Ask an expert

We have been looking at a 1.6L VW Polo from around 1997. They seem to be reasonably priced in comparison to the Nissan Pulsar and Corolla. Are they more expensive to fix than Japanese cars of the same calibre?

Rob

From the "Ask Jack" archives - 14 December 2009

I guess there are several important points people take into account when looking at buying a motor vehicle.

One of those is excitement and driving pleasure and this can depend greatly on ones needs and passion for cars. For some, a car is a car, and provided it will do a specific job then one model is as good as another.

For others, a particular style or brand is important to them. Most motorists have to like driving the car they own.

What I am trying to say is the Toyota Corolla and Nissan Pulsar are rather bland in comparison to a VW Polo in terms of looks and brand reputation. Owning a VW Golf has a certain ring to it that you don't get with a Toyota or Nissan of this age and model.

Where the Japanese brands win on most occasions however is on reduced long term running costs, and if one was more concerned on reducing that risk then the VW would come third.

For example, the AA have a mechanical warranty product which covers the policy holder for specific mechanical and electrical failures. All European cars fall under a special category section which means the policy has a higher retail price and carries a higher excess than mainstream Japanese vehicles. This pricing structure is based on risk to the underwriter and historic claim costs.

The other important factor is past service history. The car with the best reputation for reliability can be a lemon if it has not been serviced properly. This becomes a further risk when buying used imports where servicing from previous owners overseas have traditionally been poor.

In summary be careful and be prepared to look around for a car that suits your needs best.

If it's a Euro, then go for it.