*Improved crash protection *Addition of a huge number of luxury items *Power accessories *Larger wheels and tires *Massive amount of electrical wiring and other parts
I do not believe the '84 Escort/Lynx was a full frame car. It was a FWD unibody, like most all modern FWD cars are. Unibody technology has been around for decades; the 1967 Chevy Camaro was a unibody car as was the Corvair before it.
Cars today are designed to absorb and deflect energy created by accidents. They are packed with multiple safety devices. A plastic bumper is easier to replace than a big honkin' steel one. The expense comes from the fact that they are a bumper system instead of just a part so when one is damaged, the entire assembly is replaced. Mfr's have designed them this way to make for simpler installation at the factory, simpler and quicker accident repairs, and better quality control (easier to build and replace one big part than many small ones).
Headlight technology is much more advanced than it was 20 years ago. Today headlights are an important part of aerodynamics. They're also much brighter and illuminate the road better. The US used to have headlight regulations that were created in the 1950's while the rest of the world was advancing lighting technology. Fortunately that's changed for the benefit of all drivers.
Temp spares are just that.....temporary. They are lighter weight and take up less space in the trunk/hatch area. Personally I think full sized spares are a total waste of money and space. They're no longer needed IMO.
There is no question in my mind that today's cars are lightyears better and safer than any "old car" you can think of. Cars from the 1960s and before were rolling death traps. Safety by design was simply non-existent in those days. If the gov't didn't step in and mandate safety equipt we'd still be rolling around in with lap belts, steel dashboards, plate glass, and stainless steel interior trim that become spears and knives in an accident.
Time to wake up and smell the New Millenium. Your post isn't based in 21st Century reality. Yesterthink is a fool's game.
There is no conspiracy, no black helicopters, no G-Men spying on you, no secret organizations. Time to turn off the X-Files, Randpall. Come join us in the Real World.
a unibody car - the only "frame" was the k-frame section that was the mounting points for the lower control arms and steering rack. 50-55 mpg - maybe when it was being towed.
I've gotten a real kick out of the "donut" spare argument. With several years in the tire business, I always had old guys jumping up and down about wanting to put a 27" tall, 9" wide tire in their trunk because they didn't like "the donut".
Interestingly, those donuts, in many cases, had higher load ratings than the tires they "temporarily" replaced. After you get a flat, just how long ARE you going to drive around on your spare, anyway? Me, I'll drop off the flat tire that day and pick it up that afternoon - the tire shop will remount it.
I had a flat, over a weekend, when I was transferring from Athens, Greece to Abilene, TX, and my wife and I were driving from Olympia, WA to Missouri (her mom to mine). I ended up catching a nail that ripped the heck our of a Michelin TRX tire on my '84 Mustang GT - try finding one of those on a Sunday in Utah! I drove 1,100 miles on the spare, finally stopping at Lowry AFB, Colorado and buying 2 tires on base.
I did 70-80 for 1,100 miles on a temp - I don't by the crap about being scared of a donut.
Modern cars are computerized to allow them to meet federal emissions standards, not to generate added revenue for the dealers. The Clean Air Act of 1990 required that motor vehicle pollution control devices function for 100,000 miles. In order to do that, the manufacturers had to adopt more sophisticated control devices which constantly monitor the operation of the engine, adjust the settings to ensure that the engine operates efficiently, and report when a pollution control device goes out of it's specified operating range.
In my owner's manual, Nissan tells me that my donut of a spare tire is only good for up to 50 miles of travel at up to 50 MPH or something like that. Also, the donut is not the same size as the regular wheel/tire combo and I worry about my differential overheating when using the donut. Those are the reasons I am personally scared of the donut.
Of course, if I had no choice (like you), I would drive as far as I have to on the donut, perhaps at 50 though. Paul
and Paul, the manufacturer prints that on the tires FOR LIABILITY REASONS.
You and I both know people would sue the snot out of the manufacturer if they had a wreck after the manufacturer said - "go ahead and run it all you want, the car handles just the same".
In poorer parts of South Texas, there are many Chevys running 2 AND 4 donut spares for tires, for the "lowrider" look. Can't beat the cost, either - you can pick up donut spares at any junkyard for $5 each - just find 4 that match your bolt pattern!
