Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Audi A4 Lease Questions
This discussion has been closed.
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Car_man
Host
Prices Paid Forum
Specifically, I am talking about buying the car at the end of the lease, or buying it during the lease if you choose. Most companies will let you buyout the lease at the residual plus remaining payments during the lease. All will let you buy at the end of the lease at the negotiated residual.
What Audi does that is unconscionable is permit you, but only you, to buy out the lease at your negotiated residual. So, if you want to trade the car in during the lease to a dealer and have them purchase it from Audi, the dealer cannot buy it at the negotiated residual. Instead, they can only buy it at what Audi describes as "Fair Market Value", which is a special quote they create for the particular dealer.
The "Fair Market Value" differs depending on who the dealer is. For me, at the end of my lease, my residual buyout price was 19k. So I can buy the car for 19k, and pay no disposition fee or wear and tear. However, a dealer cannot buy the car from Audi for 19k, but only at the "FMV", which in my case was $1,500 more than my residual. Essentially, it constricts your ability to get out of your lease by having someone buy the lease out on your behalf.
Even worse, despite claiming that the dealer purchase price of $20,500 (a non-Audi/VW dealer) was based on FMV, when I took my car into Audi, they called and got a payoff amount of 18k, which is 1k less than I can buy the car for and 2.5k less than what a non Audi/VW dealer can buy the car for. If you want to sell it to a third party at the end of your lease, you can't do that at your negotiated price either.
Other finance companies DO NOT do this. With other companies, the buyout price is the buyout price, regardless of the purchaser. This is simply a way for Audi to prevent you from getting into a non-Audi. It is a customer hostile policy that according to Audi is non-negotiable. I have no problems with incentives for repurchase, all companies do that, but this goes well beyond that.
Moreover, while it would seem to be a simple solution to just buy the car from Audi at your price and turn it over to a dealer at that same price, you can't do that either without incurring significant tax liability (8.5% in California) for the privilege of owning the car for five minutes).
So even though Audi/VW will end up losing money on the car by having it turned it rather than purchased at the residual (when factoring in transport costs and auction results), they do it anyway. The policy makes no sense, is customer unfriendly, and is counter to the manner in which other companies run their leasing programs.
Also, this doesn't strike me as something that most people would care about. Someone who keeps the car for the entire lease period with normal wear and miles (as most do, I assume) would be fine. Again, it's good to understand their policy, but I think trying to steer people away from leasing with AFS for this reason might be a bit extreme.
Just my $0.02...
It is also deceptive, because they claim the buyout price is based on "fair market value", but that value changes based on who the car is being sold to, and whether the customer is purchasing another Audi or VW. Moreover, the FMV is not a reasonable price reflective of the actual value of the car. They actually mentioned something about Kelley Blue Book in setting the FMV, which is silly.
People should care about it because it further impacts the already limited flexibility a lease provides. While most people will probably never try to get out of their lease early, if they need to, this can be a huge impediment, and won't be discovered until you are in the situation. It is a policy I find hostile to the interests of the customer. It is a practice that is counterintuitive, and a practice not utlized by other leasing companies.
Audi contracted to a certain residual price with the customer, with the expectation the car may be purchased at that price. Audi cannot sell that car at auction for more than the negotiated residual, so they will actually end up losing money by preventing the leaseholder from having the dealer or a third party buy the car at the residual or residual plus remaining payments depending on the timing as opposed to turning the car in at the end of the lease.
The practice of artificially increasing the buyout price for a third party to purchase the car makes no sense -- it is simply a transparent attempt to gouge the customer because they can. The odd thing about it is, these are Audi customers they are doing this to.
My point is that this is a practice not utlized by other leasing companies, and people should be aware of it, because it's not even buried in the fine print.
Knowing this policy, I would never lease from Audi Financial Services again unless my company were paying the bill and assuming any and all liabilities for lease termination.
You can apparently swap out of your lease and get someone to assume your lease obligations (with AFS approval). Try the leasetrader.com site.
