Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Here is another point:
No every dealer participates in the program (we don't)
So if you drive an hours, negotiate for another 2 hours just to find that they don't participate - that's not a very smart way to spend a day.
10. This proposal would not necessarily benefit the automakers that are in the worst financial shape, as there is no guarantee that consumers would use their incentive to purchase a vehicle from one of those manufacturers and not another company.
Yet to hear of anyone complaining about not getting there piece of the pie. The early sales numbers I have seen show spikes for everyone. Which specific automaker are you talking about?
11. The program is not restricted to AMERICANS, and not restricted to AMERICAN made vehicles, but it is coming from AMERICAN taxpayer money.
I heard no complaints when this program went on in Europe and American cars were being sold there to Europeans using European tax dollars.
12. It is costing more than $4,500 per trade-in. It is costing approximately $6,000 per vehicle, when factoring in the cost of the extra government staffing, office space rent, equipment, employees, web development, printing of forms, etc.
Sounds like a allot of people have been put to work to me. You are saying they have had to hire more people to support the success of the program right? How is that a bad thing?
Would all of the Clunker Haters prefer the Goverment to continue to give out Billions to corporate america so they can keep padding there wallets with it? This and the $8K first time home buyer program are actually working. You can see it first hand. They put the money in the hands of the average working american.
This only solved the problems only for completed transactions.
For transactions didn't happen on or by 7/24, with government clearly posted info for my car qualified for the program since after the law passed, I did two months of research, test drive, shopping, and negotiation. Those efforts are down the drain. To date, NHTSA simply created a case and then close immediately for my complaint.
I did the same, contacted fuelecomony.gov, and they replied that they confirmed the GVWR at 7300 BUT.... the curb weight is over 6000 meaning "heavy duty". CARS Program says nothing about that on their site. TV commercials and ads do not even mention the "LIST". Posted a question at Edmonds.com, emailed the NHSTA as well. They said they are waiting a reply from the NHSTA on how they will rate the Suburban. Yet the 97 is listed and is almost the same car. I have been waiting since the 5th of August. Please post if you find a loophole. I would like to take advantage of the $4500. Is'nt what this program is about? Getting the high fuel consumption vehicles off the road, and boost the economy? Ha! yea right
Are they just that busy?
Can the dealer accept the vehicle on the basis that a new replacement title has been ordered?
Anyone here work for the CA DMV (hehe)?
No every dealer participates in the program (we don't)
So if you drive an hours, negotiate for another 2 hours just to find that they don't participate - that's not a very smart way to spend a day.
Well, of course.
I am assuming that the user has done their due diligence and verified beforehand that the dealer is part of the program.
(ie, just place a call to the dealer asking if they are part of the program, and if they say they are, then include them in your list of dealers you will work with)
The Pro's are pretty clear and they've been beaten to death on a number of sites. I agree with all that you've written.
Con's.
Cons
1. Artificial, unsustainable boom in auto sales.
Agreed. It was always intended to be thus.
2. Crushing those older running autos makes those parts and vehicles harder to get, and consequently more expensive.
False. Just the opposite is likely to happen, an over supply of parts.
3. Many companies build parts and upgrades for older vehicles. A reduced supply of older vehicles would adversely affect their sales.
Hmmmm, speculation. Source please.
4. The automotive restoration and customization industry relies on old cars as the basis of their products. A reduced supply of older vehicles would adversely affect their sales.
Maybe, but so what. The small number of vehicles involved should not be very significant as 50 million of these types of vehicles were sold since the mid 90's. This was not a program to assist the restoration and customization industry. Also see reply to #2 just above.
5. For lower income people, makes it harder to find and maintain an older vehicle.
Probably true but the small number of vehicles involved makes this insignificant. Also this bill was not written to assist the lower income drivers. It was written to assist the auto industry.
6. Convincing low income people, those who drive "clunkers", to go out and finance a new car when we are still in the midst of the consequences of easy credit in the housing market.
