... ** I don't have a scanner or anything, sorry ** ...
Probably not, I hardly even know how to use mine .. so I use my neighbors, my g/f's, sometimes I even go to my dry cleaners and use his, Office Depot, I've even used the one at the marina ...... so, you were saying .?
Well, it was a one owner car. The owner just rented it out to people for 9 months.
It looks like you got a good car for a decent price. I'm surprised the dealer is willing to unwind the 18 month old deal, but if that's what you want, go for it.
As for the set-off, you did put 35000 miles on the bugger in 18 months, there should be a set-off.
...... You really don't believe half these stories, do you.?
If the dealer screwed-up, paper mistake, title error or even flat-out lied *if* they have it writing .. they would give him the "difference" between the rental vs reg retail, which would be about $500/$700, plus any incurred interest on said monies, minus the miles percentage after 18 months, thats if you could get someone to swallow the 18 month period .. where was he, in a coma.?
You would have to be an idiot not to take the $5K and run... Where can I find one of those deals? Would someone please lie to me about my next used car purchase? LOL
..... ** Would someone please lie to me about my next used car purchase? LOL **
I would think you would be used to it by now with all those: "I paid $125 under dealer cost, minus all the incentive money" stories over at the Bimmer board .l.o.l...
Most people have a trade-in... Any deal that involves a trade is useless to someone else as far as prices paid.. And, if they are leasing, maybe the MF is jacked up, or the acquisition fee, or maybe they went for that "special" 7.9% financing.
Sooooo.... some people get great deals, most get average, and most people that get bad deals don't post on boards like this, or they would know better. You just have to get through the clutter, and maybe one post out of six will have some good info.. I bought used and did great with your advice, so naturally I got the best deal of all!! LOL
a used car was a "former daily rental." If the dealer was too lazy to check, or just incompetent the buyer in question is entitled to whatever compensation his attorneys can negotiate. Here we are again, incompetence or deceit? Which is it? It is pretty safe to say that a former rental is abused more (even though I have purchase a few "former rentals myself") than other cars. And if it was repossessed, then the former buyer didn't care enough to make the payments, and probably didn't care enough to change the oil. It seem the buyer has a legitimate point to me!
I was recently in the search for a new car (order came in 2 weeks ago, and I'm not disappointed with what I got), but when wandering around from dealership to dealership, I typically encountered one of two less than pleasing experiences: Either the salesperson was over-eager to try and sell me something that I had explicitly expressed disinterest in (even if I had given it a casual look-over) Or the sales staff was nowhere to be found when I had a question.
I knew going in what I wanted, what it should cost, all the options, etc., but half the fun of car shopping is meandering around seeing what else is out there. As I knew what I really wanted, my questions were few and far between. For those overly-pushy salespeople, I often respond with "I'm still undecided what I want, I just want to look around and see what's on the lot." and if they seemed overanxious to sell me something else, I'd wander over to a different type of car. (I went to a local Lexus dealer to see if they had an IS300 sportwagon, and the guy kept trying to sell me an RX330, so I made a point to look at all the OTHER models as he kept following me like a lost puppy. I thanked him for the brochure he eventually got me on the IS300 and left when I was done looking.)
Another thing I don't care for is the markup that some dealerships put on new models above MSRP. Fortunately I found a local dealer that has the policy of not doing that, and I ended up ordering my new Dodge Magnum through them. They also had some of the better salespeople I encountered, willing to look into my questions when asked, and not pressuring me on anything for it (because I researched the car so much online first, I nearly knew more about it than the salesman did). They had a somewhat more laid-back, friendlier atmosphere than the other, high-pressure Dodge dealer across town (who was marking up $2-3k on the Magnum). The only other dealer I went to that was equally friendly and unpressured was the Mini dealer, who only had one car on the floor anyway, so they really didn't have anything to push.
However, at times I sure have given them more money than I needed to because of my ignorance.
So what? I have learned a litle from my mistakes. I love shopping for cars. My golf swing is feeling better this year. I am having a very good day at work. No reason to go thru life being mad at the world.
About a year and a half later...in June of 2004, I happened to be able to run a free CarFax report on my vehicles by using a friend's unlimited 30 day account. I found a big surprise...my Taurus was first purchased by a "Major Rental Car Company" and used as a daily rental for the first 9 months of its life. It was then repossesed by the finance company, bought at auction, and then sold to me.