Sorry that you got stuck but car leases are complicated financial transactions - if one doesn't understand them, don't do it. I was very well versed on leases, knew the MF and invoice and negotiated thousands under MSRP but ... I still may have got a couple of points too low on my residual. Also, if one's income stream is not certain, leases are not a good idea.
I read all of the contractual terms. The contractual provisions explicity permit a lease buyout. Lease buyout does not consitute a breach. You are confused about what constitutes a breach.
If Audi wanted to put in a contractual penalty for an early lease buyout they could, but they don't. They expressly permit a lease buyout in the lease contractual provisions. Again, an early lease buyout does not constitute a breach. A buyout at the end of the lease does not constitute a breach.
The issue is the disparate buyout price based on who is buying the car. Audi does this whether you are in the first or last month of your lease. It has absolutely nothing to do with a breach of contract or early lease termination.
I got a great deal on my Audi, with a very low MF and with a reasonable residual. Unfortunately I can't take full advantage of the bargained for residual.
My statement regarding how other companies handle the exact same situation is 100% accurate because I verified it. Again, it has nothing to do with breach. I really don't want to get bogged down in complex legal issues. The facts are the facts. I point this out simply to warn others of my experience and the inflexibility of Audi which stands in stark comparison to other lenders.
Luckily I am not stuck because my lease is just about over, and it won't cost me too much, but others could be impacted more greatly.
New to leasing but was offered at the dealership:
a4 2.0 quattro msrp: $32,300
$3000 down $400/mo (tax incl.) 36mo/lease
a4 sline quattro $40k range
$4000 down $480/mo + tax 36mo/lease
I'm kind of new to leasing and was previously looking to buy a used 2005/6 in the low 20's and thought leasing might be an option...get a new car for lower monthly payments...but the amount down seems a bit high.
I have excellent credit and should always get the lowest rate...although leasing and residual value etc...confuses me a bit. What's reasonable for the southwest? I don't need a superb deal just something fair.
$379* lease per month for 36 months
Now through July 2, 2007
Down payment: $999
Refundable security deposit: $400
Acquisition fee: $575
First month's payment: $379
Amount due at lease inception: $2,353
EXCLUDES TAXES, TITLE AND DEALER FEES
Try asking for a couple deals with 0 down or 1k down, see what you get.
ok thanks....when I went in there, the sales person said that $2,353 doesn't include the dealership fees and the low monthly payment only applies to the base models.
Everything is negotiable but being new to leases I wasn't sure on what you negotiate. Also do you negotiate on APR with leases?
My credit union says I can get 6% no problem.
If 0 down or 1k down is offered, the monthly payments usually go up also?
Reading the forums a bit I see a lot of weight is put on residual value.
Anyway thanks for the info I'll email a few dealerships in other states.
Be fair to the dealer
Also, 2004 A4's are not going for 25k. That might be the asking price, but not the selling price. I know that because I am currently selling a 2004 loaded A4 with 33,000 miles on it.
I am in a similar situation in an A4. I leased the car with a ridiculously low money rate of .0004 or something like that, and while the car is worth more on the open market then my residual, factoring in the tax consequences makes it a wash.
BTW, I have never seen a Southern California or Bay Area Audi dealers ad. I see them for Bimmers and Lexus all the time, but I never see them for Audi. The only thing they do is link some poor deal to the AudiUSA website.
with a lease Audi has the risk. On a purchase you do!
Not necessary. Bad manners, too.
Audi will not sell the car on buy-out price defined in lease agreement (residual value + remaining payments less interest) to anyone BUT the lessee. That is the difference he finds in Audi from other auto cos. Audi will quote a higher price if a 3rd party wants to buy the car. Other auto cos. in his research have indicated that a 3rd party could buy a car from them off of a lease to you at that agreed price and this would enable you to escape tax burden by having to buy the car and re-sell it to 3rd party....
