Uh oh !

[teebowbusablaster]

I found THIS list of faults in the paperwork he sent with the bike. Item 4 clearly shows that he KNEW about the shock mount, and did nothing about it.

[RichardsMorphy]

The fact that the seller offered a grand towards repairs is a bit sus, maybe he knows it needs a lot more spending. £1,000 on a rough GT750 is nothing. Can you return the bike and get your money back?

[Alan H]

I'm concerned about the last comment on the report about the V5 'VIN' number being illegible.
Have you checked the numbers, mate?

[teebowbusablaster]

No, but will do tomorrow when the shop is open.

[teebowbusablaster]

Then it's a trip down to Farnham or wherever he lives.

[crazy4557]

You maybe lucky and he takes it back and refunds you the balance as it is but I very much doubt it and confronting him may not help your case. He's not legally bound to take the bike back or refund you, it's caveat emptor or 'buyer beware' in English. I would try a solicitors letter straightaway to try and frighten him and make him see you're serious, he may just cave in. Trying to sue him will just mean the solicitors get richer and you end up looking at a pile of bits when you could just get on with the fixing for the sake of a couple of possibly minor fixes.

Re fixing what you have, I'm not sure where that crack is but if it's not a stressed area then maybe have it welded or worst case a replacement crankcase.
Sounds like the seller was aware of issues and jogged it on to you unfortunately but good luck with it.

[teazer]

Hang about. Let's stop acting like outraged politicians for a moment and look at the facts - such as we know them.

There's nothing significant on that list - or at least nothing terribly expensive or difficult to fix and that includes the damaged shock threads. The exception is Illegible Frame number. Bikes didn't have a VIN back in the day, so what is illegible about the number? Is it just full of paint or has it been obscured in some way and what does the log book/title/V5/whatever say is the number? It's easy enough to scrape off teh paint and see what the underlying number is unless it has been tampered with and in that case, all bets are off.

That crack in the crankcase is something else. It's a B model set of cases and they are pretty robust. What we can see is a very rusty stud which suggests that the barrels had been stuck in place for a long time. We can also see where the top face of the cases where the barrels sit has been cleaned up with a smooth file or emery paper. That was either done by the PO or by the shop tearing it down. That was most likely someone trying to lever off a set of stuck barrels - see comment on rusty stud above. So the question is who damaged the barrels and cases?

If it was teh PO who represented the bike as something it was not, he has a responsibility to make that good. If he sold it as an old overpriced bike, there's less comeback. Damage to the shoick mount and to teh Frame number don't look good, but what does TeeBo know that he can share to shed light on what happened.

[mizzytheman]

There does seem to be some history with the bike and was taxed up until 12th March 2019. If the Mot examiner has does his job properly he should have checked the VIN number on the last Mot. Not to say something hasn’t happened since the last one.

[Alan H]

Strange there's an advisory on the retest at the same mileage when it was 'ok' on the fail.
Good job it was a long time ago.
What's the mileage now, perchance?

[Kettletimes3]

Perhaps he put it in the back of van for the test’s.