Should we care about 'Full Service History'
"A full service history is overrated anyway," said the friend I was talking to. "I've always bought on condition and on the strength of a test drive, regardless of any history, and I've never had a problem."
His point was in disagreement with my long-time contention that a full history is worth its weight in gold. True, it doesn't necessarily affect a car's longevity if it's missed a service or two. But a service record which proves it hasn't, and that everything's been done on time, suggests - if not guarantees - diligence by the previous owner in other areas.
Certainly, whenever I'm browsing around for my next used car purchase, a fully stamped book or, even better, a wodge of invoices is a big plus point. But exactly what counts as a full service history? I'd define it as evidence, in stamp or invoice form, of every service having been carried out on time or at the correct mileage, in accordance with the manufacturer's servicing schedule, throughout a car's life.
Others, of course, might have a looser definition - simply, for example, that there's a record of every service the car's had. To my mind, that isn't a full service history - it doesn't prove that all of the required servicing has been carried out correctly, merely that some of it has.
Help us to be better
-- PLEASE SUPPORT MY CHANNEL BY HELPING ME REACH 1000 SUBSCRIBER SO I CAN MONETIZE MY CONTENT : https://goo.gl/rH8kkj
-- Facebook : / autocarmagzyt