Absolutely false. This has been beaten to death and in fact nothing of the the kind is happening. People who cannot afford to get a new vehicle simply are being blocked by the lenders. It's the very well-to-do that are taking advantage of it. At least from this perspective in a Toyota environment.
7. Drop in vehicle donations to charities. Some charities that rely on vehicle donations for funding say they're receiving fewer cars and trucks, because donors change their minds and decide to trade the vehicles in on the Cash for Clunkers program.
True, but again this bill was written to assist the auto industry. Nothing new to see here.
8. Some older vehicles actually get better gas mileage than some newer ones. Replacing them would then negate any benefit to the environment or the U.S.' oil consumption problem.
WTF??? This is off the wall weird. First this is specifically disallowed under the program. Hurry up and erase this reason before it gets laughed off the site.
9. Encouraging consumers to scrap working vehicles could shorten the lives of cars and encourage the production of new cars, which would have a larger adverse affect on the environment that keeping the older car.
This bill has nothing to do with any environmental issue. But you must provide data for this supposition or it's simply hoohaa.
But look at it this way. Last year 16 MM units were built and sold. This year there will be 10-11 MM units built and sold. That's a huge environmental benefit.
However taken to it's logical conclusion....it would be best for the environment not to produce any auto's at all. Nor, trains, nor computers, nor vegetables, nor oil, nor anything. Producing nothing and living in a cave while living off the land is the utopian dream.
10. This proposal would not necessarily benefit the automakers that are in the worst financial shape, as there is no guarantee that consumers would use their incentive to purchase a vehicle from one of those manufacturers and not another company.
See joel's post just above. This decision has been given to the US buying public. The US buying public is making its voice heard.
Non-issue, good try tho.
11. The program is not restricted to AMERICANS, and not restricted to AMERICAN made vehicles, but it is coming from AMERICAN taxpayer money.
No the borrowings come from the future payments of the US auto industry which btw actually wants to sell units to non-Americans. These people actually have good solid spendable money too.
Your concern for the AMERICAN auto industry is noted. However the AMERICAN auto industry simply doesn't care. It just wants buyers. Martians can apply too, with all the proper documents of course.
12. It is costing more than $4,500 per trade-in. It is costing approximately $6,000 per vehicle, when factoring in the cost of the extra government staffing, office space rent, equipment, employees, web development, printing of forms, etc.
Th DOT was allocated $50 million to administer this program. It came from the funding, it's not extra. Also see prior post by joel..
That was WAY too easy, btw.
Yes, I understand there is more paperwork for you to do for C4C.
So what?
Instead of selling and making commission on 5 cars, you are now selling and making commission on 30 cars instead.
Maybe the work ethic of selling cars is different than programming software, but you know what, if I have a project at work that, if released in 2 weeks instead of 4, can generate 6 times the sales than if it was released 4 weeks from now...
Guess what...
I am busting my butt for the next 2 weeks, weekends, nights, etc, because I know the extra sales are very important, and you gotta get while the gettings good.
And I am not even working on commission like you!
Throw me on commission, and holy cow, for the next 2 weeks I would be doing NOTHING but working, to squeeze out every sale I could get!
I find it sad, and rather disgusting, that you would rather cheat the customer by raising your prices (oh wait, its never "raising" prices, but instead, "lower" incentives), based on whether they would use C4C, rather than work hard and sell more cars, and thus earn the extra cash the proper way.
Oh, good. I'd hate to think you were selling to undocumented aliens.
Edmunds says the curb weight is 5297.
Cars.com says the curb weight is 5226.
My deal was approved and I had the same car as you. Have your dealer submit it and follow the Unlisted Car process like I posted. The 99 Suburban 1500 4WD is an eligible car and should be listed.
As usual you are clueless.
