gave a very entertaining speech to the group, and he's a good storyteller. But, he told story after story about how he ripped people off on deals. He talked about how he always had an "odometer man" on staff to turn back the mileage on practically every high mileage trade in. And this guy is a revered icon to most of the old guys in the group. I suspect some of them were his victims over the years.
No matter how affable someone might be, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, well . . . A common trait among con men is an appearance of legitimacy. Slakker, you got screwed, that's a fact, but essentially just out of a potential good deal. The guy who owned the Cayman is probably the real victim here, but no one will ever be able to prove that. SMH at the actions of this shop.
The hell with the Cayman...this story makes me realize that I need better friends. Friends who host "luncheons."
My lame-*** friends have barbecues, maybe the occasional dinner...sometimes even snooty wine and cheese nights. But LUNCHEONS? That's crapping in tall cotton.
Someone needs to tell the old guy that no matter how old he gets - or funny, or rich - he should skip stories that start with "Did I ever tell you about the time I f**ked him" - points to someone in the crowd - "when he bought a Delta 88 from me? Not ONLY did he overpay for the Olds and get screwed on his trade-in, I banged his wife while he was doing the paperwork!"
That s**t'll get you knifed.
I test drove this car about a month ago for the original buyer in TX. I was too busy to do a through PPI with oil filter inspection, so I was adamant that he have that done before finalizing the deal. I'm very glad he did.
I have heard a few good things about Autowerkes & seen Bruce the owner at some of the autocrosses he helps sponser for the local PCA region.
Ed the seller is also a good guy I enjoyed talking to him & he was very forthcoming about the car. He encouraged me to not hold back on the car during the test drive.
The Cayman had some cosmetic issues & as I reported to the original buyer if you are particular about appearance this is not the car for you. I will post some pic's hoping you will feel better about your "loss". So for whatever it's worth I think all involved are good guys & this is just "one of those things".
The takeaway is you can't wait 2 years to change oil just because it's only been 5k miles, especially with Mobil 1.
"The takeaway is you can't wait 2 years to change oil just because it's only been 5k miles, especially with Mobil 1." #85 above
So is this an oil thread now ?
So if the owner had used JGDT40 it would never have been for sale ?
The ad is old. Title history shows the car was purchased in AZ back in March 2015 ans asking price was $25k.
I had a similar issue and felt compelled to warn the owner but alas I'm too late. Looks like the owner got duped and lost out on $15k. Very unethical of the shop to let an employee buy the car at the heavily discounted price. Typical scam and another shop also tried that with me.
I'm sure AutowerkesBruce will be along any moment now to explain why the pretty much unanimous opinion here is wrong and why his shop really didn't screw either the seller or Slakker like it currently obviously appears they did.
This is absolutely disgusting and unconscionable behavior by AutoWerkes. Seems like the classic scam whereby an unsuspecting customer is duped into a costly repair or selling their car at a heavily discounted price. The shop finds metal shavings or some other sign of imminent catastrophic failure and an overhaul is recommended. Foregoing that expensive repair there's an offer to buy the vehicle dirt cheap. Profiting from a poor or even fraudulent diagnosis is an abhorrent practice and speaks to the lack of integrity of this business.
If they allowed Slakker to buy the car I wouldn't take too much issue except for a questionable diagnosis. But the fact their employee benefited outright from this deception is appalling. We certainly cannot allow this sort of unethical practice to exist in our community. As such I've contacted the California Bureau of Automotive Repair to file a complaint. I urge others who are equally offended by this shop's practices to do the same. Slakker or the owner should also file complaint as they suffered directly due to this shop's actions.
You guys are tossing around opinion here like it's fact.
Yes, it's a weird/distasteful seeming conflict of interest for a shop that made a preliminary diagnosis of engine failure to purchase the car from the customer. It is MORE distasteful that the seller (allegedly) reneged on an oral agreement to sell the car to one party and instead sold it to his mechanic.
The seller elected to offload their car based on the ASSUMPTION that the IMSB was going bad. There is no indication here (or anywhere I see) on the Internet that there is a pattern of deception or fraudulent behavior by the mechanic...or ANY indication that the shop has ever been accused of perpetuating fraud.