GMBuypower was absolutely indispensable in my purchase of a 2002 Camaro. I was able to get just the car I wanted. I checked the online window stickers of over 1,000 Camaros in the Southeast to do so, something which would've been impossible otherwise. My experience with net sales was mixed. One dealer in NC was prompt & up front with a great out-the-door price (but sold the car before I could make a weekend visit). Others played coy, or had $300 "fees" on top of the net "price," etc. I wound up buying a Z28 locally by negotiating an OTD price in person. At that time there were 3 Zs I'd've been happy with within a couple hours' drive, so I could've tried the other 2 if the local deal wasn't working out. Buypower gave me negotiating strength by making me aware of the alternate cars in my area.
I know that at least one sales person (Cliffy) has said that he likes to give his price before the customer makes an offer, but from my limited experience, some dealers hate to give you a decent price right off the bat. At least you learned how to recognize a dealer like that.
It is much easier to just give them your offer and see if they accept it.
If FordDirect.com had a button labeled Bid On This Car, I would have definitely entered at bid (kind of like Priceline before they shut down).
The button was Request a Quote. What I ended up getting was "Why don't you come down to the dealer so we can talk." Like I said, the guy seemed pretty nice. I wonder if he was burned too many times by the infamous Inconsiderate Buyer ...
On a different note, my RL came with a temporary spare. I hate those! I know the chances of getting a flat are pretty low nowadays, but how much are manufacturers saving by not giving us a full size spare? I ended up ordering a steel rim from Tire.com.
I've had multiple Ram vans, a Grand Cherokee, 318is, and an Avalon. They all came with full size spares. What's up with Honda?
Temporary spares and punctured run-flats are supposed to safely go up to 50 miles. What happens if you're in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night?
I think the issue with a temp spare is not just the cost of the tire, but also the space taken up. Many people want a full size spare, but also want the extra 2 cubic feet of space. Note that one of the reasons I bought a Camry over an Accord was the FUll Size Spare Standard.
when the 'net was new, and the experience was a great hassle free way to buy a car. In todays day and age, there are too many people wanting that magical internet number to shop, so the market has changed. I usually don't give a price out in the first round of emails. I want the customer to understand the process and buy into using my service before I give them a number to go shop.
Its not what all the training manuals say, but that's why they are called "guides."
Now, in Vipers case, I'd have kicked him out a price pretty quickly. We can usually tell by the email when someone is genuine, and when someone is an idiot.
If I get an email with a cc to every dealer within 100 miles, it will usually not get any more response than hitting the "delete" key.
Keep in mind that Sante Fe is front-wheel drive, not all-wheel drive, and that ABS is an extra cost option even on the high-end models. So add ABS and AWD, and SUVs are about traction so why wouldn't you, and that price will jump up a bit.
No, I'm saying that the price quote above specifically mentioned that price was for a FWD vehicle. Hyundai sells both, but you'll pay more for AWD, obviously.
As I was reading the posts on how some people are concerned about the fact that their vehicles only have a donut and not a full-sized spare tire and it got me thinking about the cars that are out there that don't have any spare tire at all. For example, the new BMW Z4 has run-flat tires and absolutely no spare. Of course, you can drive X number of miles at X miles per hour after your tire pressure monitor alerts you to the fact that one of your wheels has been punctured, but still talk about driving around without a safety net !
They mishandled your request totally. If you were looking for a Toyota and had been to my website and requested a price quote with a stock number or vin on it I'd have no problem sending you a price quote back. Audia8 is right about the market changing (via internet) I do see a lot of surfers getting my price and shopping it around. Had one tuesday that wanted a quote on an 03 Runner with tax, title, and fees included. So I quote him an out the door price, he comes back that someone quoted him $900.00 less. I told him to go buy it, and if he got there and they started to play games that my price would stand firm. : ) Mackabee
I purchased a 2002 Chevy Tracker a few months ago. I am really very scared to drive this SUV when their is high wind.This van is blown all over the road. Is this normal for this van? Has any one else complained about this Chevy. Would wider tires help this and can it be done and what is involved? I need help. I almost turned over with the wind on I4 in Florida today.
