Acpantera

Carfax reeks of bull *****... My dad went to trade in a car to buy his last new Buick at the age of 90. The Buick he was trading was only 3 years old and had just over 10,000 miles. The dealer was trying to de-value his trade because carfax showed an accident. The accident in question was 2 tires and 2 wheels that his insurance paid for after hitting a monster pot hole. The car was perfectly fine, everything was done at the dealer (same one he was dealing with) and checked over thoroughly including an alignment. After a longer than normal transaction, we made the deal. A few days later the dealer was advertising his old trade as having a "clean carfax". At the time I was pissed but never had the time to pursue their douchebaggery. It's shady stuff.

ZL-1

I’m no fan of Carfax either. Unfortunate that they won’t reconsider, likely because of the difficulty of searching back over 15 years. One odd thing is its having been titled in Florida, Nebraska and Texas just in its first few years, before you bought it. That might make it look like a title wash to Carfax. Florida has had flood cars with little or no apparent damage yet declared a total loss. It’s unfortunate that Carfax is unwilling to be more specific. If it’s a nice car you might do well selling it privately.

Avanti

The old adage, "Garbage in, garbage out" still holds, be it for Carfax or any other info source.

John Harry

I'm always a bit surprised at the bad Carfax comments. It's one - and only one - source of information. Most items that appear on Carfax are correct, and errors can be corrected. I know, I've done it. Missing info is a different story, since they can only report what's been reported to them.

johnodrake

Have you considered an attorney and a law suit? You have demonstrable damages from an apparently incorrect report.

JALLEN4

The problem with CarFax is what is the true value of their services to the general public. There is no question that they now have a huge impact on the market. Problem being is that impact is against the consumer. Every dealer today looks at the CarFax report and starts deducting what is considered to be negative information, whether it be a trade or a purchase. The real dollar amount of depreciation for a three year old $2500 wreck that nobody really can detect looking at the car, becomes highly overblown because the amateur retail customer is going to put a much higher value on it.

In addition, we now have the insurance impact where the consumer is demanding compensation for value lost on accidents that are not their fault. While some of this is certainly justified, much of it is not when the vehicle is easily repaired but becomes a part of the permanent record. The insurance industry pays but in turn recoups their expense by raising rates for everyone.

The market has convinced a large number of the buyers that what CarFax reports is Gospel and a clean report vehicle is the only one worth buying. Factually, that still leaves a large percentage of poor purchases that were not properly inspected before purchase and that CarFax failed to turn up the proper information. CarFax pays for that information and profits greatly from selling it to participants in the overall car sales business, all at the expense of the buying public.

Andybump

Perhaps the LN reports could also become part of CarFax report. Then we can see if the previous owner was abusing the car with high speed, heavy braking, heavy acceleration, and whatever else is included in those data.

RKCRLR

My wife had a 2008 Hyundai Azera that was only worth a few thousand dollars when we went to sell it. She had hit a small animal that required replacement of the lower valance and bottom aero cover and had it professionally repaired under our insurance coverage. The dealer wanted to subtract $1500 from the ~$3000 value because of the CarFax report.

JALLEN4

From experience, the dealer had little choice as he was going to get beat on by the eventual buyer whether it was retail or wholesale. Factually, most likely a great car that was well taken care of and a normal inspection would make it a desirable purchase.

hawkgfr

I'm more surprised anyone would believe 10% of what they say as there is no real due diligence on their part and no one to over see the validity of what they report Its just an easy money grab for them............

Blue Lion

I'm sure like many databases they are "crap in, crap out". They have saved me from buying damaged vehicles over the years but I'm also sure they have not helped others.

smithers

Carfax is only as good as the data that is provided to them. Not every business or agency that provides data will be as reliable as other. The sources may not even report data right away. So if a car is wrecked and quickly fixed at a body shop, one could easily sell the car before the wreck hits the report.

In OP's case where an issue hit the report years later, I wouldn't be surprised if a business that didn't previously report to Carfax started reporting to them (switched their back end system to one that automatically reports things to Carfax.. something like that) and all of their old data was then reported to carfax all at once. That'll cause problems for people.

Carfax competitors aren't any better. My old car took a solid hit when it was still basically brand new... not totaled, but structural damage. Accident wasn't reported to Carfax, but the damage was reported by the body shop (showed up months later on the report). Sold the car to Carmax, disclosed the history as it was on the carfax... well they use autocheck, and that had zero report of the accident or damage. So they sold the car as a "one owner, clean history" car for top dollar. So someone out there paid a premium for that car and won't be too happy when they go to sell it and someone checks the carfax and proceeds to beat them up hard on the price.

Agree that carfax is just another tool and not something to 100% rely on. Unfortunately there isn't a good way to really research a cars history on your own.

cor28vettes

What are the suggestions to employ all due diligence, beyond Carfax in the tool box? With the assistance of others, if available. ID any sources please for clarity. With links, if any are available.

BlindSpot

Get a PPI done (just like you would probably have a preowned home inspected)
Check the number of previous owners and how long each owned the car. (carfax)
Etc,

These are more pieces in the puzzle if I am looking at preowned.

captras

attorneys won't touch it because it is 16+ years old.

NORTY

OP~
You have suffered no loss of value to your car. It is still in-service. Enjoy your car. It did nothing to you.

Now, when you decide to sell your car, and you think that your car's value has diminished, due to the Carfax report, THEN you now have damages. It would at this time, that you go after Carfax for "DIMINISHED VALUE.

Attorney time, then.

You can't prove damages, until you sell the car. Then, you'd have ammo for a hearing.

JALLEN4

Honestly, do you have any idea what it would cost to hire a lawyer to chase that dream?

John Harry

Some good suggestions above, and ask any Chevy dealer to run a VIS report (now IVH, for Investigate Vehicle History) on the VIN.

_zebra

for real? clearly, neither of y'all read through this thread before posting in it.

the OP bought the car in 2007 (with a clean CarFax report) & was recently trying to sell it back to a dealer who severely depreciated the car based on CarFax now saying it's been a salvage vehicle since before the OP bought it (despite being proven wrong by the OP's various add'l sources). Additionally, CarFax refuses to correct their report. The OP tried to get a lawyer, but none would take the case due to its age.

JALLEN4

Clearly, you did exactly what you accuse me of doing...not reading the thread. Check my post numbered 31 and 46. I express my concern for the OP's predicament and my distain for CarFax.

I have more than 40 years experience in real estate development and buying, selling, and operating new car dealerships. I have gained a reasonable working knowledge of potential legal expenses having spent well more than a million dollars on them in my career. Should the OP find someone to accept the case, which he states is a problem, he is going to pay the attorney to force CarFax to disclose their source. Should that prove to be possible, there is certainly a possibility there is a legitimate source reporting the fact. The attorney would then have to prove the source in error, prove CarFax liable for accepting the source, and prove the amount of value damage suffered.

All the time in this process your attorney would be pitted against a company that most likely has their own legal representation on staff and deep pockets. This happens while you are paying $250-750 per hour for your attorneys time with the possible upside of winning an eventual ten grand or so in damages to the vehicle value. Anybody who has ever been in one of these protected legal battles will tell you what a terrible bet it really is.