https://www.carfax.com/VehicleHistory/p/Report.cfx?partner=CUL_1&vin=4JGAB57E24A460155&compCode=%2F0YXdBGG7R4CLwIf2CyTro7Qa6yK8Q%2FO


In the dealer ALL the time. Would you consider this a good thing, or maybe a lemon? Going to check it out soon.

I'm all over the place right now. Looking at 123's, 124's, 126's, 140's, 212's and now 163's.

__________________
RT


1984 300D---Sold
1995 E420 - 106K - Brilliant Silver Metallic/Orion Gray --- Sold
1984 300SD - 151K Manganese Brown Metallic/Mostly Black --- Sold
1982 240D - 79K - Manila Beige/Palomino---Sold

Other than a mileage history, ignore Car fax and others. Not every bad thing shows up and some minor things are tagged as dire. Nothing beats an in person inspection by a mechanic.

My SL was tagged at some point with " Moderate rear damage " , this would make you think rear bumper / support / tail lights / tail light panel. The actual damage was a rear bumper cover tear / shallow dent in the spare tire well from backing into a high curb / lawn mower. I'd hardly call this " moderate " but it could cause some to flee from the car.

The same car had the front bumper repaired 2x prior to me fixing it for the 3rd time ( low cars tend to tear the lower bumper. ) None of these two repairs showed up.

If someone pays out of pocket for a repair after a drunken night out, it likely won't show up. Nor will it if a car is repaired by a used car dealer after it was traded in.

CF is a shake down of car dealers, their advertising paints non subscribers as shady by convincing those with little car knowledge only CF knows what a good car is. This would be like me offering potential employees a certificate showing they are not criminals and convincing employers those without a cert are hiding something.

And they're charging some dealers $1,500+ a month for their questionable reporting. The argument always is they can only see so much, or not everything is reported to them, but then they also have marketed such that people won't buy cars without a clean CarFax.

__________________
68 280SL - 70 280SL - 70 300SEL 3.5 - 72 350SL - 72 280SEL 4.5 - 72 220 - 72 220D - 73 450SL - 84 230GE - 87 200TD - 90 190E 2.0 - 03 G500

Nissan GTR - Nissan Skyline GTS25T - Toyota GTFour - Rover Mini - Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - Cadillac Eldorado - BMW E30 - BMW 135i

I found this but no result of the case.

https://jalopnik.com/carfax-sued-for-50-million-by-120-dealers-in-massive-a-479988420

and this

https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1083776_carfax-sued-for-50-million-by-120-u-s-dealers
Carfax Sued For $50 Million By 120+ U.S. Dealers
Richard Read Richard Read Reporter


April 26, 2013

Carfax's catchy ads have encouraged millions of Americans to say "Show me the Carfax!" when purchasing used cars. That's great for Carfax's bottom line, but not so much for the dealers who have to provide those brand-name reports -- to the tune of $16.95 a pop, or a monthly subscription of up to $1,549.

According to AutoNews, 120 dealerships from across the U.S. are now suing Carfax for violating antitrust laws. And according to the lawyer handling the case -- Leonard Bellavia of Bellavia Blatt Andron & Crossett in Mineola, New York* -- dozens more dealerships have submitted paperwork to join the suit.

THE CLAIMS

Bellavia's clients are suing Carfax for $50 million in damages. Among the plaintiffs' allegations:

Carfax has exclusivity agreements with several popular used-car sites. In practical terms, that means dealers selling vehicles on those sites can only show vehicle history reports from Carfax, which effectively shuts out the competition.

Out of 40 used-car certification programs run by automakers, Carfax has exclusive arrangements with 37. In other words, if you're looking at a vehicle history report on a certified used car, there's a very good chance that your dealer has been obligated to use Carfax.

Carfax charges more for vehicle history reports than its competitors.

Adding a little bit of spice to the plaintiffs' case is the fact that Carfax reports aren't always accurate. Carfax and its competitors rely largely on the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System, a database of insurance claims and other data pulled from 41 states. Vehicle info from other regions can be left out of those reports, resulting in inaccuracies, not unlike the kind recently uncovered on 20/20. (Check out that news segment, embedded above.)

What does Carfax have to say about these allegations? So far, the company hasn't released a statement on the matter.

Interesting stuff guys. I don't put a whole lot of weight into a carfax, but honestly this ML was in the dealer 80+ times since new. Usually averaging about 8 visits per year. You have to admit that one would at least know it's been serviced, right?

__________________
RT


1984 300D---Sold
1995 E420 - 106K - Brilliant Silver Metallic/Orion Gray --- Sold
1984 300SD - 151K Manganese Brown Metallic/Mostly Black --- Sold
1982 240D - 79K - Manila Beige/Palomino---Sold

I'm thinking the owner either had OCD ( see the frequent car detailing ) or really liked the service writer.

Given the level of detail in the actual repairs / detailing, I wonder what was actually being done to the car during the other visits. The owner seemed to like the car otherwise I'd think they would have dumped it long ago if there were actual problems.