The tax occuring twice refers to something that is true on most leased cars in most states. If I buy my Audi today I pay remaining tax owed and then if I sell it tomorrow to another party they pay the tax on the amount they pay me, too. That is not exclusive to Audi, though. There are clever ways to get around this in some states. What is exclusive to Audi according to the poster and guarantees this tax situation is their refusal to sell to a 3rd party for the same (possibly attractive) price as they have agreed to sell it to you in their lease agreement. It is not as though they get the tax money so it is just a way to encourage you to stay in the leased car by making it financially unattractive to get out of the lease. Either you have to buy the car and re-sell and pay tax or a 3rd party (non Audi dealer or your next door neighbor for example) has to pay more unattractive price to buy out from Audi and then they pay tax once on their transaction (if it is private party - but if it is a dealer - then no tax will be paid until the car is sold to another private party by dealer.)
What part did you not understand?
Just don't call me in three years for help when you decide to buyout your lease from the "dealer" and finally figure out how the transaction will work.
This will avoid tax liability on the lessee's part and allow the lessee to resell to a third party at the favorable lease buyout price (or higher to turn a profit).
http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/reg1610.pdf
Tax laws vary state to state however.
Or, if the lease allows him to sell to a third party but at a higher buyout fee, he has to perform that contract term because ... he signed the contract. So if Audi wants to keep you in a lease for their business purposes (which I think we can assume they know better than the consumer), they can penalize him for breaching that lease by selling the car to a third party. Maybe some companies will let the lessee sell the car to some third schmoe for the remaining payments and residual, but the lessee will still owe them a fee. Otherwise, what is the incentive to stay in the lease?
If Audi has violated the terms of the lease by requiring a higher buyout than the lawyer contracted for, then the lawyer has a cause of action against Audi. But it appears that Audi is not violating the lease as the lawyer does not mention litigating the issue (and if a lawyer would not litigate, who would?) Again, if they penalize him beyond the terms of the contract, the lessee has legal redress. Indeed, he could get attorney fees under truth in lending laws.
http://consumerlawpage.com/article/common.shtml
I don't think Raudi was following the tax argument of the lawyer. The lawyer is indeed hosed by the tax circumstances he got himself into. The lawyer never did respond to my suggestion to trade or sell the lease itself. As I said, if one don't understand the risks inherent in a lease or have an uncertain income ... one should not enter a lease.
He did not say he thought he had a case against Audi - just that he objected to their terms and would not lease again from them.
You say:
"What RaudiAudi (and I) don't understand is why the lawyer, who contends he knows about contracts because he is a lawyer of some sort, signed a contract which he can't comply with."
Huh, when did I say that. Of course I can comply with the contract. The contract contains no terms stating that the buyout price will be different for a third party or dealer than it will be for the lessee, regardless of when that buyout is made. And, FWIW, so those reading can guage respective credibility of the posters, I am an attorney who drafts and negotiates contracts on behalf of businesses on a weekly basis.
You said:
"As previously pointed out, if the lawyer signed a contract he is bound by the conditions of that contract. If the lawyer chooses to sell the car in violation of the lease terms, the contract allows for Audi to penalize him in some manner - as all leasing companies do in one form or another."
Selling the leased car, i.e. paying Audi the lease buyout price IS NOT A VIOLATION OF THE LEASE. Let me state again, a lease buyout is NOT A VIOLATION OF THE LEASE. To the contrary, it is explicitly authorized by the lease provisions. ALL LEASES allow you to buy out the lease at the end at the residual price. Virtually ALL LEASES allow you to buy out the lease prior to lease end by paying the residual plus remaining payments. Why do they? Because the money they make on the lease does not change based on whether you buy out the lease on day 1 or the last day. In fact, I am sure they would rather have you pay it all on day one, so they can access the money sooner rather than later. Since the interest is already built in to each payment, this would simply give them access to your capital sooner.
You said:
"If you can give me a cite or a link to a leasing company that does NOT penalize one for selling a car out of a lease, please do."
First, it is not "penalizing" for selling a car out of lease. It is the practice of disparate lease buyout price (as stated in the lease terms) based on who the purchaser is. As for leasing companies that don't do this, Honda, Acura, Ford don't. From what I understand, a Ford dealer will do the third party buyout for you at no charge as a courtesy. When I inquired about Audi doing the same, multiple Audi dealers told me that Audi will jack up the price on them to.
