I'm looking at a 2011 with only 38k miles on it. Car fax states that it had structural damage in 2013 but was not a salvage or rebuilt title. They are asking 35k for the car and firm on the price. Is this is a fair price for a car with structural damage but a clean title? All the service was done at a Lexus dealer and it was certified. It's at a private dealer now.

Thanks for the help!

 

nope... dont see why someone would ever consider spending that much $ on something that's been probably significantly damaged. you could easily spend that money and get a higher mileage one thats not of questionable condition I looked for a year and a half before settling on an F I was ready to pull the trigger on. Never was I hesitant to walk away from one that I had to question. You're in Cali, there's easily more available.

 

+1.

 

Baseballin, I would walk from that deal, to me I prefer all original panels that may have had slight blemished than panels that have been repaired etc... same as Id rather prefer the original windshield put on the factory with minor rock chips that have been repaired than having a brand new aftermarket one put on or rather have a original fender with a dent in it that can be paintless dent repaired than one that had the fender replaced/bondod/repairds/repainted and the bumper hood blended to match the new paint of the fender, but thats just me.

Honestly, at 35k you can find a clean title one without any accidents. Unless the seller will drop the price for you, I would walk and wait for a better condition isf.

I'd also have to disagree with cali having more isfs (which is not true).

 

Thanks for the replies. The car is in great condition. All original fenders ,Windows, etc. The only replacement was the rear bumper and trunk lid. It was a rear collision in 2013. There was no damage to the frame. Lexus fixed it and sold it as a certified car. I have found it hard to find a lot of low mile isFs in Cali. The title is "clean" Not a salvage or rebuilt. So this car is a head scratcher.

 

well you made it sound like there was more to it by adding structural damage to your post meaning there was damage to the structure of the car not referring to the bumper/trunk.

In this case, have you checked the trunk and bumper to see if the original vin stickers were still attached, that would indicate that it mightve been a slight bumper and the damage was repairable using the original part, if there are no stickers it might indicate more severe damage where it needed to be replaced and you would need to see the inside in order to evaluate the damage even further.

Just trying to help you out, but I wouldnt believe everything they say when selling you the car, their job is to sell you the car so they will always tell you what you want to hear.

I was just using that fender and windshield thing as a reference.

 

If the car run great and no issue with aligment. I don't see why not.

 

Yah the reason I bring up structural damage Is because that's what the car fax states "structural damage" I actually called the dealership who did the original work and they gave the car a great review based on the work. They said there was no damage to the frame or chassis but had to replace the rear bumper and trunk lid.

 

Someone is lying to you. All I do all day, for the past 9 years, is inspect vehicles for prior repairs. This often includes frame repair. The frame and the structure are different words for the same thing.

Here is the NAAA structural damage policy for unibody vehicles:




In the rear, the quarter panels are technically the only structural piece. The "rear body panel" (where the spare tire sits) ties both quarters together, but is not considered part of the structure per NAAA. For Carfax\Autocheck to show structural damage, one of the quarter panels has been completely replaced...as in cut out, and welded back in.

Personally, I wouldn't drive anything that even had a previously damaged rear body panel. Even if you don't care about the extensive repairs, the next potential buyer will, and it'll make selling that IS-F very, very difficult.


TL;DR : That car got rearended, HARD. You're an idiot if you pay $35,000 for it.

 

Car Fax often has unreliable information. My IS350 showed "moderate damage" from a rear end collision that did nothing more than scratch the bumper cover. The cover wasn't even replaced, but I lost $3k in trade value when I bought my F simply because Car Fax said "moderate damage" in their report.

My F had the right rear panel replaced from it's last incident. It was not rear ended at all, and certainly was not "structural damage" because there was no twist to anything sufficient to cause wheel misalignment - that was all from a bent tie rod. The car aligned perfectly and drives perfectly. But by the description above, my car would show up on Car Fax with structural damage. Absolutely silly.

If I could see the R.O. and see exactly what was done, then I could make a solid decision about it for my own use, but as is clear to anyone buying a car, if Car Fax has bad information, you will be taking a much lower offer for resale.

I don't care about resale. I have no plans to sell my F anymore than I have plans to sell my Supra.

 

Yah resale is not really something I worry about. I keep my cars for a long time. I've owned my last car for 11 years.

 

If there is structural damage that was not repaired the right way its on you. I would keep looking. You dont want something that should be so much fun to become a damn nightmare

 

Yeah I would pass. Unless it was under 20k

 

Just get it if you like it.

 

My wife being the voice of reason talked me out of it. I think if it were cheaper I would have pulled the trigger. But for 35k I wanna make sure it's something that's not gonna cause any problems. The search continues.