He never said anything about qualifying for a new car loan he just said that to save money go for a used car over a new one. If you need to save 4,000 or so dollars cause your trade is only worth a few hundred or maybe a 1,000 bucks then go for a used car that is 5,000ish dollars cheaper.
Our Volvo Dealer is the seventh largest certified pre-owned Volvo dealer in the country. We sell a ton of used cars to very happy people. The warranty will not be non-existent because nearly every brand now has a factory backed certified warranty that is very comprehensive. Sure the interest rate might be slightly higher then a new one but unless your credit is completely shot you won't be paying 20%. In fact with the way things are now if your credit is real bad you just won't get a loan period. No, one will buy the sub 540 score people now even with tons of money down.
We sell cars for wholesale or close to every once in a while and a smart buyer will notice that super marked down car that has been on the lot for 90 days and jump on it. I would rather lose a 1,000 some dollars retailing a car to someone for a wholesale price then losing a 1,000 dollars plus auction fees to really wholesale a car. That retail customer will probably give us some service business down the road and hopefully I did a good enough job to get some referrals out of them.
Sounds like a allot of people have been put to work to me. You are saying they have had to hire more people to support the success of the program right? How is that a bad thing?
Would all of the Clunker Haters prefer the Goverment to continue to give out Billions to corporate america so they can keep padding there wallets with it? This and the $8K first time home buyer program are actually working. You can see it first hand. They put the money in the hands of the average working american.
Any idea how they came up with the 6,000 dollar figure? It has been widely reported at 50 million dollars of the initial one billion was set aside for administrative costs. Also one of the reason the EPA is having problems setting up the revised MPG numbers and handling cars left out of the system is no additional money was allocated for the EPA to do that. They are just absorbing the extra work with no additional staff and no additional equipment.
Just because your business is an exception does not mean I am clueless about buying used cars. The last used car I was able to buy from a dealer was over 25 years ago. My experience is the dealers want way over value and offer way under value for trades. You would hate dealing with me. Probably hand me to a salesman that is tough. The chances of your selling me a vehicle are slim unless Rover offers a diesel version of their Range Rover. I would not have a Volvo if they were the last vehicle on earth. New or used. Pure yuppie junk. I will continue to buy and sell used privately. Much better chance of getting a fair deal both directions.
Would all of the Clunker Haters prefer the Goverment to continue to give out Billions to corporate america so they can keep padding there wallets with it? This and the $8K first time home buyer program are actually working. You can see it first hand. They put the money in the hands of the average working american.
The logical extension of this would be to simply print money to make a job for EVERY unemployed American. In fact, why not just "put the money in the hands of the average working american" by printing the money and handing it out on the street corner.
Let me guess, you car didn't qualify.......... :P
1999 Ford Ranger 170,000 miles hit more times the Joe Lewis. Tops a $500 sled. She got:
$4500 Clunker Money
$150 Scrap Value
$418 Tax Savings
$500 Ford Owner Loyalty Clunker Rebate
$5568 total for a $500 piece
Only in America my friends, what a country!!!!!!
See you next winter
"forced" :confuse: ...you could just say "no"
They said I have to wait for the CARS money to deliver to them
I saw this on the cars.gov and don't know what I should do.... call Hotline?
"IF THE DEALER HAS THE NEW CAR IN STOCK, THE DEALER MUST ALLOW YOU TO TAKE POSSESSION OF THE NEW CAR BEFORE THE DEALER MAY SUBMIT THE CREDIT APPLICATION TO THE GOVERNMENT. PLEASE REPORT ANY DEALER TO NHTSA THAT DOES NOT ALLOW YOU TO TAKE POSSESSION OF A NEW CAR PURCHASED UNDER THE CARS PROGRAM. PLEASE CALL THE CARS HOTLINE AT (866) CAR-7861."
