Either the TSSC price guide needs updating or someone's being rather optimistic...

[Mjit]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185329982606

An admittidly tidy looking Spitfire Mk IV...for £16,995?

[dougbgt6]

Something not quite right, claims to be 1973. M reg would normally be 1974, but an unsold 73 might hang around to 74.

However, dvla says first registered 1971. 

So how's a 71 got a 74 number plate?

Doug

[Mjit]

No, M reg is fine for '74, would just mean registered between Jan. and July 1974 , new registrations just coming out once a year, in August back in the day.

The "first registered" issue is probably down to shit record keeping at the DVLA and it getting miss-typed when they computerised everything/nobody noticing in the years since.

[NonMember]

50 minutes ago, dougbgt6 said:

So how's a 71 got a 74 number plate?

Sometimes happens with re-imports, but the DVLA doesn't normally record the original (foreign) registration date.

It could be a '74 car and the DVLA misread it. A '71 would have a black dash (none of the photos show the interior at all properly but the one that almost does looks like a wooden dash) but since most of the car's not original that's no guide.

[dougbgt6]

1 hour ago, NonMember said:

Sometimes happens with re-imports, but the DVLA doesn't normally record the original (foreign) registration date.

It could be a '74 car and the DVLA misread it. A '71 would have a black dash (none of the photos show the interior at all properly but the one that almost does looks like a wooden dash) but since most of the car's not original that's no guide

Or it's a Bitsa? 

db

[Josef]

The rest of the dealer’s stock is very much modern, so they’ve probably not done their research…

[Colin Lindsay]

1 hour ago, Josef said:

The rest of the dealer’s stock is very much modern, so they’ve probably not done their research…

That's what makes me wonder. He'll charge a high price, as a dealer, to sell a car that a private sale might get half of. The buyer will think he's safe and well covered if anything goes wrong, plus the car is in A1 condition, when in fact all it's probably had is a valet and he's got no more rights than with a private sale. Maybe some of the mechanics there are into classics, but it's rare these days, so what's the benefit?

[Josef]

Well, you do have extra consumer rights buying a used car from a dealer up to and including rejecting it outright and them being obliged to take it back and refund you in full. That’s in the case of it being misleadingly advertised or having a major fault. How easy that would be to exercise in practice I don’t know. Not that this justifies paying huge sums. 
 

My neighbour was telling me he saw an apparently fully restored Mk1 GT6 sell at an antiques auction for £6k in the last week or so. It’s the other end of the scale but the same root cause I’d think, someone who’s not really part of the classic car world has got hold of one for whatever reason and is unaware of what it’s actually worth. Modern dealers seem to rely entirely on the same valuation database which won’t contain Spitfires…

[DanMi]

I have checked the DVLA and states first registration October 73, which is correct for an M reg as is the interior with wood dash and headrest seats (though clearly recovered as piped red), so looks pretty original, though obviously restored. Don't forget that is an asking price not necessarily what someone will pay and it is a dealer so they will always try to get the highest price. TSSC concourse is 12000, 8000 for a1+ so yes a high price but will they get that figure?

[Mike Costigan]

Dealers' asking prices frequently have little relationship to reality. About two years ago a car (not a Triumph) came on the market which might have interested me; it was for sale with a dealer that is well-known for asking ridiculously high prices, but this one was expensive even by their standards. I've just checked their website; it's still for sale with them, although the asking price is now one third of the earlier price - it's still too expensive!

[dougbgt6]

15 hours ago, Mjit said:

No, M reg is fine for '74, would just mean registered between Jan. and July 1974 , new registrations just coming out once a year, in August back in the day.

I know, I said that.

 

1 hour ago, DanMi said:

I have checked the DVLA and states first registration October 73, which is correct for an M reg

What's this then?

Doug

[DanMi]

dvla issue

[Colin Lindsay]

1 hour ago, Mike Costigan said:

Dealers' asking prices frequently have little relationship to reality. About two years ago a car (not a Triumph) came on the market which might have interested me; it was for sale with a dealer that is well-known for asking ridiculously high prices, but this one was expensive even by their standards. I've just checked their website; it's still for sale with them, although the asking price is now one third of the earlier price - it's still too expensive!

There was a very nice early Herald which sold locally to me on Gumtree, I think about £4000. Less than a month later it was on a mainland dealer's website at around £8000. I suppose that's how they make their money.

[dougbgt6]

1 hour ago, DanMi said:

dvla issue

Yes Indeed! The tax section says 73 the MOT section says 71.

If it's a mistake, easily rectified. My original V5 said my GT6 was a convertible. I wrote to the dvla and pointed out their error, it's a coupe! They sent an amended V5 by return, no photos required, no independent assessment.

The point here is this is a restoration and if this is a dvla mistake it's been overlooked. So what quality is the rest of the restoration? 

Doug

[Peaks]

I never really understand why people buy a classic from a dealer, although I believe that increasing numbers are. The advantages of buying a modern used car from a dealer just aren't there with a classic dealer (OK, they might be in theory, but in practice I'm not sure many are relevant to classics), and in nearly all cases the dealer is simply flipping the car having done very little to it. 

Am I missing something? Is there an advantage to using a classic dealer? 

[Colin Lindsay]

11 minutes ago, Peaks said:

Is there an advantage to using a classic dealer? 

Like any trade there are different standards; you'll have classic dealers who know a good car and from experience will pick only the best, and a buyer will know there are no hidden nasties, so, besides a warranty, is getting peace of mind.

You also have the 'quick-buck' dealers who buy cheap and sell dear to the most basic of standards and trust in their mechanics or their warranty scheme to overcome anything they'll actually stand over. Some of them have what's known colloquially as a 'tail-light' warranty... once the tail-lights pass his boundary you're on your own. 

When my father passed away forty years ago a local dealer bought his car off my mother for £600, then put it on his forecourt for £3200. I only found out as it was a work colleague who bought it from him. 

[thescrapman]

Loads of dealers sell "on behalf of the owner" thus avoiding the warranty requirements 

Sometimes that owner is the dealer himself, or one of his relatives.

But it is not the company that owns it, so that is fine.

[PeteH]

We have a guy (dealer) locally who is doing just that. He`s had several through his showroom, mostly since lockdown, His "asking" prices are more that I would be prepared to pay. The one, Austin A40, I posted on another post recently was asking £7400. It`s sold, what for I have no idea, He`s now got a "spridget". Not been and looked at it yet, but curiosity will get me there before long, from the road the price looks around 11K. which to me is eyewatering!. Back in 2021 he had an MGB up for 11K. It went quite quickly, price unknown. I acutally looked at that one, as I thought at first it had been one I knew belonging to a Local who died, that had had a Full 10K+ ground up restoration, and was probably worth that much. allegedly It`s still in his garage, his daughter sometimes drives it.

Pete