An after-sales confirmation can be an important part of a recently registered vehicle’s China export file. For the overseas buyer, however, possessing a stamped page and having a workable repair arrangement are separate outcomes.
The useful task is to verify the document’s issuer and scope, then establish what the named service arrangement can actually deliver. A letter should not be turned into a promise of worldwide manufacturer warranty without the applicable terms.
This recently registered used-car rule should not be used to describe every new factory-export order. Our new-vehicle programme covers LHD and factory-built RHD enquiries; the factory version and new-vehicle export file are confirmed separately. Manufacturer relationships help obtain version and support evidence, while the named supplier and applicable documents still require verification.
Establish why the document is required
The four-department MOFCOM notice, 商贸函〔2025〕648号, requires manufacturer-issued after-sales repair-service confirmation for the defined recently registered used-car export applications from 1 January 2026, expressly including day 180. It identifies destination country, vehicle information and service-outlet information among the contents and requires the manufacturer’s official seal.
The exporter must establish the actual registration dates and licensing case. This is an additional-document requirement for its specified scope, not a general instruction to delay every car for six months. Use our existing 180-day rule guide for the broader route and date checklist.
Verify the issuer through an independent channel
A buyer should not determine authenticity from a stamp image alone. Request the complete document, its identifying reference where available and the issuer’s traceable details. Ask the manufacturer or its properly identified representative to confirm the document through an official contact route.
Do not rely solely on a phone number printed on a scan if that number has not been independently matched to the issuer. The seller should explain which entity produced the confirmation and why that entity is the relevant vehicle manufacturer.
This is a recommended procurement check, not a claim that the notice prescribes one universal online verification portal. Any accepted electronic or paper verification method should follow the actual issuer and licensing process.
Match the letter to the transaction
| Verification field | Buyer’s review | Follow-up if unclear |
|---|---|---|
| Issuing entity | Corresponds to the relevant manufacturer | Obtain issuer confirmation |
| Vehicle scope | Identifies the offered vehicle or defined covered set | Reconcile the allocated VIN and model |
| Destination | Matches the intended receiving country | Request the accepted correction or reissue process |
| Service outlet | Traceable name, location and contact | Confirm the named provider’s role |
| Document version | Final version retained with the order | Remove superseded scans from the active file |
This worksheet expands the buyer’s operational review; it is not a fabricated statutory form. If a batch letter is proposed, obtain confirmation of the actual covered vehicles rather than assuming that one model name covers every VIN in stock.
Turn outlet information into a repair pathway
Contact the named provider and establish the actual support arrangement. Ask which diagnostics and repairs it can perform for the offered model, how appointments are arranged, and who authorizes and pays for labour and parts.
A provider that can replace ordinary components may need another organization for high-voltage diagnosis. That is acceptable when the roles and escalation path are defined; it is incomplete when a sales proposal simply says “local after-sales available.”
Request a parts pathway with VIN-matched identification, ordering responsibilities and realistic quoted lead times. An anticipated future workshop should not be represented as a currently functioning outlet.
Test the service process without inventing a fault
As a proposed pre-order check, send the provider a normal enquiry for a routine service item or a clearly hypothetical diagnostic case. Record how the provider identifies the vehicle, supplies the relevant information and explains any referral.
This checks the communication process. It is not evidence that the car has failed, that a repair has been performed or that the provider can resolve every future issue. Do not describe a desk enquiry as a workshop test.
A fleet buyer can keep the response with the procurement record and repeat the contact check if the provider, vehicle generation or promised support changes.
Separate the letter from warranty economics
Obtain the actual warranty contract or applicable manufacturer terms. Record territory, transfer conditions, covered components, exclusions, labour, diagnostic fees and any reimbursement process.
The buyer’s commercial after-sales agreement may add obligations beyond the export confirmation. Conversely, the confirmation alone does not establish every benefit advertised to a China retail first owner. Ask who bears an expense if manufacturer reimbursement is unavailable.
If the destination or allocated vehicle changes, return the letter and service plan for review before loading. The final licensing and destination-admission decisions remain separate from the buyer’s service-process assessment.
Request an issuer-verified service file
Send the destination, model, condition and registration information through our contact page. Request the applicable manufacturer confirmation, its verification route and a defined parts-support arrangement, together with inspection records for the allocated vehicle. Keep document authenticity and actual support capability visible as separate checks.