914 Condition Assessment Form?, Do we need this? Options

[JeffBowlsby]

Would this be a useful tool for us? It would be a form sorta like the rental car agencies use to show existing damage only more detailed and specific to the 914. The form would benefit all parties to a transaction to more fully document the condition of a 914 to avoid misunderstandings and worse. I wish I had something like this on previous buys.

I envision a multipage form that is filled out by an owner, buyer or PPI inspector to document the condition of a given 914. Use it as a disclosure statement to a buyer, and a basis for negotiating a fair price. 914s are special interest cars now, with buyers finding cars far away where they cannot be personally inspected.

The form would have simple line diagrams including all 4 sides of the car, a plan view looking down from the top, a plan of the bottom and interior views – all to be drawn upon and conditions noted. A buyer could insist that the seller fill it out (for full disclosure) or better, pay a PPI inspector to complete. A proactive seller would furnish it without asking as a sign of good faith. The form could be a free benefit (downloadable .pdf) of belonging to this fine forum. The form could be used as evidence to document a car before it is shipped in the event of shipper-caused damage.

In addition to the diagrams a checklist of items to verify and room for comment would be included, covering everything from what is included in the sale (a list of extra parts and paperwork), the oil change/valve-adjustment history, to anything else the owners wishes to list ‘the top leaks and squeeks’, the registration expires in October’, ‘COA included’, etc.

Specific condition items could easily be documented with this form that often get overlooked, with as much care as the inspector can supply, that often affects a 914s value.

A basic level of inspection/documentation would be visual only and only cover things that can be observed without tools, lifts or removing any parts:
-Curb rash on wheels
-Non-op lighting/electrical mechanical system flaws
-Body/trim/glass/weatherstripping/lenses – every chip/ding/scrape/flaw/rust bubble
-Upholstery tears, carpet wear
-Remaining tire tread
-Shock absorber function
-Driving test impressions
-Non-stock or upgraded equipment
-Missing/worn parts and funky repairs
-Overall impression of cleanliness and maintenance
-General classification of car as ‘show-driver-race-repairable-parts car’

A more thorough inspection/documentation would require additional time, tools and access which would most likely be done in a shop:

-Underbody cleanliness or damage if a lift is available
-Oil/brake fluid leaks
-Brake rotor/pad thicknesses
-Compression/leakdown tests
-Exhaust system rust
-Suspension/steering bushing wear
-Rocker panel/Hellhole condition

With the most complete reports, detailed photos of critical areas can be included with the report.

[championgt1]

That is actually a real cool idea. Especially for people buying cars sight unseen.
Then you could know what needs fixing and where to put the jackstands first (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Great idea Jeff! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beerchug.gif)

[markb]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

Maybe something like they use for insurance adjusters.

[BMartin914]

That is one of the best ideas I have heard in a long time Jeff!

[ericread]

Geez Jeff. Just when I think you're gotten old and senile you come up with another really great idea!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Let me know if I can be of assistance.

Eric Read

[watsonrx13]

Absolutely.... great idea..... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smilie_pokal.gif)

-- Rob

[Rusty]

Fantastic idea! Could we add views inside the engine compartment and the two trunks?

[SGB]

Perhaps the form could point the reviewer toward some known weak areas-
-condition of rocker panel/ longitudinal area
-cylinder head condition (possible exhaust leaks, stripped spark plug holes, existance of heli-coils, etc)
-slop in shift linkage
-1st/reverse synchros
-trunk hinges

just a thought.

[r_towle]

This is what a PPI is all about.
No form should be needed for a dedicated and knowlegable person providing this service.

A PPI is typically only done by someone with a long history of working with these models. It should be very detailed, and cover all body, mechanical, and authenticity issues in detail.

This is why a real PPI costs money, $100 or more depending upon proximity...and the cost is not based upon weather you buy the car.
This is a professional service, not a money maker...

In the 356 world, a PPI is typically done by a thrid party with 10-20 years experience working on 356's...either as an owner or restoration shop. A typical PPI is not done by a person that has not taken one of these cars apart and restored it...that is the only way to know ALL the potential issues...