You said:
"Or, if the lease allows him to sell to a third party but at a higher buyout fee, he has to perform that contract term because ... he signed the contract. So if Audi wants to keep you in a lease for their business purposes (which I think we can assume they know better than the consumer), they can penalize him for breaching that lease by selling the car to a third party."
Again, you don't understand. First, the lease doesn't "allow" or disallow the lessee from selling the car to anyone for obvious reasons, as the lessee does not own the car, so inclusion of such a term would be nonsensical. Second, the lease does not "penalize" the lessee "for breaching the lease by selling the car to a third party". The lessee cannot sell the car without buying it first. Once the lessee buys the car, he or she can do whatever he or she likes, and Audi does not and could not penalize that transaction becuase they have no privity of contract with the third party. Moreover, the contract is silent as to the terms for selling the car to a dealer or third party, as opposed to selling it to the lessee.
You said:
"Maybe some companies will let the lessee sell the car to some third schmoe for the remaining payments and residual, but the lessee will still owe them a fee. Otherwise, what is the incentive to stay in the lease?"
More nonsense. The buyout price is the buyout price, and most companies will allow you or a dealer or third party to buy the car out at the same price. The buyout terminates the lease. You don't own a "fee" after a lease buyout, regardless of the purchaser. That is why it is called a "buyout", not an early lease termination.
You said:
"If Audi has violated the terms of the lease by requiring a higher buyout than the lawyer contracted for, then the lawyer has a cause of action against Audi. But it appears that Audi is not violating the lease as the lawyer does not mention litigating the issue (and if a lawyer would not litigate, who would?) Again, if they penalize him beyond the terms of the contract, the lessee has legal redress. Indeed, he could get attorney fees under truth in lending laws."
Complete misquote and fabrication. Not once did I state Audi was breaching the express terms of the contract. Please point out for all of us where I ever said that? You should choose your words more carefully. What I stated was that there is no provision in the contract explicitly stating that Audi will charge a dealer or third party more than the lessee for the identical privilege of buying the car from them. The contract is silent on that term. It is counterintuitive that Audi would do this, as evidenced by the fact that are so far the only company I have found that does this. It even angers Audi dealers. It is simply a policy designed to increase their bottom line. While Audi contracted to sell the car to you for X, they figure hey, why not try to get X + Y if we can, and we don't care at whose expense. That is a business decision Audi makes. Other leasing companies DO NOT.
You said:
"I don't think Raudi was following the tax argument of the lawyer. The lawyer is indeed hosed by the tax circumstances he got himself into. The lawyer never did respond to my suggestion to trade or sell the lease itself. As I said, if one don't understand the risks inherent in a lease or have an uncertain income ... one should not enter a lease."
I am not "hosed" as you state due to the provisions of California law permitting one to avoid tax liability if a car is purchased for resale and the transaction is completed within ten days. However, many states do not have such a provision, and the complexity of the third party buyout and unfamiliarity with it (because of Audi's unique refusal to sell to a dealer or third party) by most lenders/dealers makes the transaction convoluted and time consuming. Moreover, when you say the "tax circumstances he got himself into" - you do realize you are talking about State tax laws that every lessee is subjected to right? This is not some special deal for me. Thus the reason for my post in the first place.
Regarding your attempt to equate the validity of my post with whether there is pending litigation is silly. Certain hostile business practices are legal, others are illegal. You can choose to do business with whomever you like. It is certainly not illegal to charge someone MSRP on a car, and if you don't mind the practice, feel free to buy the car at MSRP.
Regarding legality, while I question whether this practice violates California Unfair Business Practices Law, considering in the end I will incur no damages as a result of this hostile practice other than lost time, there is no reason to litigate. Even if I were to incur a loss by having to pay a dealer or third party a premium to purchase the car from Audi at an inflated price, it would not be worth my time to litigate as the loss would be under $2,000.
Regarding your comment of the litigiousness of lawyers, behind every sleazy lawsuit is a willing client.
I posted this in the first place because others may not be so lucky in avoiding double taxation depending on their state of residency and familiarity with tax laws. Others may have a change in circumstances that requires them to try to exit their lease and get into a different car (whether it be having children, loss of life, change of job, etc...)
