How is my SL350 correctly described ?

[NJS5]

I am trying, probably unsuccessfully, to get an agreed value with my insurers for my 2011 Mercedes-Benz SL350.

I have given them the registration number & VIN + a printout from LastVIN.Com. Things have been complicated as the last MoT test certificate described the car as an SLK350. I'm not sure how to get that corrected, but in the meantime they have asked me to confirm the car's full "model description".

The car was first registered on 21 06 2011 & I've dug around a bit and found what I think they may be looking for. Is my car correctly described as:-

SL 350 (230.458), with engine type M272.968 ?

I'm pretty certain that this is 100%, but confirmation would help, please.

Thanks in advance

NJSS

 

[Craiglxviii]

230.458 pins the car as an R230 platform. SL, NOT SLK.

 

[NJS5]

Thank-you Craig that was very quick; so my description is correct.

The next problem how to get the Mot records corrected, I'm amazed they got it wrong, as they are close to my Indy, and very frequently do MoTs on Mercedes vehicles, you would think they could discern an SL from an SLK.

Presumably I take the matter up with the test station, and ask for a corrected certificate.

NJSS

 

[JBell]

What did all the other MOT Certificates say the car was??

Also go on Auto Trader to find similar cars to help with the valuation

 

[NJS5]

The physical earlier Mot certificates which I have, all before I bought the car show it every time as an SLK:-

24/09/2019 - SLK 350
21/09/2018 - SLK 350
12/08/2017 - SLK 350

The .gov website doesn't show the model of the car.

I clearly must insist on the recent certificate being corrected, but I'm not sure what to do regarding the earlier ones.

Establishing the value with the insurers doesn't seem to be too much of a problem the problems are twofold; firstly they are concerned that the car has a "dodgy" history because of its mis-description, and secondly once that hurdle has been cleared whether they will agree the principal of an agreed value for a car less than 10 years old.

NJSS

 

[Craiglxviii]

The physical earlier Mot certificates which I have, all before I bought the car show it every time as an SLK:-

24/09/2019 - SLK 350
21/09/2018 - SLK 350
12/08/2017 - SLK 350

The .gov website doesn't show the model of the car.

I clearly must insist on the recent certificate being corrected, but I'm not sure what to do regarding the earlier ones.

Establishing the value with the insurers doesn't seem to be too much of a problem the problems are twofold; firstly they are concerned that the car has a "dodgy" history because of its mis-description, and secondly once that hurdle has been cleared whether they will agree the principal of an agreed value for a car less than 10 years old.

NJSS

Ask that MoT test station to reissue its certificates with the correct model of car shown. It’s committing fraud as things currently stand by officially stating the car to be something it is not.
What does the V5C say?

 

[NJS5]

Thanks Craig.

I don't yet have the V5C, I only purchased the car a month ago on 10th July, and assume that it will be to hand reasonably soon, as a month has passed since then.

When I examined the V5C prior to purchase the car was correctly described as an SL 350. The part 10 - the new keepers details, in my possession, confirms that.

I have an MB Digital service report (History) from the first service on 30/07/2016 to 5th on 30/07/2016 which describes the car as an SL 350, and I am 100% sure that this is what it is.

The only misdescriptions, of which I am aware, are in the MoT certificates, the service history (both MB & Indys) clearly describes the car correctly as an SL.

NJSS

 

[LostKiwi]

Look at the online VED check and the MOT History online. It should tell you what the DVLA think it is....

 

[Blobcat]

That is definitely an SL

Although as you advise MOT says different...

 

[Craiglxviii]

Lovely wheels too

 

[LostKiwi]

This site https://vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/VehicleFound?locale=en

Says it's an SLK, hasn't been taxed since 2012 and has a 1.8 litre engine.
And it's black.

 

[LostKiwi]

Build sheet

 

[V6Matty]

This site https://vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk/VehicleFound?locale=en

Says it's an SLK, hasn't been taxed since 2012 and has a 1.8 litre engine.
And it's black.
View attachment 61067 View attachment 61068

Typo there Alistair, the reg end UDP rather than UDB

 

[Blobcat]

 

[axelcls]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[John Laidlaw]

Total Car Check also has it as an SL....

 

[daibevan]

First time it was wrong on an MoT it was probably a keyboard error and it has just carried on ever since. They probably just put in your reg and the rest of the details autofill. My car is wrong on a lot of sites, I have to change the spec when I put in my reg.

 

[NJS5]

Many thanks for your helpful comments everyone. Alistair, you nearly caused heart failure!

I have emailed the garage which did the last MoT & am awaiting a reply.

Once I have sorted out the most recent MoT I intend to address the issue of rectifying earlier ones. At this stage I'm inclined to ask the DVLA to sort it out, but no doubt it will take an age!

NJSS

 

[NJS5]

I have now spoken with the tester, who was polite & helpful; but could not assist.

Apparently "the system" auto completes certain information, including the Make & Model of the car from central record held by the DVLC, note not DVLA. The test centre cannot correct this erroneous information.

The DVLA have the car correctly described as an SL, but the DVLC database is incorrect & describes the car as an SLK. I have now emailed the DVLC with all the details & await their response; I'm not going to hold my breath !

NJSS

 

[d215yq]

Surely the whole point of the agreed value is that they actually look at the model number, options, photos, condition, etc. As such if you give them the full VIN etc they should be able to deal with it whether or not it is wrong in an MOT database or not.

I'd talk to the insurers rather than the MOT centre, etc who will probably take a long time to change it and may require the documents to be sent off. It's also not "fraud" unless the misdescription has been 1) deliberately put there and 2) in an attempt to make a financial gain by these perpetrators so if you get your insurance value agreed you don't need to worry about changign the database and cretainly not about previous MOT certificates, etc.