What customers misread about the car selling process

Online car selling is no longer a new concept in India. Millions of sellers now choose digital platforms to sell their cars quickly and conveniently. And yet, when I look at seller feedback across the ecosystem, I notice the same concerns coming up repeatedly:

• “The price changed after inspection.”
• “The inspection felt too strict for the selling process.”
• “The RC transfer is taking too long.”

These aren’t isolated complaints. They are recurring friction points, and in my view, they stem from a common root cause: a gap between what sellers expect and what each step of the car-selling process is actually designed to do.

Let me break this down stage by stage.

An Online Estimate is Mistaken for a Promise

One of the most frequent questions sellers ask is why the price shown during online valuation drops after inspection.

The answer lies in how much information becomes clear only after a car and its documents are physically verified. Online valuations are based on inputs provided by the seller and historical market data. Inspections, on the other hand, reveal details that aren’t always visible upfront: variant mismatches, expired insurance, missing service records, mechanical issues, tyre condition, or document discrepancies.

There is also another factor sellers often overlook: live market demand. The final price depends on what buyers are willing to pay for that exact make and model on the day of the auction.

When seller inputs closely match inspection findings and market demand hasn’t shifted, final prices usually stay well within the initial range shown online. That’s why the online price should be seen for what it is: an estimate, not a guaranteed offer.

So, why not offer a fixed price upfront?

Fixed pricing may sound simpler, but it comes with trade-offs. When platforms offer fixed prices without inspection, they take on the risk of undisclosed issues and market volatility. To manage this risk, prices are kept conservative, which often means lower payouts for sellers.

It’s similar to buying an asset without fully understanding its condition and it’s human nature to assume the worst and price it accordingly.

Auction-based models, on the other hand, allow sellers to benefit from real-time demand. Neither approach is inherently better; they serve different seller priorities. Problems arise only when price certainty is expected in a system designed to balance multiple variables.

Inspections: Meant for Verification, Not Negotiation

Another common frustration is around inspections being “too strict.” In reality, inspection dissatisfaction is rarely about the inspection itself. It’s about the price adjustment that sometimes follows.

Inspections on online platforms are standardized across locations and sellers. Tools like diagnostic scanners, paint thickness meters, and document verification systems are used to reduce subjectivity and human bias. The goal isn’t to negotiate or reduce the price arbitrarily. It’s simply to verify whether the car’s actual condition matches what was declared during online valuation.

When it does, prices don’t change much. When it doesn’t, prices adjust to reflect real risk and demand. This step also protects buyers by ensuring cars are accurately assessed and fairly priced; something that ultimately strengthens trust across the ecosystem.

RC Transfers: The Most Underestimated Seller Risk

RC transfer delays often cause the most anxiety for sellers, and understandably so.

What many don’t realize is that RC transfers sit largely outside a platform’s direct control. It’s a multi-step process involving document verification, state RTO systems, buyer follow-through, and, in some cases, physical visits (peshi) by the seller.

If documents are incomplete, hypothecation closure is pending, or a peshi gets rescheduled, the process pauses until the issue is resolved. These dependencies on government systems and third parties are why RC transfers can take time even after the car has been sold.

The real concern for sellers isn’t just delay; it’s legal uncertainty. Worries about challans, misuse, or liability during the interim period are valid. That’s why strong seller-protection frameworks like Seller Kavach are critical, to safeguard sellers until legal ownership officially changes.

How These Steps Connect From a Seller’s POV

One of the biggest gaps I see is that sellers often view online valuation, inspection, auction, and RC transfer as disconnected steps. In reality, they’re all part of a single flow.

• Online valuation sets an initial range
• Inspection verifies condition
• Auction reflects live demand
• RC transfer marks legal ownership change

Issues arise when sellers expect each step to function independently or deliver fixed outcomes. When the connections between these stages are understood, the process feels far more predictable, even when results vary.

What This Means for Trust in the Used-Car Ecosystem

Across pricing, inspections, and RC transfers, trust breaks down when:

• Early prices are assumed to be guarantees
• Inspections feel like forced price reductions
• RC delays are mistaken for inaction

Trust improves when platforms focus on:

• Clear communication about why each step exists
• Transparency in inspection findings
• Strong legal protection for sellers during RC transfers

In the online used-car ecosystem, trust isn’t built on promises of the “best price” alone. It’s built through systems that protect sellers, particularly in areas where the process is complex or not immediately visible.

And that, ultimately, is what a mature digital car-selling experience should deliver. And that’s precisely what CARS24 strives to achieve.