Did you go and have a look at this? I know cat d is usually light damage etc, but saying as it is being used for the mrs and newborn, personally if it was me, I'd always be slightly hesitant about putting them in a car that's been damaged and fixed..
I know you could unwittingly be driving about in something that was fixed and not know, but something just doesn't sit right knowing it's been hit..
Cat D is nothing, especially one that was declared at 5 years old. Cat C (structural damage) would be a different story.
In theory you'd be taking more of a risk buying a brand new model that'll probably need a recall or two before the manufacturer declares it's safe to drive.
If I do decide to buy it'll be going to a local Mercedes specialist (NITEC) for a thorough inspection before turning a wheel with the wife and son in it anyway.
Think your definition of car d/c may be a bit off?
From whatcar.com
"If you're buying a Cat D car, there's no guarantee that it hasn't incurred chassis damage. You can find out for sure by investing in a full mechanical inspection at an approved dealership, or by RAC Inspections."
The classification is mainly due to cost of repairs, not the type of damage.. Although there should be a general correlation between the two..
I didn't phrase that very well.
Cat D can be nothing is what I should have said.
Each car has to be judged on its own merit.
I appreciate where you're coming from as I'd have been like that once upon a time but having seen cars on the road that were heavily damaged and not recorded I've learned that you have to be careful regardless of categorisation.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.