"Elle" <honda.lioness@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:373440f4-8ddb-4486-9c00-2be6d7b7879f@r36g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> Is there anyone with either carfax.com or autocheck.com service
right
> now that could run one check for me? Please email me. I will
pass your
> favor along to someone else somehow. Thank you.
>

I am just a rank amateur car buyer but IMHO I disagree with
**not** using carfax.

Sure if an experienced con/shyster wants to shyster someone, then
someone will likely be shystered.

And there are many car's that may not show all their histories
on carfax but i doubt the number is significant compared to all
the car's problems that will appear.

I subscribed to carfax a few years ago for the intentional
purpose of checking/buying a used car. One car that was on a
large dealer's used lot was less than 1 yr old. When I inquired
about why such a new car was on the used lot the reason given was
that the customer/owner traded up.

Well... car fax showed that the car was involved in an extensive
front end collision about 3 months after it was purchased and it
had bounced across 5 different *used* dealer lots before ending
up at this dealer's used lot. That was one car and salesperson i
needed to avoid. It only took minutes to get that info.

and there are many more stories like that one, than a story like
this,
(fake story follows --->) "a friend bought a car and it was in 3
wrecks and was totaled out as a salvage because it was submerged
in the great flood of New Orleans and carfax showed the car had
only one owner and had never been in an accident, carfax sux"
(<---end of fake story)

I tend to think of carfax as a time saver. Inspection can take
lots of ones time.
If someone is trying to shyster you then it might take **more**
inspection time. carfax can eliminate many (maybe not all) but
many of those wastes.

my $0.02
robb