I usually drive a Mountaneer or navigator and under certain conditions the wind does seem to blow me all over the road.....it feels alot worse than it really is...
but you should have your car checked out to make sure nothing is wrong with the tires or suspension.
Hi Karen, My wife recently purchased a 2002 Volvo from Ken Garff here in SLC. A few months ago she was rear ended in town & the car sustained approx. 6,000 in damages. The car had 3,000 miles onit. Garff assured us that they could get the car looking "just like new". During the repair period of approx. 1 month my wife expressed an interest in trading the car in for a 2003. We were both told ~ as soon as the prices come in for the 2003 we'll give you a quote that will be 500.00 over invoice.Well, the weeks rolled by and no quote although the 2003 prices were posted all over the internet. When we asked Garff what the problem was we were told "we'll call you back with the price & the trade in within 1/2 hour!"...Finally after another 2 weeks the sales manage calls me & says "we have no interest in your car" "we don't want it!" ...I asked him to put that statement in writting ~ he agreed but I never received it. The Garff General Manager, who also had been confirming with my wife that he would "take care of the trade in ~ no problem" called a few days later & requested that I come in and we could work out a solution. I agreed ~ after a short time in the meeting the GM said he'd give me 15,000 on a trade in for the car but he really didnh't want it! I paid almost 40,000 cash for the car! I have repoted this incident to Volvo & what do you think I was told by Volvo North America? "That's how much cars depreciate when driven out of the showroom". I'm 63 years old & have purchased a new car every 2~3 years & this is the first time I've this lame excuse. This is the 1st time that I've been treated like a piece of ragweed by a dealer & a manufacture of an automobile ~ or any other product that I've purchased. Ken Garff's logo is "we back you up" ~ you can interpret that statement several ways none of which apply to satisfying a customer.. I think everyone who is considering purchasing a Volvo should be aware of what the possibilty of having this happen to them if they purchase anything from the Ken Garff organization here in Salt Lake City. Thanks for your time & the enrollment into your national discussion boards for Volvo owners. If I can provide you or any other members with any additional information about this matter please feel free to contact me. Repectfully submitted, Jeff Fleming buzltyr837@aol.com
b/c it has been in a rather expensive accident and they would probably not sell it themselves anyway. If they treated you rudely then you have a beef, but the fact is a wrecked car is worth substantially less than an unwrecked one.
really has no basis from what you've said in your post, I'm sure this dealership will be quite interested in you slandering them on this web site. I don't even care if they were rude. Rudeness does not call for this treatment in a public forum. At 63 years old you should know better.
How can you say that his claim has no basis? That car is worth $22-25K wrecked. I would never even dark the door of a dealership like that again or even any dealership of that car maker.
where the dealer guaranteed a specific amount for a wrecked trade-in? The dealer is under no obligation whatsoever to buy a vehicle from anyone. If it's so easy to get more money for it then why doesn't he try to sell his property privately and be done with it. Just because the car is now damaged goods doesn't mean the dealer that originally sold has to share in that misfortune. Why doesn't this guy sue the person that crashed into him?
but he does have an obligation to treat the customer like a human being. The dealer should make a decent offer so that he can make another sale. This way he has lost a sale and a customer for life.
that the dealer needs instruction on what he should do to make a sale. For whatever reason, the dealer does not want this car on trade. Obviously, they feel that to take it on trade would be a money loser. Dealers do not have to buy someone's car just because it is offered to them. You don't have to buy the dealer's car and he doesn't have to buy yours.
Somehow I doubt we'd be hearing about this if the car was 4 or 5 years old. The fact that it is relatively new doesn't make it any more of the dealer's responsibility.
an appropriate amount for the discount they will have to give the buyer (generally nothing unless it gets a salvage title or the buyer gets a carfax). However, let's say discount it $2000 and make that offer.
Or, you could just blow off the customer. Yeah, that sounds like a money making plan.
.... All do respect and sorry for your loss .. but the dealer didn't hit, smash or cause the accident .. right .?
