People are selling cars claiming they’re a cat b write off (ithout v5, for prts only) after it’s been scrappage schemed. Legal?

Yup. Legal. So long as they are not getting back on the roads.

There they are.

Errr I’ll post another link without the rude pics in. 😳

Clean well almost as it’s The Daily Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263548/Now-did-say-left-car-The-28m-backlog-perfectly-driveable-vehicles-waiting-SCRAPPED.html

some of them thar motors are worth well more than what the scarapage would give.that pic imo does not give the whole story as to why those vehicles are there.

There was an instance recently on a website I use where a car of some classic/collectors status had unbeknown to the owner being part ex’d on the scrappage scheme. The car, which was in pretty good condition was obviously not able to be driven on the road again but it was bought by a parts dealer and stripped for a large profit.

seems a shame so many good cars being binned, dealer i worked at had a 1981 renault fuego scabby yes , but would make a good resto project as it was all there.

Most of them were a waste, disgraceful. However if theyre OK for parts and not just cubed it makes a much better end result.

Can someone explain this line from Drac’s link please.

“The vast array of cars, including BMWs and Peugeots”

Now I’m no petrol head but I’ve never really regarded Peugeots as something we should be shocked about if we see it in a scrap yard. On the contrary, I’m usually shocked if I see a Peugeot *not* being driven to a scrap yard, unless of course it’s being towed there. Which is far more likely.

i’d quite like that subaru forester down the front.

Ah so that’s where NZ gets all its frikin cars from…

NZcol, how dare you! my 1991 nissan primera is a vintage motor

I scrapped my 12 year old VW Sharan 1.9 TDi, 128000 miles from new, nothing much wrong with it really, but there was no other way I was going to get 2 grand for it 🙁

In my opinion selling the cars for spares sort of defeats the purpose of the scrappage scheme.

Unless it’s being done on a commercial basis for the benefit of the public purse, but we all know that’s not going to happen.

The scheme was intended to get the automotive manufacturing industry moving again. Spare parts are also manufactured by this industry. Cube ’em I say.

Got 2250 for an S Reg Pegeuot 406 Estate, so it worked for me.

Pedantic, but of importance… you didn’t get that amount for your old car. You got a discount off a new car…

The Southern Yeti – Member

In my opinion selling the cars for spares sort of defeats the purpose of the scrappage scheme.

Unless it’s being done on a commercial basis for the benefit of the public purse, but we all know that’s not going to happen.

The scheme was intended to get the automotive manufacturing industry moving again. Spare parts are also manufactured by this industry. Cube ’em I say.

The scrappage scheme had no useful purpose.

scraprider – Member
some of them thar motors are worth well more than what the scarapage would give.that pic imo does not give the whole story as to why those vehicles are there.

Are you suggestion the Daily Mail might be misleading it’s readers?

Zokes – really?

There was an instance recently on a website I use where a car of some classic/collectors status had unbeknown to the owner being part ex’d on the scrappage scheme. The car, which was in pretty good condition was obviously not able to be driven on the road again but it was bought by a parts dealer and stripped for a large profit.

How was it part ex’d without the knowledge of the owner? Isn’t that theft?

Thurleigh is used by a number of different companies for storing vehicles. Not saying those are not scrappage cars but they could be there for a number of reasons, fleet returns, car supermarket trade-in’s etc. (friend used to work there moving them about)

The scrappage scheme was a complete waste and the reason that second had cars, especially those 4-8 years old are now expensive and short on availability.

It just meant that there are a lot less decent cheap secondhand cars for sale.

Pricing poorer people off the road or forcing them into debt to buy a more expensive car.

And scrapping all those perfectly decent, serviceable cars that could have been driven for many more years isn’t exactly environmentally friendly is it?

Horrible scheme, terrible policy.
Unless you’re a car dealer of course.

I could’ve got 2k for my old Passat but I couldn’t bear the thought of all my hard work in rennovating it going to waste. Sold it for 800 in the end.

And scrapping all those perfectly decent, serviceable cars that could have been driven for many more years isn’t exactly environmentally friendly is it?

That’s not why they did it – they did it to avoid having to massively bail out the car industry.

I could’ve got 2k for my old Passat but I couldn’t bear the thought of all my hard work in rennovating it going to waste. Sold it for 800 in the end.