If the seller had ANY inclination that the shop was being anything but honest, why would the he have reneged on the agreement to sell the car to Slakker? Rather, the seller opted to sell the car to his long-time - and trusted - mechanic so he would not have to do business with someone he didn't know / someone who might
potentially
not be completely legit.
There is a TREMENDOUS difference between doing something that appears unsavory or in poor taste vs. committing outright fraud. If the seller felt he was being defrauded by his mechanic - or even thought that they were being overly concerned about the contents in the filter, he could have taken the car elsewhere for a second opinion. He could have posted the results of the diagnosis online and shared pictures of the debris (which the mechanic DID save for the purposes of justifying the diagnosis that the IMS bearing was likely failing). He could have requested that they pull the sump - but he did none of these...presumably because he didn't want to spend more money on diagnostic work. Seller based his actions on the fact that metal was found in the filter.
Upon seeing metal in the filter, MANY Rennlist members (based on the opinions of certain sponsors) would want the engine split for proper diagnosis, exhaustive cleaning, and replacement of ANY components that might have been compromised due to metal circulating throughout the oil passages. My ASSUMPTION is that seller and his mechanic both felt that it would cost $5K - $10K to tear the engine down, make any necessary repairs, replace potentially compromised parts, and clean the engine thoroughly enough to feel confident that both the root cause AND any problems resulting therefrom would be eliminated. My guess is that the seller didn't want to spend that time, or the money, or take the depreciation hit when disclosing this to a potential buyer in the future, on a Cayman that has not yet finished depreciating.
What would YOU say if a seller mentioned during negotiations for you to buy his car that - by the way - "during the Q3 2016 service we found metal in the oil filter, but we ran another 27 quarts of oil through it and it has been fine ever since."That would send most people running - and you can be certain the comments on Rennlist would all say "RUN - don't walk - away from this car!" Seller cut his losses and walked away...admittedly, blowing off Slakker in the process.
TLDR: We have no evidence that the mechanic is anything other than willing to purchase a car that MIGHT be a time bomb. We DO know - according to Slakker - that the seller agreed to sell the car to him and then blew him off...the only REAL impropriety that took place (assuming the preceding sentence is factual) was on the part of the seller.
I promise to get back to being unreasonable immediately. It just raises my hackles to see people accusing someone else of gross impropriety without any evidence to support it. Just waiting to see what comes next...maybe "I heard they kill kittens" or "pretty sure they also punch babies. In the throat!"
(Slakker, no disrespect - just trying to get back to properly derailing threads)
"I felt a great disturbance in the For-UM, as if millions of keyboard warriors suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened. Where is Schnell and what have you done to him?!?!"
Well, as I said, I am certain that AutowerkesBruce will come in and set us straight to explain the following uncontroverted fact:
He allowed his tech to buy the car out from under another customer who hired Autowerkes to do a PPI on the car.
There is no conjecture WRT that issue.
Now, let's get into the gray area:
2. He allowed his tech to buy a car from a longtime customer at a very deep discount based solely on the diagnosis made by his shop. And, as I understand it, Autowerkes itself admitted it was a preliminary diagnosis. They even told him to get another diagnosis (which was the right thing to do). As raised by a couple of commenters, if Autowerkes' initial diagnosis was wrong, are they going to financially compensate the seller in some manner, who is a longtime and valued customer? If it's not the IMSB, won't it be more than a little awkward explaining that they screwed up the diagnosis yet profited at the customer's expense from that diagnosis? Wouldn't it be better to just not purchase cars from your clients right after you give them a catastrophic diagnosis? Wouldn't it be better to just have a policy that you buy other shops' catastrophic diagnosis vehicles if you want to get into the repair & resell business? Wouldn't that solve the ethics concerns raised herein? Wouldn't that have avoided all the conjecture caused by the obvious eagerness by the diagnosing tech to undercut Slakker and convince the customer to sell to him instead? There is a clear conflict of interest evident here even if there is no wrongdoing. Many other professions have dealt with similar situations by adopting simple rules. Gonzo pointed out the real estate industry. Attorneys have such rules. Here at the auto museum, all employees and board of directors members have an ethics code that prevents similar deals.
Hey, I've got no problem with Autowerkes' tech taking a car and fixing up and selling it to make some extra money. I buy cars and flip them myself (I have a dealer's license). But this deal just wasn't done right. So Bruce should come on here and explain.