I'm sure, once the body shop got a good look at all the damage there was more than they thought -- a vehicle that has been wrecked and repaired can loose a lot of value, especially Imports -
I love Volvo's, but if one has been whacked, I'm never a player for it and neither is anyone else unless they can buy em' cheap so they can sell them cheap because buyers DON'T want them ~ and that my friend is anywhere in the country, some dealers wont touch a vehicle if it's had $2,500 worth of damage ..... if you wan't to feel a sick feeling in your stomach, drive a Benz or a BMW across the curb, then try to trade it without a 20%+ loss, let alone a $6,000 hit ..
But, you are waaaay out of line dropping the name AND blaming the dealer because he doesn't want to step up to cover YOUR accident .. *what are you thinking .....??*
If You don't like his figures, then go on to another dealer and try to pass it on to someone else - I cant believe you even posted this, and I hope they read it -- $6,000 will seem like chump change compared to your attorney fee's .. are you sure your 63 and not 13 and stamping your feet ....?
then he shouldn't mind his name being posted here. If this is OK, then all will see it as that way and respect him for it. No legal will be involved because he didn't say anything that didn't actually happen (I'm assuming). For it to be slanderous, there has to be things that aren't true in the public statements.
Or should I say Mr. Contradiction. In one post you appear to agree that the dealer has no obligation to buy this guy's car. But in your next posts you basically say the dealer does have to buy it - at what you believe to be an appropriate price. Otherwise the customer is not treated like a human being.
So which is it? Does the dealer have an obligation to buy this guy's car or not?
As far as what's true? It is certainly not true that the dealer did anything wrong by not buying this guy's car. And that was the original poster's point. He wasn't deriding this dealer just because of an unreturned phone call.
The problem is not with any technical reading of the word slander. The problem is that with the world being full of morons, many of them believe anything they see on a computer screen, whether true or not. It is not a business's responsibility to defend itself everytime some crackpot with a grudge wants to take a potshot.
It seems to me, the beef should not be with the dealership, but rather the insurance company. Yopu can find out how much the car was worth before the accident,; you know what it is worth now. The difference is the dimished value, and (in some states), you are entilted to it.
........ We weren't there, we didn't see or hear the whole thing, we don't even know what this $40 grand Volvo is, it's never been disclosed, but you come to a figure and say it's gotta be worth $25,000 .. how do you know ..?
We have little or no both party info here, except the customer feels that he was not treated decently -- should the dealer have overpaid for the wrecked vehicle and gave away the new vehicle just so a person feels it fair for them ---
Hmmm, this kinda sounds like the case were the lady drove over her husband not once, but Twice in a Benz, but it was an accident and she's innocent. l.o.l. thats decent for her.!
do, please, post your qualifications to make that statement. I think you're slightly outgunned here by the posters around you.
We're probably looking at a vehicle that has had enough damage to require the title be branded. It won't be a "salvage" title, likely, but we have a requirement here to note any damage greater than 25% of its value. Now, when the future buyer of this gem comes in and pulls a carfax on it, pulls a service history, etc, what do you think the dealer will be able to do?
Since Volvo now shares depreciation with its parent company (Ford), I can easily see the ACV of that car being $15k.
I think this guy will probably be getting a nice call from the Dealerships attorney on Monday. This will add a new and interesting twist to "backing you up" for sure.
more than a 50 IQ. That's enough to know that NO car depreciates 50% in the first year. This damage is also not 25% of its value. I can do math you know. Can you? sheesh, typical salesman.
Did anyone think that the dealership DOESNT WANT THE TRADE?
I'm no car dealer, but I can understand that they are bascially telling the guy they don't want the car, unless the price is insanely low.
I think I even recall reading in the story that the dealership said "We have no interest in your car." Unless jflemming2 doesn't speak english, it should be pretty clear that they don't want to take this in on trade.
To make a low offer is not ripping anyone off, it's a starting point, just like any other negotiation.
For the customer to be mad at the dealership because they made what he felt to be a low offer is just childish. The dealership had nothing to do with the accident, only the repair.
So unless their is problem with the repair, the poster really doesn't have much to complain about to the dealer. Hey Terry and others, how is $500 over invoice on most new 2003 Volvo's, is that a good deal or what? If so, then the dealership is "With you" Jeff, regarding your replacement car. But why do you expect them to fix something that wasn't their fault?
