Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I bought my 2003 350GT Coupe 2 weeks ago. It was imported in early May this year, and complianced in late May. It had done only about 2,000km between compliancing & when I picked it up - the importer had been driving it.

I just wonder what the compliance workshop is meant to do. I have found numerous maintenance issues that I would have expected to be fixed when the car was comlplianced, and wonder if I have any recourse on the workshop that did the compliancing. Not sure if I'm allowed to mention the name, so I'll hold off for the moment. Although I live in SA, the car was complianced in Melbourne.

The issues that I would expect to be fixed during compliance / the full service that the importer assured me had been done:

1. The air filter was black & oily, and there was a huge buildup of oily "grunge" in the airbox before the filter. A new filter only cost $11, and about 30 minutes of my time, but thats not the point. This filter had done a lot more than 2,000 km.

2. The cabin air filter was growing stuff, and was also black. This also hasn't happened in 3 months & 2,000 km. A new filter was around $45, plus some of my time to install it.

3. The front disk rotors are 2mm thinner than the legal limit - ie 20mm. They have a huge lip around the edge where the rotor has worn. Once again there is no way this has happened in 2,000 km, so either they weren't checked or they turned a blind eye. I have ordered a set of RDA slotted rotors, and front & rear EBC Redstuff pads. This is the most serious issue with the car, and I am very surpirised that a mechanic could do a service & not pick this up. I would almost class this as criminal neglect.

4. The centre rear brake light wasn't working at all. To be fair, there is a small possibility that this has broken since compliancing, but given the other issues I doubt it. I assume this is a roadworthy issue.

5. The rear tyres were at or below the legal wear limit - they had been wearing below the wear markers for a while. I was under the impression that new tyres had to be fitted when an import is complianced - if this was done then the tyres were changed again after compliancing.

6. No radio expander had been fitted. This is a minor issue but I was under the impression that an expander was fitted during compliancing by most workshops.

I'm not sure if I should pursue these issues with the compliancing workshop or the relevent govt department. It has left a sour taste in my mouth. All problems except the brakes have been sorted, and the brake parts should be here within a few days. I have concerns that if this is how they are delivering cars people with less mechanical ability than me may well be driving cars that are not at the standard they should be, and don't realise it.

Any input would be appreciated.

These are all typical issues with any import. All of the above items were the same on my car, and it was a fresh import. When I personally imported my R34 from Japan and had it delivered to me, personally delivered to the compliance workshop here in Adelaide, then picked up by me, I had nearly all of the items and then some. I believe technically they are supposed to replace all the seatbelts and install side intrusion bars as well, but none of these were done on my R34 or V35.

The compliance workshops seem to run around doing whatever the hell they want ... but what is more amazing is that cars get through the transport authority pits for their first registration with these items not done. The fines for a workshop not meeting all the RAWS rules perfectly is HUGE.

1) Not necessary for compliance but if you paid for a full service on the vehicle and it's stated as such on your invoice, then you need to kick their bums on this one. It really comes down to semantics and what their definition of "full service" is. If it is meant to cover air filters, then they should have done just that. It's standard practice (and I think it's also specified as such by Nissan) to quickly check such items so I'd imagine it'd be part of a full service.

2) Same as #1.

3) Below legal limits = not roadworthy. I guess it boils down what I said in #1 about the definition of "full service". Either way, the vehicle is highly unsafe and should not have left their workshop, let alone the car yard, in that state as they could be held liable for that.

4) I agree with you on this one but not easy to prove that it was a product of their negligence, if it wasn't checked upon leaving the workshop.

5) I'll agree with you on this one. Again, this is a safety issue at a basic level. The importer, let alone the workshop, should have taken the responsibility of not allowing it to leave with unsafe tyres. Not necessarily new but certainly not illegal/worn out tyres. Again, this will be hard to prove without at least a witness to back you up on it as the importer can just say that you put on the worn out tyres in an attempt to squeeze a buck out of the importer.

6) Not imperative. I elected not to have one fitted to mine despite it only costing about another $50 or so.

I would definitely pursue some of those matters at least for the purposes of getting some of your money back. Your issue, however, is with the importer since that's whom you bought it from. Do not allow them to fob you off to the workshop, unless you paid the workshop directly. If you paid the importer and only the importer, the workshop's function was as a subcontractor to the importer and that leaves the onus on the importer to handle your matters. That's the simple legal fact.

The other issue here though is proving your case. As the complainant, the onus of proof is on you. The air filters should be a simple matter to prove if you have taken photos at least, preferably with your registration in view as well to demonstrate the photos are authentic. The discs, on the other hand, could be seen as more difficult to prove, particularly if you have done all the work yourself. If you have photos, that would certainly help but no guarantee. If you had this taken care of by another mechanic, you could use their testimony to help prove your case.

I'm not trying to discourage you here but it's not going to be an easy battle. Being the stubborn prick I am, I'd definitely go for the jugular with these guys but that's just me. In the very least, it gets these guys noticed by the relevant authorities and they'll have a watchful eye on them thereafter. Think of it as at least doing a service to your import vehicles community. :)

I remember reading through a copy of Street Machine once and found an interview with a mechanic whom I successfully challenged in the Tribunal back in 2006. While the article had shone him in a good light for anyone looking for a performance motor, I felt I had to tell the magazine editor about my experience with him when I had my "performance motor" built by him and the battle that ensued after the engine let go 2 minutes after starting it idling at 2000RPM. Sure, it probably fell on deaf ears but I like to think I did something to help other enthusiasts out there. It definitely bolsters my opinion of cash for comment with the media. Still, we have to do what we can.

I believe technically they are supposed to replace all the seatbelts and install side intrusion bars as well, but none of these were done on my R34 or V35.

Really? Don't compliance workshops have to provide paperwork which states all the work they've performed? With my V36, I only had stated on the compliance paperwork that they converted the headlights from HID to halogen, replaced the tyres and performed the necessary noise and emissions tests. So with the relevant state transport authorities requiring a copy of this paperwork, anything not documented but required would result in that arse kicking, wouldn't it?

I didn't pay for a full service as such, but was told it had been done before the car was advertised for sale. I was also told a few other things that weren't quite true, or at least not the full truth. I'm will follow this up in some form, just haven't decided how as yet. The car was probably still a good deal, even with the issues, so I'm not too pissed, just annoyed.

I'll keep the importer & compliance workshop id to myself for the moment - it's only fair to give them the chance to explain the situation before naming them.

The compliance sheet says the vehicle has new tyres & air filter when complianced - I can understand someone changing the tyres back afterwards, but not removing an $11 air filter & refitting a dirty one.

I'll post back when I have more info.

Edited by GeeDod

I bought it from someone who trades as a car importer, but he drove this car himself for a short period. It was complied approx 2 months before I bought it, and covered around 2,000km. He has an ABN and a business name that suggests that he works as an importer, and he advertises numerous cars for sale, all imports.

Sorry, no factory....

I have heard of new tyres being fitted to pass compliance, then the originals being put back on. I'm not sure what the regulations say about this, but it has to be morally wrong. I knew the rear tyres weren't new, just didn't realise just how bald they were until I took the wheels off the car.

Will assume that this "Importer" also has a "Factory"?

Anyway, part of compliance is that the car MUST have new Aus approved tyres fitted.

But that is just part of compliance. The importer will almost always pull their brand new tyres off and put some cheapies on before they actually sell the car.

But that is just part of compliance. The importer will almost always pull their brand new tyres off and put some cheapies on before they actually sell the car.

Which is typical practice and perfectly legal unless they're sold with bald tyres as the OP has suggested. Then it's not roadworthy for sale.

I believe technically they are supposed to replace all the seatbelts and install side intrusion bars as well, but none of these were done on my R34 or V35.

I think this is only required on certain cars.. for example the 300ZX required side intrusion bars, and maybe seatbelts. I am fairly sure the V35s don't require this for compliance.

To the OP, as others have mentioned, most of those items are service/roadworth issues, not compliance requirements. And you would have to check what 'full service' is.. it might not include and air filter and cabin filter.

If it was sold to you with a roadworthy/safety certificate, and it had no center brake light, illegal tyres, illegal brakes. I would take it back to the workshop that supplied the certificate and ask them to fix it, or report them.

The importer isn't me btw ;)

I can pretty much guarantee I know who it is if it has been complied interstate rather than here...

Freshly imported cars aren't required to be serviced when they arrive here, just meet ADRs. The work that is done will normally be written on the Consumer Information Notice which I'm presuming you don't have seeing it was registered here first by the importer.

To put it bluntly, once it's registered in Australia, it can and will be as roadworthy or unroadworthy as any other car already here - in other words, it's buyer beware if you buy something with dodgy brakes, tyres etc. Once it is registered, the workshop can and will officially wash their hands of it, as they can claim parts were switched after it was registered.

If your seller also happened to be a car dealer, then that's a different story - you'd have grounds for taking it up with the Office of Consumer Affairs if they don't make the necessary repairs, even on vehicles supposedly sold privately.

Lmao that's so obvious iamhe77

And yet it wasn't done and had the OP questioning if it had to be, thus my reply.

Yep, it is one of the most basic of requirements so why wasn't it done in this case?

Just to be clear it definitely wasn't Iron Chef - sometimes not "naming names" can implicate others by default, so sorry if anyone thought he was involved.

I didn't get a roadworthy certificate (not required to sell a car in SA) or a copy of the "service" paperwork, just told that it was freshly serviced. I do have the import paper (CIN) which states that at the time it was complianced, it had new tyres & a new air & fuel filter. I'm wondering now if I should replace the fuel filter, flush & service the auto box, and do an oil & filter change.

I'm more interested if:

The faulty bits were swapped for compliance, then changed back again by the workshop

or

The faulty bits were there when the car was complianced

or

The imported swapped the bits after compliance

I still think I got a good deal, and as stated I have fixed most of it & just waiting on parts for the rest. Out of pocket expenses will be a bit over $1K, but I will have new rear tyres, new slotted front rotors, new redstuff pads front & rear, etc. I just don't like being told something & then finding out it isn't true. Truth is I probably would have bought the car anyway if these things had been made clear upfront. I've run my business on a handshake & a promise for 15 years and it has worked fine, why the f*%k can't other people have the same integrity?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...