That's why I said it's not complicated but is a mistake. Noone with any business sense will do this.wt_know;689601 said:hahaha ... you have asked an excellent question.
that's why TS says it's complicated and he need to sign LTA transfer form :screwedu:
jaskin;689606 said:That's never going to happen... unless you import it yourself.
I can accept that the OMV is impt. But if a buyer accepts to sign on the dotted line without the OMV price stated, he can complain but can he sue for it? Is OMV stated in contracts with PIs?jaskin;689622 said:I disagree. OMV is very important. But ADs will never give you the info prior to buying the car.
Any logical business reason for MA to use a higher priced open cat COE to register the car when they have obtained the lower priced cat B COE? Second letter states that it's MA's mistake, not TS's.chongster;689629 said:I think for TS, as Cat B Coe is not transferable, MA is asking him to sign a form (write an appeal) to send to LTA to say that a mistake had been made in the bidding of the Cat B COE; thus LTA will refund the $10k deposit. In this sense, TS feels that there is no mistake made so why must he sign a document to tell LTA that he made a mistake in the bidding.
masschaoz;689178 said:It started off with a very bad purchase experience with alot of cockups and non-disclosure in august. Car was not specced according to what I wanted despite their claims it is.. Best part register my car with an open cat Coe though they had already secured a cat b for me..
Asked for omv before I signed on the agreement for the M3, gave me estimate and cited cannot give actual figure..but car already in store since feb 2011.. Checked with sg customs, omv is fixed before it can clear customs/port. I have every reason I believe they knew the figures but refuse to disclose to me..
Matter haven't resolve, things go missing twice when I send my car in.. I wonder how bad can it go on? I'm in midst of seeking legal advice to sue them.
bm323;689633 said:Any logical business reason for MA to use a higher priced open cat COE to register the car when they have obtained the lower priced cat B COE? Second letter states that it's MA's mistake, not TS's.
chongster;689636 said:this i would agree with you. Make no biz sense and wld applaud MA in trying to make up for a low OMV with a slightly higher COE. End of day, it is TS decision on whether a slightly higher COE can defray the lower OMV that he has.
I am not sure what is the ballpark OMV for MA's E92 as this information is not available on One Motoring and a check on sgcarmart has quite a wide range. I can only say that my OMV of my MA E92 is much more than TS.
Well, I just hope that both parties can come to a conclusion that both can accept
Niva;689643 said:wats yr omv if you do not mind sharing?
edleee;689717 said:Very interesting thread.
A very important point to note please. BMWs sold by ADs in Singapore are imported by BMW ASIA. They are the people who provide the invoice value, etc which will eventually determine the OMV of our cars. There was a Straits Times article some months ago regarding this. I believe LTA is currently looking into this although no particular Company was named.
Therefore, people; MA and/or PML are not to be 100% blamed for this low OMV thing. Its sad that we, as consumers are duped by the importers and our GOVERNMENT does too little to assist us but instead, grant tax concessions to these importers which in turn encourages them to further lower the invoice values. Vicious cycle, but nothing can be done if the importer and exporter are the same company.
masschaoz;689761 said:yes I'm aware of this matter which is why I'm getting my resources to assess this low OMV issue by highlighting it to LTA to investigate as well. Things can be done, its a matter of effort. My huge amount of anger is hopefully sufficient to fuel this effort.
satinGHOST|r!der;689774 said:One of the forummers told me that BMW Asia is being investigated for something abt the low OMV which they are making a gain on and transferring the money back to Germany. Not sure to what extent it's true but could be one of the few LTA is investigating according to the straits times news a few months ago...
ts sad that we, as consumers are duped by the importers and our GOVERNMENT does too little to assist us but instead, grant tax concessions to these importers which in turn encourages them to further lower the invoice values.
Solidgold;689836 said:Why we end up having "fluctuating" OMVs is because the meaning of OMV no longer applies when the importer is the manufacturer. OMV, (Open Market Value) as the term implies the sale value or street price of the vehicle in the exporting country. It is not cost price or material cost of the the vehicle.
An importer (some years back) is an agent, local distributor or dealer who does not have direct dealings with the plant. They need to buy from an exporter(distributor) and thus the term OMV was coined.
So for vendors importing vehicles directly from their plant, what is the meaning of OMV then? So this outdated term OMV has to change to have a level playing field in the market place.