I would recommend that Jeff take the written trade offer to the party at fault in the accident and go after a dimished value claim.
It would really suck (or be funny depending on your POV) if the at-fault party was the poster here.
that the MSRP was 40000 and after he faxed twenty dealers before he bought the vehicle trying to get his best qoute. He probably bought for around 31500. I see it all the time on damaged cars where the customer always resorts back up to the MSRP when something happens to their vehicle. Here in Iowa we have to disclose damged cars over 5000.00 and we usually will deduct 20 percent for it from the the value of the car
....... Thank God your not doing my tax return .. it's not the cost of the damage, it how much it effects the value for the future sale ..
***That's enough to know that NO car depreciates 50% in the first year*** -- Really ..?
Ok, here is just a few .. 02~ Jag 4.0 "S" type, doing "around" $31ish at the block .. 02 Hyundai Sonata V6, running in the the $10's, 02 Town Cars, $21ish .. 02 Cavaliers sleep walking in the $7's .. 02 Saturns "L" banging around in the $8's .. 02 Kia Rio's trying to reach the $5's .. Benz C230 coupes in the $18's ...
My mother just bought a Chevy Impala. She signed the paperwork two days ago, turned in her trade-in and drove the car home. The salesman called yesterday and said he wanted her to come in and sign a new set of papers. Reason --- he made a mistake and gave her an extra $1,000 off. She bought this car in good faith never knowing until the day of the paperwork what the bottom line was. The salesman is almost threatening her to come in and stating that "technically" she doesn't own the car because she financed it.
Is this legal? Wasn't the car hers once she signed the contract and took possession of the car? And, it seems like the salesman made an error and the error should be between him and his boss and/or company, not my mother's concern. Any suggestions??? Thanks in advance!
then your mom is out of luck. They can (and will) repo the car if the contract isn't legit.
Not to be rude (honest) but how in the heck did she "bought this car in good faith never knowing until the day of the paperwork what the bottom line was."
it isn't a math error. They wrote an additional $1,000 down as a rebate.
My idea of good faith -- my mom has never negotiated a purchase for a car before. I helped her research prices on the internet (we are in different states) to give her a ball park figure. She new the invoice price, realized the rebates, and somewhere in the discussions there was an additional $1,000 off for the car being manufactured before September. I told her that before she signs to ask what additional fees would be added. She thought she had a good deal when the bottom line had not changed. How is this her error? Can I go back and tell my salesman I paid too much and would like an additional $1,000 off?
Comments
*Improved crash protection
*Addition of a huge number of luxury items
*Power accessories
*Larger wheels and tires
*Massive amount of electrical wiring and other parts
I do not believe the '84 Escort/Lynx was a full frame car. It was a FWD unibody, like most all modern FWD cars are. Unibody technology has been around for decades; the 1967 Chevy Camaro was a unibody car as was the Corvair before it.
Cars today are designed to absorb and deflect energy created by accidents. They are packed with multiple safety devices. A plastic bumper is easier to replace than a big honkin' steel one. The expense comes from the fact that they are a bumper system instead of just a part so when one is damaged, the entire assembly is replaced. Mfr's have designed them this way to make for simpler installation at the factory, simpler and quicker accident repairs, and better quality control (easier to build and replace one big part than many small ones).
Headlight technology is much more advanced than it was 20 years ago. Today headlights are an important part of aerodynamics. They're also much brighter and illuminate the road better. The US used to have headlight regulations that were created in the 1950's while the rest of the world was advancing lighting technology. Fortunately that's changed for the benefit of all drivers.
Temp spares are just that.....temporary. They are lighter weight and take up less space in the trunk/hatch area. Personally I think full sized spares are a total waste of money and space. They're no longer needed IMO.
There is no question in my mind that today's cars are lightyears better and safer than any "old car" you can think of. Cars from the 1960s and before were rolling death traps. Safety by design was simply non-existent in those days. If the gov't didn't step in and mandate safety equipt we'd still be rolling around in with lap belts, steel dashboards, plate glass, and stainless steel interior trim that become spears and knives in an accident.
Time to wake up and smell the New Millenium. Your post isn't based in 21st Century reality. Yesterthink is a fool's game.
