From: JB on 9 Jul 2010 04:08
"CT" <me(a)christrollen.co.uk> wrote in message
> JB wrote:
>> The description was pretty accurate except for "full service
>> history" actually meant full service history _apart from_ the 23k
>> mile gap between the last 2 services!
> I've always wondered about the term "full service history". Does it
> mean (or *should* it mean) that there is a documented service history
> *and all service intervals have been complied with* or does it mean all
> services history documentation is present but with no implication that
> it is indeed at regular service intervals.
I've always assumed that FSH means that _all_ services have been completed
to the manufacturer's recommeded mileage schedule. No gaps; No missing
services. I don't care about not being main dealer serviced. In fact I'd
rather a small independant specialist did the work every time.
> In this case, as long as the seller wasn't trying to imply that there
> was an (undocumented) service within that 23k miles, then they're not
> actually hiding anything and it then fits the latter description.
There were a few other discrepancies too which rang alarm bells in any case.
I found a mint for the same money a few months later with a binder full of
just about every receipt/bill/MOT etc.
From: CT on 9 Jul 2010 04:10
Niel Humphreys wrote:
> I don't know if this is relevent but on the 1st pic the front brake
> calliper seems to be red but on the other photos the other side of it
> shows it silver. Also on the back wheel on the new photos there seems
> to be something hanging down under the chain guard which should be
> visible from the other side but is not there on the original photo.
The 1st pic is obviously of a bike in a garage or showroom. Maybe the
only one he had of the bike when setting up the auction was the one he
saved from when he bought it. Since then, it's had a few tweaks (rack
removed, caliper replaced etc.) but it's actually the same bike but now
photographed as it is now, in his back garden.
> Having said that the new photos do seem to shop a very good condition
> bike anyway....
From: crn on 9 Jul 2010 04:23
In uk.rec.motorcycles The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> As far as I'm concerned, if I bid on the strength of the original pic,
> and tht pic turns out not to be of the item being sold, and the ite
> turns out to be in considerably worse condition than that in the pic,
> the seller can take a hike.
> Any other thoughts?
Not as described
I suspect that the seller is a numpty and that the original picture
is indeed an online stock picture.
At the end of the day, is the bike actually a good deal at the price,
if so you might still want it.
76 Honda 400/4 project
78 Honda 400/4 in black
06 Sukida SK50QT (Slanty eyed shopping trolley)
From: petrolcan on 9 Jul 2010 04:23
In article <1jlctru.khlnl41pz54okN%totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk>, The Older
> petrolcan <petrolcan(a)SPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > The first pic has a decal on it that doesn't show up on any of the other pics.
Half way along just under the seat but two cups of coffee later I now suspect
that it is a reflection from the strip lighting.
From: Ace on 9 Jul 2010 04:34
On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 08:55:35 +0100, Champ <news(a)champ.org.uk> wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 08:02:06 +0100, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk (The
>Older Gentleman) wrote:
>>I'm currently the high bidder on this item
>>After I'd bid, like a day or two after, the seller uploaded all the
>>other photos. I dunno how this was done, actually, as I didn't think you
>>could modify a description after a bid had been placed, but I assume he
>>had the urls in place pointing to where he had the pix and he hadn't
>>actually got the pix ready at the time.
>>I have a funny feeling that the original photo was not of the actual
>>bike being sold. For a start, it wears a carrier, not visible in any of
>>the other pix, and secondly...
>The subsequent pics seem to show the bike with a mainstand (which
>surprises me, as I wouldn't have expected one on such a bike). But in
>the first picture, I'm fairly sure there's no sign of a mainstand.\
I noticed that too, ans also that the sidestand seems to be shiny
metal on the first pic, black on the others, although that could be
just a trick of the light.
>Also, is the brake caliper red in the first pic? It's not in the
Or maybe it's just red on one side?
>I think you're right to be suspicious.