Also, at this stage of the market, we should be locating and providing a list of PPI service providers that have credentials to back up a PPI. This is more important than a standard way of doing a PPI...its pretty standard if you have had a few done.

Expect a real PPI to be alot more detailed, with pictures, than any form could cover.
Each car is different, thus a PPI.
To build respect for the model, a PPI network of knowledgable and thorough reputable inspectors should be listed, like on the 356 registry.
If you want a PPI, there is a list based upon location.

Rich

[JeffBowlsby]

Fantastic idea! Could we add views inside the engine compartment and the two trunks?

I was thinking the same thing... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[JeffBowlsby]

Perhaps the form could point the reviewer toward some known weak areas-
-condition of rocker panel/ longitudinal area
-cylinder head condition (possible exhaust leaks, stripped spark plug holes, existance of heli-coils, etc)
-slop in shift linkage
-1st/reverse synchros
-trunk hinges

just a thought.

Some great ideas there...

[JeffBowlsby]

This is what a PPI is all about.
No form should be needed for a dedicated and knowlegable person providing this service.

A PPI is typically only done by someone with a long history of working with these models. It should be very detailed, and cover all body, mechanical, and authenticity issues in detail.

This is why a real PPI costs money, $100 or more depending upon proximity...and the cost is not based upon weather you buy the car.
This is a professional service, not a money maker...

In the 356 world, a PPI is typically done by a thrid party with 10-20 years experience working on 356's...either as an owner or restoration shop. A typical PPI is not done by a person that has not taken one of these cars apart and restored it...that is the only way to know ALL the potential issues...

Also, at this stage of the market, we should be locating and providing a list of PPI service providers that have credentials to back up a PPI. This is more important than a standard way of doing a PPI...its pretty standard if you have had a few done.

Expect a real PPI to be alot more detailed, with pictures, than any form could cover.
Each car is different, thus a PPI.
To build respect for the model, a PPI network of knowledgable and thorough reputable inspectors should be listed, like on the 356 registry.
If you want a PPI, there is a list based upon location.

Rich

I hear what you are saying Rich. The form I am proposing is more of a standardized checklist to help prompt the inspector to verify all critical conditions, as well as provide a background format to assist in recording all observations. It is to facilitate the most thorough PPI. Photos would either be attached in print form showing all conditions observed or better, on a CD because its cheaper, faster and more effective. So many times, the detailed info about condition that would be on this PPI form is not even discussed between buyer/seller and this form would promote both a more careful evaluation by an inspector and a more thorough disclosure by a seller. Win-Win. Maybe I will call it a PPI checklist.

I LOVE your idea for generating a list of qualified PPI providers...can you start a separate thread that could either become 'classic' ? Or maybe the admins could think of a better way to display qualified persons, a separate page?

I would nominate: Rich Bontempi, Perry Keihl, Brad Mayeur, George Hussey, Dave Pateman, Pat Garvey, surely there are others in every area.

The only item I would challenge you on is the price, only the most basic visual PPI could be done for $100 or so, but that type of PPi probably would not reveal much more than even a layperson would observe. Here in the SF Bay Area, a good visual PPI should take at least 2 hours to do including the time to complete the report, process the photos to CD and discussions. When you start doing compression tests and taking off rocker panels, the time goes up accordingly. An hours time for someone with that level of 914 knowledge around here is at least $100-150, so any worthwhile PPI cost is well more than a C-note. Costs in other areas of the country would be commensurate with their locale.

[Rusty]

Personal opinion follows: Ed Mayo, Mark DeBernardi, Clay Perrine. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[r_towle]

Cost is what it is.
The business providing the PPI dictates the price.

Bottom line is that this is a service offered for classic cars.
There is not standardised list or format because then the list creator is liable..
You want the PPI service provider totally liable for what they include/dont include in a professional PPI.

The list of PPI service providers should not be a thread, but should be a pull down list at the top of the 914info section.

I forget where it is, the the 356registry has a section with all PPI volunteers.
Do not add any names to the list if that person has not agreed.
Yes, its business, but its not bread and butter business.
It can be a PITA some weeks if its busy.