Probably to someone who got £2k for it on the scrappage scheme.

No, sold it to my Neighbour who needed a good car, and had previously borrowed it and kept going on about how much they loved it. Seriously.. it was decent but not THAT good!

Plus you had to have owned it for a year before being able to cash it in IIRC.

That’s not why they did it – they did it to avoid having to massively bail out the car industry.

Give that man a fish! But what would I know… I wasn’t working for a manufacturer and hadn’t had several years working for a parts supplier / manufacturer either.

Zokes – really?

Yup – wasted huge amounts of tax payers’ money, priced lots of poorer people off the road, had no sound environmental basis (just look at most of the cars scrapped and how long they’d go on for with minimal work), and was saving jobs that large multi-national employers should have if they didn’t want to lose their skilled workforce just in time for the recovery.

They hardly jumped to save woolies et al., did they?

The people who use to shop at Woolies went to shop elsewhere. People didn’t stop buying homewares, kids clothes, toys or pick’n’mix so the business just moved.

People WERE stopping buying cars though and the scuppering of an entire massively important industry sector would be a lot worse.

Zokes… the manufacturers would’ve consolidated their production facilities… probably in Eastern Europe…. tens of thousands of jobs were at risk…

Do you not remember the stories of factories closing their gates?
Production stopping for upto 8 months?

I certainly remember taking a 10% paycut to help avoid redundancies.
I remember working out how we could support the supply chain to prevent massive job losses… millions of pounds being handed out to keep skilled staff in jobs… or at least on the payroll.

You don’t have a clue I’m afraid… the future of automotive manufacture in the UK was very nearly at an end.

The scheme was also sold on it’s environmental benefits as well aiding the motor industry.

I can link to Hansard if you want, but the environmental benefits were heavily pushed when the scheme was proposed.

Link.

Link.

I’ve no problem with bailing out the automotive industry, but to sell this scheme as environmentally friendly was a crock.

Not just the automotive industry either. I’m in the steel industry and at one point, our orderbook was so poor we only had enough orders for 3 days production – insanely tight for an industry that works on a 6 week average lead time.
Certainly helped our automotive orderbook.

Hey ho Twin… it didn’t help out the fluffy bunnies so it was a waste of time.

You don’t have a clue I’m afraid… the future of automotive manufacture in the UK was very nearly at an end.

Because people were buying fewer cars. I thought this was what successive governments had aimed for ever since they’d worked out what a mess Beeching made of the railways.

If you sell fewer cars, you need fewer people to make them. This is not a surprise. Bailing out huge multinational companies with no guarantees that the money or any future profits would continue to be invested in the country is frankly daft. Selling it mainly on its ‘environmental benefits’ doubly so.

LOL @ Zokes.

I’m not biting. I have a gym to get to. But I think you’ll probably find there was a temporary blip in car sales as everyone shat themselves about the economy which was against on ongoing trend for increased car ownership.

I’m not biting. I have a gym to get to. But I think you’ll probably find there was a temporary blip in car sales as everyone shat themselves about the economy which was against on ongoing trend for increased car ownership.

EVERYONE? Nope, can’t think of anyone I know who did, at least about the car industry at any rate.

As for being against an ongoing upward trend in car ownership, what bit of ‘decrease car use and increased uptake of public transport’ do you not get? This has been a government aim for longer that I can remember. One would assume decreased car use also, to some extent, means decreased car ownership. If people own fewer cars, it seems logical that they would be expected to buy fewer cars.

So there wasn’t a recession?

Damn you! Where’s TJ to argue everyone to the death leaving me free to chat nonsense on other threads!

So there wasn’t a recession?

Now where did I say that?

And how do most people buy new cars? Ah yes, by getting a loan and therefore in more debt.

Now then, how did the recession start again?

Not just the automotive industry either. I’m in the steel industry and at one point, our orderbook was so poor we only had enough orders for 3 days production – insanely tight for an industry that works on a 6 week average lead time.
Certainly helped our automotive orderbook.

I’m pleased to hear it did have some benefit then. I was a bit sceptical about it. I can see it working in Germany, since the Germans tend to buy German cars, but over here we buy anything, morel likely made abroad, so unless people were buying Minis, Nissans, Hondas, Jaguars etc, then new car funds will just have been going abroad (albeit keeping a few dealers in business).