And Schnell, I tend to agree with you regarding the seller - it does make sense why he'd want to sell to someone local who he knew rather than to slakker. Even though he backed out of the deal, I haven't criticized the seller. The shop should know better than to allow what happened though.
You ****ed Up. You Trusted Us. - YouTube
I touched on this briefly a few pages ago. I have a good friend who owns an auto repair business. I ran this scenario by him and he was very clear that he would not allow any of his mechanics to purchase a car from a customer after giving such a catastrophic diagnosis.
The bigger question for him was that the mechanic was willing to gamble $10k on a car that may need a new engine. Granted, labor costs would not come into play...just sweat equity...but if the current engine was toast, the cost of a replacement engine made that a mighty ballsy wager.
He doubted he ever had a mechanic work for him who A) had that much cash lying around much less having that much cash lying around to put at risk and B) would have made that gamble without hedging his bet...
Blue dress:
That is the reason a reputable company would have prevented this happening. Even
if
it is innocent (?) it looks really,really bad.And you have to ask that for all the resulting debate here, was it worth taking such a hit to your reputation?
Answer= you'll never know. Customers will just quietly avoid you.Dumb business move and no amount of 'splaining and whining will remove the stain .It sticks like .....
Appearances can certainly be important. However, we are all listening to this story from the perspective of someone (a) who has some degree of camaraderie with many of us and (b) relates the story from the perspective of an individual who is being wronged by a corporation. Humans tend to side with the perceived victim, and we are programmed by the media to assume that in any situation involving a corporation vs. an individual, corporations are evil and crooked and individuals are innocent and guileless.
Autowerks says the seller is a long-time customer with several cars in their care; this seems likely given the seller's behavior (extending preferential treatment to Autowerks). Does it seem prudent that someone who runs a business in an industry where personal referrals are tremendously important would cheat a long-term customer so they could...wait for it...get their hands on a decade-old Cayman that might REALLY be gravely ill? No, that would be lunacy. Autowerks claims to even have done some legwork pitching the Cayman to other potential buyers; at some point, the tech who ALSO has a relationship with the seller expressed interest, and the seller elected to hook him up.
The biggest single expense in rebuilding an M96 is labor. When the labor is essentially free (assuming work after hours/weekends) and parts can be obtained at-cost, it makes perfect sense that one of the employees is interested in the Cayman as a project car...and it sounds like seller wanted to be a good guy and help the employee out (regrettably, Slakker was boned in this process).
The only people giving this any mindshare are Slakker (due to the boning described above) and those of us chewing the fat. I haven't seen anyone post up as an Autowerks customer; I know that if this all went down with MY indie shop, I wouldn't think for a minute that the shop would be trying to perpetrate fraud on the seller, and I would commiserate with them about all the forum nonsense it had generated the next time I was there.
If you squint hard enough at any situation, you can find something you think might be inappropriate. Granted, this situation doesn't require much squinting to see something that you could imagine a little hinky, but there's still a MASSIVE gap between "wow, that might seem shady to some folks" and the outrage some people are expressing against someone they seem convinced to be guilty of defrauding a long-time customer without a shred of evidence support that position.
It's been a rule for as long as I can remember that a) I never sell a car to a friend or family member, and b) I never lend money to a friend or family member unless I am able (albeit not necessarily willing) to walk away from the loan. Maybe Autowerks should consider a similar rule; however, Autowerks isn't compelled to give a single damn about what I think...
If the seller was being wronged, yes, the answer to many of these [rhetorical
] questions would be yes. However, the seller has evidenced his willingness to wash his hands of the Cayman. Maybe he wanted that spot in the garage for a new golf cart; maybe he was tired of the Cayman and also needed a quick $10K for that whole-back laser hair removal he's always wanted and finally decided to buy.
Maybe Autowerks has NEVER purchased a customer car before, but they did so as a favor so the older gentleman (as Slakker described) wouldn't have to go through the hassle of trying to register the car as non-operational (since it's not smoggable in its current state and thus cannot be sold by its owner to an individual in the state of California).