To do a good PPI, yes it takes a few hours...could be three or four hours depending upon the initial inspection results.
The car must go on a lift, it must be driven etc etc.

Rich

[Rusty]

The list of PPI service providers should not be a thread, but should be a pull down list at the top of the 914info section.

I disagree. A list of potential PPI providers doesn't belong in the 914info section any more than a list of vendors or suppliers. A thread is the perfect place for that info, IMAO.

We're not the 356 registry... for so many reasons. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[r_towle]

It would end up being easier to find the names in the long term versus searching a thread.
Your one of the admins, so your opinion counts as to how its implemented.

We are, for all intents and purposes, serving the function of a 914 registry...at least we are a centralised (two sites) place to go look for thse types of things.

Maybe Jeff could host a list on his site...he has a format that suites the need.

I am not sure if I was clear above...
Please consider asking anyone before claiming that they do PPI as a service...some people/business's like to do them, some dont.

Rich

[ericread]

Cost is what it is.
The business providing the PPI dictates the price.

Bottom line is that this is a service offered for classic cars.
There is not standardised list or format because then the list creator is liable..
You want the PPI service provider totally liable for what they include/dont include in a professional PPI.

The list of PPI service providers should not be a thread, but should be a pull down list at the top of the 914info section.

I forget where it is, the the 356registry has a section with all PPI volunteers.
Do not add any names to the list if that person has not agreed.
Yes, its business, but its not bread and butter business.
It can be a PITA some weeks if its busy.

To do a good PPI, yes it takes a few hours...could be three or four hours depending upon the initial inspection results.
The car must go on a lift, it must be driven etc etc.

Rich

I respectfully disagree about the checklist creating liability. In any standardized testing/evaluation, a checklist is used as a a baseline to ensure all significant points have been covered by the inspection. It should never considered to be an all-inclusive testing script for PPIs. The creation of this baseline checklist creates a pro forma document which should serve to a) ensure the inspector covers all of the anticipated defect areas, and; (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) limit the liability of the inspector from claims as items that are not on this checklist are considered, at this time, as being unanticipated to be significant defect areas.

What has to occur next is that a steering committee be created to provide draft checklist. The checklist needs to be created with diagrams and instruuctions. This checklist should be posted on this board for a comment period period of 30 days, during which comments and suggestions be considered. Once the 30 day period has expired, the steering committee should revise the checklist and publish this checklist. At the start, the checklist should be revised semi-annually, and once the checklist has matured, the checklist should be reviewed with a comment period on an annual basis.

While this process is somewhat cumbersome, it does a couple of things. Firstly, it involves all of the board participants, which should increase the perceived buy-in of the 914 community. Secondly, it places the responsibility of the document not on a few persons, but upon all of the participants and contributors of this board, which greatly reduces the culpability of any single person who assisted in making this list a reality.

I think this is a great idea whom time has come.

Eric Read

[ericread]

One other note. IMHO, the checklist should be published on this board and be available to all. Any list of "qualified" inspectors should not be tien to this list and should be provided as a seperate item. The problem with listing "qualified" inspectors is that without a testing and certifying body, there is no way to qualify or certify persons as being qualified.

Any liability really lies in suggesting persons that may or may not be qualified to perform these inspections. While the list being proferred is actually pretty good, I'm not sure George Hussy or some of the other listees really want to be called to perform PPI's on a regular basis. Or would you let the Qulaified Inspector assign delegates to perform the PPI in his/her name?

The Qualified Inspector part is, in my opinion, not without liability. It also risks removing some very qualified persons from consideration from performing this service.

I say, let's start with the checklist, and look to naming qualified Inspectors as a second phase of this project.

Eric Read

[SirAndy]

simple, start a thread where people can post qualified shops/persons for doing PPIs and add a link to that thread in the "914 Info" section.
that way, you never have to search for the thread ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/shades.gif)


now, as far as the form goes, i think it's a great idea. i could have used one on the last two PPIs i did.
now matter how often you've done this, a checklist is always beneficial. i'm not getting any younger. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

and we can host the form here as well for people to download and print out ...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/cheer.gif) Andy

[davep]

Good idea.