There is no conspiracy, no black helicopters, no G-Men spying on you, no secret organizations. Time to turn off the X-Files, Randpall. Come join us in the Real World.
I've gotten a real kick out of the "donut" spare argument. With several years in the tire business, I always had old guys jumping up and down about wanting to put a 27" tall, 9" wide tire in their trunk because they didn't like "the donut".
Interestingly, those donuts, in many cases, had higher load ratings than the tires they "temporarily" replaced. After you get a flat, just how long ARE you going to drive around on your spare, anyway? Me, I'll drop off the flat tire that day and pick it up that afternoon - the tire shop will remount it.
I had a flat, over a weekend, when I was transferring from Athens, Greece to Abilene, TX, and my wife and I were driving from Olympia, WA to Missouri (her mom to mine). I ended up catching a nail that ripped the heck our of a Michelin TRX tire on my '84 Mustang GT - try finding one of those on a Sunday in Utah! I drove 1,100 miles on the spare, finally stopping at Lowry AFB, Colorado and buying 2 tires on base.
I did 70-80 for 1,100 miles on a temp - I don't by the crap about being scared of a donut.
Of course, if I had no choice (like you), I would drive as far as I have to on the donut, perhaps at 50 though.
Paul
I know, I might have to change tires twice, but those are the breaks.
TB
You and I both know people would sue the snot out of the manufacturer if they had a wreck after the manufacturer said - "go ahead and run it all you want, the car handles just the same".
In poorer parts of South Texas, there are many Chevys running 2 AND 4 donut spares for tires, for the "lowrider" look. Can't beat the cost, either - you can pick up donut spares at any junkyard for $5 each - just find 4 that match your bolt pattern!
My experience with net sales was mixed. One dealer in NC was prompt & up front with a great out-the-door price (but sold the car before I could make a weekend visit). Others played coy, or had $300 "fees" on top of the net "price," etc.
I wound up buying a Z28 locally by negotiating an OTD price in person. At that time there were 3 Zs I'd've been happy with within a couple hours' drive, so I could've tried the other 2 if the local deal wasn't working out. Buypower gave me negotiating strength by making me aware of the alternate cars in my area.
It is much easier to just give them your offer and see if they accept it.
If FordDirect.com had a button labeled Bid On This Car, I would have definitely entered at bid (kind of like Priceline before they shut down).
The button was Request a Quote. What I ended up getting was "Why don't you come down to the dealer so we can talk." Like I said, the guy seemed pretty nice. I wonder if he was burned too many times by the infamous Inconsiderate Buyer ...
On a different note, my RL came with a temporary spare. I hate those! I know the chances of getting a flat are pretty low nowadays, but how much are manufacturers saving by not giving us a full size spare? I ended up ordering a steel rim from Tire.com.
I've had multiple Ram vans, a Grand Cherokee, 318is, and an Avalon. They all came with full size spares. What's up with Honda?
Temporary spares and punctured run-flats are supposed to safely go up to 50 miles. What happens if you're in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night?
Good thing I have AAA ...
Talk to you guys later.
Peter
See also: Financing | Insurance
2003 Hyundai Santa Fe
LX 2WD 4dr SUV (2.7L 6cyl 4A)
MSRP Invoice
Regional Base Price
for Change $22,619 $21,101 $42,394
Typical Options new feature
Add/Remove $595 N/A $577
Destination Charge $525 $525 $525
Incentives and/or Rebates Not Available
Total $23,739 $21,626 $43,496
"What Others
Are Paying"
Not much different from the old world of car buying now is it?
Its not what all the training manuals say, but that's why they are called "guides."
Now, in Vipers case, I'd have kicked him out a price pretty quickly. We can usually tell by the email when someone is genuine, and when someone is an idiot.
If I get an email with a cc to every dealer within 100 miles, it will usually not get any more response than hitting the "delete" key.
Ed
-juice
http://nadaguides.com/Values/ValueCatOptions.asp?UserID=0638961F2- - DF&DID=37644&wSec=1&wPg=1206&CategoryId=5&Mak- - eId=1196&VehicleId=49893&Year=2002&ColorId=
-juice
Car_man
Host
Smart Shoppers / FWI Message Boards
The pricing guide says:
Total MSRP=$23,739 Invoice=$21,626 TMV=$43,496
: )
Mackabee
I'm sure a tall and narrow SUV is more succeptible to cross winds, but your case sounds a bit extreme.
I'd pose the same question in the Tracker/Vitara threads to see if other owners find it normal, too.
-juice
but you should have your car checked out to make sure nothing is wrong with the tires or suspension.
My wife recently purchased a 2002 Volvo from Ken Garff here in SLC. A few months ago she was rear ended in town & the car sustained approx. 6,000 in damages. The car had 3,000 miles onit. Garff assured us that they could get the car looking "just like new". During the repair period of approx. 1 month my wife expressed an interest in trading the car in for a 2003. We were both told ~ as soon as the prices come in for the 2003 we'll give you a quote that will be 500.00 over invoice.Well, the weeks rolled by and no quote although the 2003 prices were posted all over the internet. When we asked Garff what the problem was we were told "we'll
call you back with the price & the trade in within 1/2 hour!"...Finally after another 2 weeks the sales manage calls me & says "we have no interest in your car" "we don't want it!" ...I asked him to put that statement in writting ~ he agreed but I never received it. The Garff General Manager, who also had been confirming with my wife that he would "take care of the trade in ~ no problem" called a few days later & requested that I come in and we could work out a solution. I agreed ~ after a short time in the meeting the GM said he'd give me 15,000 on a trade in for the car but he really didnh't want it! I paid almost 40,000 cash for the car! I have repoted this incident to Volvo & what do you think I was told by Volvo North America? "That's how much cars depreciate when driven out of the showroom". I'm 63 years old & have purchased a new car every 2~3 years & this is the first time I've this lame excuse. This is the 1st time that I've been treated like a piece of ragweed by a dealer & a manufacture of an automobile ~ or any other product that I've purchased. Ken Garff's logo is "we back you up" ~ you can interpret that statement several ways none of which apply to satisfying a customer.. I think everyone who is considering purchasing a Volvo should be aware of what the possibilty of having this happen to them if they purchase anything from the Ken Garff organization here in Salt Lake City.
Thanks for your time & the enrollment into your national discussion boards for Volvo owners.
If I can provide you or any other members with any additional information about this matter please feel free to contact me.
Repectfully submitted,
Jeff Fleming
buzltyr837@aol.com
Somehow I doubt we'd be hearing about this if the car was 4 or 5 years old. The fact that it is relatively new doesn't make it any more of the dealer's responsibility.
Just offer him KBB wholesale - the cost of repairs and do the deal on the new one.
Or, you could just blow off the customer. Yeah, that sounds like a money making plan.
I'm sure, once the body shop got a good look at all the damage there was more than they thought -- a vehicle that has been wrecked and repaired can loose a lot of value, especially Imports -
I love Volvo's, but if one has been whacked, I'm never a player for it and neither is anyone else unless they can buy em' cheap so they can sell them cheap because buyers DON'T want them ~ and that my friend is anywhere in the country, some dealers wont touch a vehicle if it's had $2,500 worth of damage ..... if you wan't to feel a sick feeling in your stomach, drive a Benz or a BMW across the curb, then try to trade it without a 20%+ loss, let alone a $6,000 hit ..
But, you are waaaay out of line dropping the name AND blaming the dealer because he doesn't want to step up to cover YOUR accident .. *what are you thinking .....??*
If You don't like his figures, then go on to another dealer and try to pass it on to someone else - I cant believe you even posted this, and I hope they read it -- $6,000 will seem like chump change compared to your attorney fee's .. are you sure your 63 and not 13 and stamping your feet ....?
Sorry, but this stuff is not called for ..
Terry.
So which is it? Does the dealer have an obligation to buy this guy's car or not?
As far as what's true? It is certainly not true that the dealer did anything wrong by not buying this guy's car. And that was the original poster's point. He wasn't deriding this dealer just because of an unreturned phone call.
The problem is not with any technical reading of the word slander. The problem is that with the world being full of morons, many of them believe anything they see on a computer screen, whether true or not. It is not a business's responsibility to defend itself everytime some crackpot with a grudge wants to take a potshot.
Stop lieing about what I am saying. But of course, I'm not sure why I expect any different here.
We have little or no both party info here, except the customer feels that he was not treated decently -- should the dealer have overpaid for the wrecked vehicle and gave away the new vehicle just so a person feels it fair for them ---
Hmmm, this kinda sounds like the case were the lady drove over her husband not once, but Twice in a Benz, but it was an accident and she's innocent. l.o.l. thats decent for her.!
Terry.
We're probably looking at a vehicle that has had enough damage to require the title be branded. It won't be a "salvage" title, likely, but we have a requirement here to note any damage greater than 25% of its value. Now, when the future buyer of this gem comes in and pulls a carfax on it, pulls a service history, etc, what do you think the dealer will be able to do?
Since Volvo now shares depreciation with its parent company (Ford), I can easily see the ACV of that car being $15k.
I think this guy will probably be getting a nice call from the Dealerships attorney on Monday. This will add a new and interesting twist to "backing you up" for sure.
Ed
Seems to me the person causing all this damage is the one on the hook.
rich
I'm no car dealer, but I can understand that they are bascially telling the guy they don't want the car, unless the price is insanely low.
I think I even recall reading in the story that the dealership said "We have no interest in your car." Unless jflemming2 doesn't speak english, it should be pretty clear that they don't want to take this in on trade.
To make a low offer is not ripping anyone off, it's a starting point, just like any other negotiation.
For the customer to be mad at the dealership because they made what he felt to be a low offer is just childish. The dealership had nothing to do with the accident, only the repair.
So unless their is problem with the repair, the poster really doesn't have much to complain about to the dealer. Hey Terry and others, how is $500 over invoice on most new 2003 Volvo's, is that a good deal or what? If so, then the dealership is "With you" Jeff, regarding your replacement car. But why do you expect them to fix something that wasn't their fault?
I would recommend that Jeff take the written trade offer to the party at fault in the accident and go after a dimished value claim.
It would really suck (or be funny depending on your POV) if the at-fault party was the poster here.
FWIW,
TB
Computer Geek, likes cars.
He probably bought for around 31500.
I see it all the time on damaged cars where the customer always resorts back up to the MSRP when something happens to their vehicle.
Here in Iowa we have to disclose damged cars over 5000.00 and we usually will deduct 20 percent for it from the the value of the car
***That's enough to know that NO car depreciates 50% in the first year*** -- Really ..?
Ok, here is just a few .. 02~ Jag 4.0 "S" type, doing "around" $31ish at the block .. 02 Hyundai Sonata V6, running in the the $10's, 02 Town Cars, $21ish .. 02 Cavaliers sleep walking in the $7's .. 02 Saturns "L" banging around in the $8's .. 02 Kia Rio's trying to reach the $5's .. Benz C230 coupes in the $18's ...
So what else did you want us too know ...
Terry.
;-)
B.O. Please don't be offended, and please, continue to participate in subjects that you might know more about.
Ed
My mother just bought a Chevy Impala. She signed the paperwork two days ago, turned in her trade-in and drove the car home. The salesman called yesterday and said he wanted her to come in and sign a new set of papers. Reason --- he made a mistake and gave her an extra $1,000 off. She bought this car in good faith never knowing until the day of the paperwork what the bottom line was. The salesman is almost threatening her to come in and stating that "technically" she doesn't own the car because she financed it.
Is this legal? Wasn't the car hers once she signed the contract and took possession of the car? And, it seems like the salesman made an error and the error should be between him and his boss and/or company, not my mother's concern. Any suggestions??? Thanks in advance!
Not to be rude (honest) but how in the heck did she "bought this car in good faith never knowing until the day of the paperwork what the bottom line was."
Ed
My idea of good faith -- my mom has never negotiated a purchase for a car before. I helped her research prices on the internet (we are in different states) to give her a ball park figure. She new the invoice price, realized the rebates, and somewhere in the discussions there was an additional $1,000 off for the car being manufactured before September. I told her that before she signs to ask what additional fees would be added. She thought she had a good deal when the bottom line had not changed. How is this her error? Can I go back and tell my salesman I paid too much and would like an additional $1,000 off?