Heck, maybe Autowerks went through the trouble to get licensed to buy/sell cars in California JUST BECAUSE metal in the filter of an M96-powered car puts some of their clientele in the situation of owning a car they cannot legally sell (the onus of smogging a car is on the seller in a sales transaction); the car is not a salvage title because nothing yet has been proved wrong with it, yet the seller knows that simply starting a car in such a condition to get it smogged has some small chance of rendering even the engine core unusable. Sure, this is a stretch, but not really that much more of a stretch than much of the conjecture that's being bounced around here...
On the plus side: I promise I'm done beating this dead horse, and I will return to the GW thread where they usually keep me locked up.
Interesting thread as I've been looking at pcars just like this one. Research seems to indicate motors are $10k parts only so turning any sort of profit is quite difficult even for the shop. So the fact they tend to purchase them is a bit suspicious and does lead to conspiracy theories of misdiagnosis or blatant fraud.
As kcattorney and others have stated they could easily have avoid any concerns by simply not allowing anyone affiliated with them from purchasing the car.
Doesn't seem prudent to me, but it happens.
Slightly different place on the depreciation/appreciation scale, but I have a friend that got screwed by Intersport here in Tysons VA. They THE Porsche independent in this area and everybody knows them. Other than their ridiculous prices I have never heard a complaint about them.
My friend bought her 97 993 Targa in 98 as a CPO. Every oil change, modification, repair, etc.. was done by Intersport until 2015 when she sold it to them.
She was in the middle of a divorce, didn't have a garage for it anymore, and couldn't bring herself to keep it on the street after so many years of babying it.
I regret not making her an offer as the best I could do was $25k and it was worth $35-40k at the time. I couldn't insult her with such a low ball offer.
They "helped" her out by giving her $20k for it. It was in their for sale list the next day for $40k and 3 days later it was gone
It was of course up to her to do her due diligence to have an inkling of it's value, but much like the seller in this story she just didn't want to deal with it and thought she could trust them based on her history with them.
I'm also not opposed to them having picked it up and making some profit, but probably $15k on a car that they just needed to post on their website (it needed nothing and was in perfect condition) is a bit obscene to me.
So that's clearly a case of them putting short term profits ahead of their reputation. I expect at least part of it is the hubris from being "the" Indy in the area and thinking their current work load won't go away (which it may never slack significantly). The fact that I'll never go there and will actively try to convince others to not go there really doesn't mean squat to them.
Ahh, well that changes everything.
Allowing the tech to buy the car after slakker hired them to do the PPI, then having the ***** to come on here and slam slakker: Priceless.
Consider this horse beaten to death.
(unless Bruce actually comes back here - then all bets are off!)
I completely agree with every word scnellyboomabingbang has written in this thread.
I mean, I have a great relationship with my mechanic who makes house calls and then sits in the back deck drinking beers and if one of my cars went **** up and I was selling it and he said hey, I'll give you that for it I'd sell it to him over some rando internet freakazoid any day of the week. And if he told me my car was broke, my car is broke.
The shop or employee shouldn't have bought it after I engaged them for the PPI and they shouldn't have purchased a car they diagnosed as catastrophic. All the other stuff just makes for an entertaining story.
I may post the PPI piece on google if I get around to it. If it's an isolated complaint, it will have almost no impact. If it's a trend then that's a whole other matter.
The one interesting tidbit I haven't heard anyone talk about was the guy that did a Rennfax stating that the oil hadn't been changed in 2 years. That could have complicated things.
Regardless, I've got parts arriving everyday and starting to pile up. Track car comes home next week and I get to dive in and finish phase 2.
I think it's a blessing in disguise personally as you don't need any distractions so that you can concentrate on your main ride. You do have a lot ahead of you in prepping your track car.
>>Intersport here in Tysons VA. They THE Porsche independent in this area and everybody knows them
..as arm twisters and 'ambulance' chasers. [Based on direct experience, too long to recount in detail: let's just say their efforts to drum up business at a Summit Point DE showed either diagnostic incompetence or mendacity. No third option exists]
I think both of you guys are wrong. I just went to their website and it says right there that they are great guys that you can trust. So, sorry, but what you say cannot be true. Just ask them. Come on, you can't base your opinion on actions when words say differently.
C'mon Gonzo. The guy is busy using the car for the greater good of mankind. He's probably turned it into a taxi to ferry orphaned puppies from the pound to no-kill shelters around LA. That's why.
After all, slakker was going to *gasp* MAKE MONEY off it.
(And slakker
hates
puppies)
