9 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHWould anyone consider buying a Cat C insurance write off ?
Leading reported evidence
Use cars/porsche-911-2dr-s-tiptronic-s-cradley-heath-201410017845346
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.
Would anyone consider buying a Cat C insurance write off ?
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Use cars/porsche-911-2dr-s-tiptronic-s-cradley-heath-201410017845346' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use cars/porsche-911-2dr-s-tiptronic-s-cradley-heath-201410017845346' (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.
Use cars/porsche/911-carrera-996/porsche-911-996-carrera-2-convertible-hi-spec-53-2003/2847230
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.
Would anyone consider buying a Cat C insurance write off ?
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.
9 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Porsche Club GB: 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: 20261026T213932Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi,
Would anyone consider this - Assuming a full independent Porsche inspection was completed (with no structural issues found).
Or is it too much hassle (additional insurance consideration / re-sale problems) ?
Its tempting - but interested in the views on this forum...
Thanks
Greg
Personally I wouldn't, but I can see the financial attraction. It will always have that Cat C stigma, and although you'll buy cheap, you'll have to sell even cheaper, and to a much more restricted number of buyers.
At first glance, that one looks a bit unloved to me. The drivers seat looks a bit saggy, and the aircon LCD has blown. A good PPI by a specialist would help, but it would need to be
very
thorough.
Maybe your question should be why would you buy a Cat C car if you could a reasonable HPi clear one for less??
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/porsche/911-carrera-996/porsche-911-996-carrera-2-convertible-hi-spec-53-2003/2847230
OK, not exactly the same at all, but with a hardtop as well[
]
As the previous comments say, why when there are straight cars for similar price. I would not buy a cat C, or D. But cat D can be minor damage, but either way its going to affect insurance and resale. I was never tempted as the hassle was not worth it in my opinion. There are people struggling to sell non damaged cars. So cat C would be difficult I would imagine. Good Luck whatever you decide, by the way, the Silver cabriolet looked nice, and fair price I would have thought.
Maybe - but you need to know what the actual repair was - remember this car was badly enough damaged for the repair to be uneconomic against trade book price, so you can reason that out to be £10k plus of damage - okay that might well be at OPC prices (at least for parts) but actually its more likely assessment through an insurer network, where labour rates are low.
So if someone has been able to repair it and its now for sale at less than usual market asking price, ask yourself where's the join? (or the badly welded seam...).
Proceed with extreme caution my friend - full engineering inspection essential - and that's going to cost you £3-400 notes.
Best.
Thanks for all the comments - The search goes on (discounting the Cat C cars from now on)...
Paul was right, there are plenty of others available - patience was never my strong point
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