Audi has chosen to pursue a practice that benefits them at the expense of the lessee. This practice is not disclosed in the lease agreement. This practice is not done by other leasing companies. Whether it is legal or illegal really isn't the point. You can choose to do business with whomever you like, but you should know all the facts prior to making your decision.
Oh, and by the way, in response to your equestion regarding "selling or trading" the lease, and why I did not respond to that suggestion, the answer follows. As if it were not obvious, why would one ever trade a lease with one month remaining. Your suggestion made no sense.
However, just so everyone is aware, you cannot assign your Audi lease to a third party (through leasetrader or other similar programs) in the last 12 months of the lease. Most lenders do not have this restriction, some have a sixth month restriction. Moreover, you remain liable for the lease even after the lease is assigned to the third party (unlike many other lenders, who allow a clean assignment).
Just more food for thought for those considering an Audi lease.
http://www.edmunds.com/advice/strategies/articles/48244/article.html
Don't worry, I won't be calling you in three years, the liars....I mean lawyers I deal with know the difference between to, two, and too.
". When I inquired about Audi doing the same, multiple Audi dealers told me that Audi will jack up the price on them to."
Jabs aside,
I know you aren't in a lawsuit, and I know you aren't trying to get out of a lease agreement early. The double taxation thing is still muddy waters for some people, even in the article I have linked into this posting. She is going for the State Taxation Board for a double taxation claim, which is BS. She did not buy the vehicle until the end of the lease, where she should be taxed on the residual price of the vehicle plus any applicable fees she agreed to. Now whoever buys it after her purchase must pay sales tax on their purchase of the vehicle from her. So no double taxing is going on. If there was better resources on this forum, I would draw a diagram with cute stick figures and all. I understand leases, loans, and taxation. In this article, she discovered what a dealer would do to either help or hinder a third party in obtaining the vehicle. If the residual was 15k and the market of the vehicle held strong at 18k, I would like to meet the SOON-TO-BE-FIRED Finance Manager at a dealership that would turn away, plus AID in the effort to get the third party in the vehicle for 15k when they could make so much more by telling both parties that it can't be done, then taking the third party and selling them a car for about the same price he had worked out or maybe a little less. In this case, the dealer also has the lessee by the you know what because if the lessee was over mileage or past normal wear and tear, they just took the lessee's get-out-of-jail-free card away and now they can charge the lessee the appropriate fees when he is now forced to turn the vehicle into them since they took away his buyer--Just playing the devil's advocate that always chases the dollar. Situation #2 is that the market of the car actually is 13k and your buy out is still 15k, which is more likely with most brand of manufacturers over Audi (greater depreciation rate per year, rather than the roughly %12 Audi currently maintains), so your third party would be an idiot to step in the finance room to make that deal with you. So the black and white has been established here, but now there is a grey we haven't even talked about. First Audi has a Premier Purchase Plan, after skimming through the rules, it seems like they put the title of the vehicle in your name from day one, but treat it much like a lease, so I hate to use the [non-permissible content removed]-out-of-u-&-me word here, but I would assume there is a sales tax situation wrapped up in the program somewhere, maybe even before the term end. So this is also a purchase, with some lease restrictions with a balloon payment at the end for the purchase of the vehicle, which eliminates the taxation at the end, again I am only assuming. The gray area also has the down and dirty idea of buying it from the dealer, with your money (which is better) or money fronted by the third party, then selling it to your third party for say 1k, which you can put on the title when you sign it over to him on the back of the document or in a bill of sale note, but don't put down "gift", b/c the DMV in most states have caught on to this and will go with market value of the vehicle. He pays virtually nothing for taxes and you have payed tax once. If the DMV is curious about this, the third party can say it was a "favor" deal, happens all the time. For the rest of the amount come to an agreed understanding of why this helps the two of you out and plan out the rest of the payment plan.
-"You don't know what they don't know."
P.S. I would recommend doing it this way since the poster of the article referenced in this reply tried to comply with California Law and the whole ten day policy and she still ran into snags. No surprise there, state officials make the law and they still can't interpret it correctly for the people of which it governs.
