My wife and I considering replacing our 2003 Honda Accord. We are looking at a particular age, price range and mileage range (≤ 3 years old, <$27,000 and < 30,000 miles) for the replacement vehicle. As to be expected, the price of what we see that we (she) like exceeds (by a few thousand dollars) what we (I) would like to spend.
When we find a great deal (low mileage and in our desired price ranger or lower), we check and find out the vehicle has been in an accident.
Some have been side impact, others frontal impact. One involved a deer. I believe all have resulted in air bags being deployed.
It's always been my philosophy to avoid buying a car that's been in an accident. But now that buying one may make the difference in getting the make/model/year car we would like, I'm questioning whether I should stick to that philosophy or compromise.
So my question is this:
What do you think about buying a car that's been in an accident (even a minor one)? If so, how would you decide whether to take on the risk?
I'm primarily interested in the gray area....I mean there are obvious things that would warrant avoiding a car that's been in an accident (i.e. doors that don't close properly, tires that don't track, etc.). I'm concerned about the stuff that's more difficult to ascertain.
Comments rated to be Good Answers:
Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers: