Please do not buy this '89 930 before talking to me
 

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=266344606&dealer_id=613428&car _year=1989&model=911TURBO&make2=&mod_bookmark_id=4 204938&mod_bookmark_id=4204938&start_year=1989&key wordsrep=&keywordsfyc=&engine=&certified=&fuel=&se arch_type=both&distance=0&make=POR&color=&min_pric e=&incremental=All&body_style=COUPE&drive=&default _sort=priceDESC&lastExec=1250122275000&max_mileage =&sort_type=priceDESC&address=54451&advanced=&end_ year=1993&doors=&transmission=&max_price=&cardist= 1563&standard=false

VIN WPOJB0934KS050418

I promise that you won't be sorry we spoke.

Give us a hint...

possibly
 

Could it be the same 930 that the guy restored on this site that has low mileage and had bullet holes on the rear fenders? He lived in the Bay area I thought.

Just a thought.

Bryan

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=351941&highlight=930

This ad brought a reply (within hours) from a brand new Pelican in Ga. who was my saving grace. He had returned the same car to the same owner in Oregon about a year earlier. The car is white so it hides its flaws but the closer you look, the worse it gets....and it gets terrible.

Long story short, it took me a year and a half of heartburn, dealing with attorneys, depositions, time and money to return the car on a settlement that left me out $1k (I recovered all the rest in that settlement...I'm not complaining). The ordeal has my attorney going to the Oregon state supreme court on an appeal from the inspector who refused to participate in settlement (a theme throughout the whole thing) but now wants his attorney fees back (he lost the majority of that motion/appeal/(?) in the county the trial was originally set). I'm still in it in name only as my attorney leveled with me saying he never saw the inspector doing this as a possibility...gotta love an honest guy!!

Obviously there are a zillion details that are missing here but that's the cliff notes version. If you ask me, the car is about a $5-10K car today...at best.

The dealer is now aware of the issue in general...I'll be following to see where the ad goes.

WOW! What a story. Glad it has worked out for you.

Reminds me of a '96 VW Bug we bought for $16K when we lived in NC years ago. Talked to the one owner and he said the car was great, had one little fender bender, but that was it. I looked over the car and it was immaculate. Paid cash, but the owner was very late in getting the title. Finally after a couple of months, he said it was at the dealer and I could pick it up there. Went to the dealer and the dealer said by NC law, he had to tell me the car was wrecked for more than 25% of the value of the car by law. WTF! I said no way and left the keys and car right there, telling him that either VW, the dealer or the seller was going to give me my money back. Layered up and after two months we got $25K from the owner because he was looking at treble damages (3 x $16K) plus lawyers fees for the deception.

if you read the wording in the add it gets pretty scary. "Intentional missing information". "pictures may not represent the actual vehicle".....WTF? thats setting off alarms right there.

Actually, it says: "Some vehicle information and vehicle pricing may be unintentionally missing or inaccurate, and are considered invalid and may or may not be honored at the sole discretion of Kuni BMW" but it still made my radar go off. The "Picture may not represent actual vehicle" is right, how can they eff that up?

Boilerplate text for all their used car ads.

HELLLLLOOOOO TRACK RAT! rattle can her primer black, gut her, and throw some slicks on it.

update...sales people continue to misrepresent car by phone, sales manager won't return my calls... . Looks like another buyer may unknowingly be hung out to dry....amazing. I think the legal term is fraud.

images:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=491966