Ye have little faith, no, Ye have no faith!
Again, Audi charges MORE to sell the car to a dealer than they do the lessee. Other leasing companies do not do that. That was my original premise, and you have not disproved it.
Regarding buying the car "from the dealer" as your "gray area", you can't buy the car from the dealer unless the dealer buys it from Audi first. And guess what, the price the dealer can buy it for is a special increased price that exceeds your residual. So sure, give up your residual price, have the dealer buy it for $1500 more, and then buy it from the dealer, and then sell it to a third party. Yeah, that makes a great deal of sense.
Regarding the third party process in california, I read the same article. The author fails to mention numerous ways to avoid ever having to go to the DMV, which begin with signing a limited power of attorney with your lender to allow them to move title directly from the manufacturer, through you, to the third party. I have no idea why the author paid sales tax to a dealer, particularly when California law is clear that if purchasing for resale within ten days, no tax liability is owed.
What little value I did glean from your post simply supports my point, so I have to thank you. What is so easy to do with many lenders is extremely difficult to do with Audi (and apparently difficult to do with Nissan). You finally understand.
Regarding the Audi Premier Purchase Plan, sure, you can go that route, but not only will your payments be higher than if you had a lease, but you also can only select 15k miles a year. Great plan. And note was is not in the details of the PPP. Whether a third party or dealer can buy the car for the same balloon payment. I have a pretty good idea what the answer is.
So it seems your solution, and correct me if I am wrong, is to buy the car from a dealer at a premium well over your residual (because that is the only way you can buy the car from the dealer), and then commit fraud in the title transfer to the third party, rather than simply applying for a refund with the State Equalization Board?
Wow, and people hold lawyers in low esteem. I highly, highly recommend you don't follow this advice. Simply complete the transfer within ten days in California or suck it up and pay the tax. In other states, check the taxation laws.
For the dealer to sell it to you, they have to buy it first. Thus, there is no reason to buy the car from the dealer when you have the right to buy it directly from the finance company.
The problem arises when you want to trade the car in to a dealer for another car or have a third party buy the car. If you try to do this, the dealer will have to purchase the car at "fair market value" determined by Audi Financial, and not your negotiated residual. The FMV will likely exceed your residual. There are no add of "fees" by the dealer. The increase in price is a result of Audi Financial charging the dealer a buyout price that exceeds your residual.
As I have stated multiple times already, there is no provision in the leasing contract stating that Audi will do this. There is no provision stating Audi will not. The contract is silent on this issue, and therefore, until you are actually in the situtation, you would have no idea what their policy is.
The practice of charging a dealer "FMV" solely determined by Audi Financial instead of the negotiated residual is a practice not utlized by other leasing companies.
The dealer is not re-negging on a residual. The dealer is simply a conduit/agent in the transaction. You can still buy the car from the Audi Financial at the price in your contract. A third party cannot without paying a premium well above the lessee's residual.
Regarding your justification for evading taxes, it sounds like Wesley Snipes in his tax evasion trial. I suggest you petition your State congressman/woman regarding state tax policy rather than commit tax evasion because you disagree with the policy of the government.
Regarding your claimed scenario #2, you claim that the contract is silent on the criteria regarding buyout and you don't like and disagree with their interpretation of the buyout clause. Well, hello Mr. Contact-Law-Expert - Negotiate! Or sue them. If indeed, it is industry practice to interpret such clauses in auto leases differently than AFS does, that practice is indeed industry custom and such custom is probative towards interpreting the disputed lease terms. But since - after what? 4 posts - you, Mr. I-Know-Everything-But-Am-Losing-My-Shirt-Anyway have not given me ANY links, I can only assume that industry custom does NOT normally let you buy your way out of a lease with no type of penalty (or the equivalent, an inflated market value). You are just mad because you can't take advantage of AFS the way you probably do in your work by the use of your quite impressive but still confusing and bombastic rhetoric.
"Regarding your claimed scenario #2, you claim that the contract is silent on the criteria regarding buyout and you don't like their interpretation of the buyout clause"
Classic.
