14 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHWhat does CPO paperwork suppose to look like?
Leading reported evidence
Inspect cpo (which i and the dealer had
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
A checklist of all the items inspected for CPO (which I and the dealer had to sign)
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
None of those things means the vehicle is covered per se, in fact the confirmation of coverage will be when you check with a dealer to make sure your VIN comes up with a CPO warranty in the Porsche computer system.
Leading evidence: 'Inspect cpo (which i and the dealer had' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'good thing' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check with a dealer' (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 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.
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.
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
It was probably a good thing that I never inquired about the warranty in those first six months.
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 contain suggestions
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.
Suggestion
None of those things means the vehicle is covered per se, in fact the confirmation of coverage will be when you check with a dealer to make sure your VIN comes up with a CPO warranty in the Porsche computer system.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Check with a dealer
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that contain suggestions
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.
Suggestion
None of those things means the vehicle is covered per se, in fact the confirmation of coverage will be when you check with a dealer to make sure your VIN comes up with a CPO warranty in the Porsche computer system.
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.
14 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.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Hi everyone,
I've just purchased a 2004 GT3 from an authorized Porsche dealer and other than a handwritten note on the sales contract I don't have any "official" paperwork, handout or presentation folder.
When I asked for this documentation, I was told it would take a little while to receive, and not to worry because the car was already CPO'd.
I find this weird, especially when considering the sales pitch that indicates a pre-owned purchase experience with Porsche should be as satisfying as a new car purchase.
Cheers,
David
i never got anything from PCNA but I did get a "certificate" signed by the salesman at purchase which basically said I had a CPO car. Have used the CPO so I know its genuine!
If it's an authorized Porsche dealer, I wouldn't lose any sleep. Don't worry - call the dealership GM if you don't get over it. Unless they're going out of business, you should be AOK.
I agree with eDoug... don't worry about it. i dont have any paperwork. brought it in once for oil service and dead powerseats. they replaced the powerseat motors under cpo. nice guys!
I received the following:
1. A checklist of all the items inspected for CPO (which I and the dealer had to sign)
2. A certificate indicating the VIN and the effective date
3. A receipt indicating the vehicle was CPO
None of those things means the vehicle is covered per se, in fact the confirmation of coverage will be when you check with a dealer to make sure your VIN comes up with a CPO warranty in the Porsche computer system. If you receive the box in the mail, welcoming you to CPO, you're in the computer. If you haven't received the box, just ask the dealer to put you in the national computer system and remember to mark down the dates of coverage.
When I bought my car I had a big red stamp across the paperwork saying "certified"...I was a bit concerned at first, but then about three weeks later I received a nice Porsche Tin Box with the logo embossed in it. Inside was all the warranty info, tow coverage, effective dates, catalogs etc..very impressive little gift.
Initially, I recieved a checklist that stated CPO on it from the dealer. But the official items came in the mail inside a metal box with my official CPO letter and booklets from Porsche HQ.
Just remember that if you aren't in the computer, and something happens which requires the vehicle to be towed in, you've got no roadside. Call the dealer, and confirm.
I wasn't "in the computer" when I called roadside assistance a week after I got the CPO - they towed it at no cost and figured out the paperwork later. Again - it takes a little while - and I got my metal box after sending in the "registration card" that came with the CPO papers.
This shouldn't be a big deal - just contact the dealer, or better yet, send them an email and get confirmation that you have a CPO car from PCNA. Shouldn't take 5 minutes.
When I bought my car back in July, 2005, the only official indication that it was certified was what was handwritten on the sales contract. I did not receive anything from Porsche NA until February, 2006. At that point they sent a letter welcoming me for my purchase of a CPO car and the tin box with brochures. At the time I just thought they were really slow.
The good news was that somewhere in the computer they listed my purchase date as of February, 2006 and as a result my warranty did not expire until February, 2008. I got an extra six months of coverage. That little mistake on the part of Porsche cost them a new transmission for me in December, 2007, although technically I had first complained about the symptoms back in June when I thought the warranty ended in August, 2007. That was when I discovered the mistake in the computer.
It was probably a good thing that I never inquired about the warranty in those first six months. If I had, I might have lost out on the extra six months. My advice is to make sure it is on the sales contract at least. If you can get a copy of the certification checklist, that is also a good idea. As long as you are in the computer though, that is what really counts.
Glad to hear that worked out for you. While I haven't had to personally deal with it, I've had two dealers (the original certifying dealer and the service writer at my local dealer) tell me some bad stories about flatbed bills in the past.
+1 on making the call
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