I believe they have to put in the VIN number for the new car when they submit the application, so your car (and deal) is pretty much secured. I understand though the wait is a bit frustrating. Our dealer made us wait (and we would have anyway even if they didn't) after we went through all the paperwork (made the deal) on July 30. We just got a notification that we could now go in, make the payment, drop off the clunker, and drive away with the new car. We made an appointment to go in on Thursday. Excited!
Best of luck with your C4C deal!
My options are limited, either wait or drop the deal, as for NHTSA outlawing dealers holding the new cars I doubt they have time to persue the matter
If the government keeps spending taxpayer money like it has been we could all be "living the dream" soon.
Yeah, I know that's off topic so I'll just say that I'll live in my CAR instead of a cave. :sick:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
The math fails to support this supposition. The initial funding for the program is $1B w/$50M for administration, leaving $950M for the "cash" part. $50M is 5.26% of $950M.
A $3500 C4C deal would thus cost the government $3,684 and a $4500 C4C deal would run $4,737. Neither figure is remotely near $6K. Even if there was an additional 20% overhead that was being buried/not reported/swept under the rug, the numbers would still fall below $6K.
Myth: Busted.
Yes.
Damn I am glad we delivered all ours
I'll update on what happens.
The end result is that in 97% of cases, people are paying more now, for that new car, than they would have been, WITHOUT A CLUNKER TO TRADE IN, because of the complete rollback of incentives and charging of MSRP.
Never underestimate the government's ability to perversely distort markets nor the lack of intelligence of the American Consumer.
When this money-dope, taxpayer funded grab that is benefiting dealers ends, dealers will either have to restock inventory and go back to heavy discounting (with the manufacturer), or lay off 75% of their employees, as pent up demand helped diminish their bloated lots, but sapped future demand even more than the anemic economy was doing ordinarily.
Also, look for a lot of lightly used, repossessed cars for sale in the next 6 to 18 months.
That is a valuable treatment for the car finish and costs the dealer at least $75.
What I don't understand is how car salesmen got the reputation of being slimeballs. Clearly it's completely unfounded.
The buyer wants to pay as little as possible without regard to whether the Car Dealer loses money or not.
The Car Dealer wants to charge as much as possible without regard to the welfare of the buyer.
Morally, it is a stand-off. No one has the high moral ground. It is just business, nothing more or less.
The Car Dealer wants to charge as much as possible without regard to the welfare of the buyer.
I agree with this.
Morally, it is a stand-off. No one has the high moral ground. It is just business, nothing more or less.
In the case above, I disagree with this. This guy had an agreement in place and now the salesman is holding him hostage for $899 for something he doesn't want. You don't see the moral issue with that? You think that's how business should be done?
Since you've had your clunker for at least a year, what's with a couple of more weeks? That's what I had been telling my husband who had been using the clunker for commute (no AC, no heater) and could not wait to get the new car. We are getting it tomorrow.
I called my dealership and they acted dumb, then told me they would call me back after discussiong with management. They called me back in 15 minutes and told me that the agreement I signed would be ripped up in front of me and the car would be delivered tomorrow.
For all of you out there feeling bad for the dealer...SO SORRY. This program is OPTIONAL. The dealers did not HAVE to participate and many in my area chose NOT TO. There is a certain amount of risk involved in participating, but you are selling cars like hot cakes. That is the pay off. The liability of making sure everything is in order falls on the dealer BEFORE accepting a deal. If you can't afford to be out $4500 temporarily, you should not have signed up for the program.
Don't wait. Call your dealership and/or the hotline. If the dealer will not budge, cancel the deal and go to a reputable dealership with your clunker.
They discussed terms for an agreement, but no one signed a legally binding contract. Despite the "agreement", the buyer could have just refused to sign papers and take delivery. The seller has the same privilege The agreement was really nothing more than a proposal.
The car business is a rip-off in many ways. But you would be surprised, not only are the customers being taken advantage of by management, but so is the sales staff. That is why there is so much turnover in the industry. Promise big bucks to the salespeople and pay them peanuts. Then recruit a fresh batch of pigeons.