Since nobody could be this criminally stupid, at this point I am convinced my wife put you up to posting as a practical joke and/or you and RaudiAudi are the same person and this is an endless troll.
Either way, I'm out. I need to get back to using confusing and bombastic rhetoric to take advantage of multi-billion dollar corporations.
If anyone needs any advice on how to navigate the third party buyout in California or the inherent risks unique to an Audi/VW lease, feel free to e-mail me.
Glad you gave up on Dumb and Dumber, though. It was hopeless. If either of them were your client - you would have to fire the client.
However, if a lease is made through a dealer directly with AFS, AFS is bound by the contract, if the dealer didn't go about it this way, i.e. carried you through the lease then you said you want to buy the car at the end of it, which this most likely sounds like your case, then yea, you did get hosed and should have known better. You make it sound as if AFS inks a deal with someone when a car is leased, tells them specific numbers in writing, then backs out and says, oh yea, that residual, we were just kidding, actually, here is the real price which is more like FMV.
I will ask when I go for an Audi lease if the paper is carried by them and all terms of the agreement are going to be honored by them or if it won't happen because the dealer or another third party lessor will have to at that time buy the car from AFS.
Here are your paragraphs.....
btw, if anyone wants to reply, what is the bottom line on a 36 mo a4 lease, 12k miles, say $2k down? or just the 36 mo residual and money factor used would be great to have. seems like they must have a pretty low mf if my sister in law is accurate that she landed a new a4 2 mos ago for 360/mo inclusing taxes.
This site is very confusing especially with some other irresponsible posters to confuse most other people (like me).
I just wanted to know if this is a good deal from my local dealer Ads (St.Petersburg, FL).
For A4 with MSRP $31,015, the downpayment is $1,999 and the monthly payment is $299 plus tax. Term: 36 months (30,000 miles total)
What should I watch out with this Ads? This is not clear to me if the downpayment includes all the prep fees, acquisition fee, etc. We went to the dealer on Sunday (they closed) and saw one exactly A4 we both wanted with the MSRP $31,015 exact amount from the classified Ad.
The residual amount is $17,058.25. It just didn't make sense (with negative MF?), too good to be true?
Thanks for all your helps!
If the dealer is saying you have to go through them then they are lying to you.
Go right to Audi
If you are intending to sell the car you do have to register the car first, pay the tax and then sell it. You presently don't own the car and the tax must be paid
BTW, as we are crowing, I did work in the Bankruptcy law division at Bank of America many years ago. My job (and that of many others) was to defend the Bank against deadbeats who obtained loans and not only could not pay them but then sued the bank for lending them too much money. Right up your alley.
Perhaps you can explain in laymen's terms why:
1) If AFS unilaterally replaced the lease residual #s with FMV #s, why McWenzel does not have a cause of action against them for breach of contract and violation of Fair lending laws.
2) If he has no recourse, why is this the only area of contract law, where one party can provide a specific # when writing the contract (e.g. residual), yet use another one (e.g. FMV) to later interpret it. This simply makes no sense.
Also, McWenzel claims NO OTHER finance dealers do this but cannot provide ONE link to another leasing company that does not penalize lessees for getting out of the lease. What am I missing there?
Now for my credentials: I just leased an A4 Avant for 36 months and have the MF, Residual and a price lower than any seen on this forum - all are available if you can explain why McWenzel does not have a claim against AFS or alternatively why he simply is trying to get out of a contract that he doesn't like.
Contract with AFS and agreed terms is between you and them only - they only change the residual price if 3rd party attempts to buy car. No recourse as the contract is between you and them. He gets that. Not sure why you don't. He thinks it is a rather onerous position and less than customer friendly on AFS part to change the price if a 3rd party wants to buy and that would be convenient to you. Forces you to buy the car and pay tax before you re-sell. Which can be worked around in some states - just a hassle. So no penalty as you are entitled to buy the car at any time within the lease or at lease end - but ONLY you can buy it for the price agreed.
BTW, before you brag too much on your deal - remember the MF and price should be low, but the higher the residual the better for the deal - means you are paying less for use of car for term of lease.