How many "Major Rental Car Company" do you know of that would let one of their cars be repossessed. Terry, I am sure you are bang on about the troll,
IMO his story makes no sense either. Unless there are significant penalties in CA for not telling customers the used car was a rental, I see no reason why they'd pay him off.
Did anyone read my story in post #1740? I'm curious what the experts here think. Please reread #1740 and let me know what you think. My questions were as follows:
<<Now my question for you experts here, since the fine print of the contract was in their favor and I believe in a court of law, I would have lost, how could I have handled this any differently and what would the dealer have likely done if they did not finally agree to the negotiated $18K out the door price?>>
First of all, I don't know what a troll is or why you are calling me that. I really don't know...I already asked and no one responded. I don't have time to sit here and read this forum all day long waiting for responses, I have a family and a full time job that keeps me busy.
Terry, you are obviously a very biased dealership owner which I learned by reading your profile. Please try not to be so rude. At least some of the other people expressed their opinions in a logical manner without resorting to name-calling.
Yes, California DMV regulations which carry the force of LAW require dealerships to inform buyers that the vehicle was a former rental or service vehicle. I was not informed. I believe the dealership intentionally deceived me in order to sell the car for a higher price. Whether you believe that or not is your business.
Here are some key points -
1) Had I known the vehicle was a prior rental, I never, ever would have bought it. I've seen how some people treat rental cars and will never own one whether others have had positive experiences or not. I have lost confidence that my vehicle will continue to serve me trouble-free for any length of time.
2) I'm not looking to "get over" on anyone, I just want my money back. I will accept a "set-off" or usage fee based on the amount of miles I put on the car, and more than likely will accept the dealership's first offer. I think it is a fair one.
3) Consumers have rights. I am excercising mine which are afforded to me under rule of law. Opinion really doesn't matter here...the law speaks clearly in my case. The Dealership was requried to inform me of the vehicle's history, and whether they failed to do so on purpose or on mistake doesn't matter. They screwed up, and I will not be the one to pay for that mistake.
Ok, let an "outsider" give an opinion... I'm not in the business...
Your "case" is one of the cookier ones on these boards. I understand that you didn't want an ex-rental, but I don't see the big deal NOW, 35k trouble-free miles later. Mind you, I wouldn't be happy about it, either, but apparently , you got a good car anyway.
Now you're telling us that the dealer will step up and rescind your contract? We're all baffled here, because (i) ex-rental is no big deal to most people and (ii) we have a hard time believing they'd just take the car back (with $$ adjustments) 18 months later. $5k sounds good, less than 15 cents/mile... cheap anywhere.
We're also all telling you, take the deal, wow.
The reason people said you're a "troll" (someone who tries to start heated discussions over nothing on the web) is because you stated that the car had been "repossessed" -- that term means the owner doesn't make the payments and the car gets forcibly taken by the previous owner. THAT doesn't happen with rental agencies; more likely, the car was leased to the rental company, and went back when the term was up.
Finally, don't mind Terry -- He is so inundated with stuff ("I get more email than Santa") that he doesn't spend a lot of time reading each post or email ("I have the attention span of an Asparagus").
So if something looks kooky -- and your post does, at least to non-Californians -- it gets labeled troll and he moves on. I can understand that. So you're in luck, I woke up early and I can 'splain stuff to you :-)
I have a soft spot for people named "Mikhail": 'twas a deal between Gorbatchev and Helmut Kohl in 1989 that got me out of military service. Praise Allah!
Oh yeah, and next time, run a carfax BEFORE you buy.
.. ** You might want to take "very biased dealership owner" out of your profile. ... **
Don't tell me thats still in there .?!? .. that means it still shows I have those Simon & Garfunkel tattoo's - I'll get right at it ................................
If you are that paranoid about buying an ex rental, you should just buy new cars. ANy used car may have been abused (and many rental cars are treated just fine). Lots of late-model used cars are off lease, and frankly I know leasees that take much worse care of their car than a rental company (Hey, why change the oil when I'm giving it back anyway?).
Also, ever wonder how many cars are traded in because they are problematic? Too much time in the shop?
ANyway, my point is, buying a used car exposes you to some risk (the reward is less $$). So, do a car fax if it makes you happy, and have it inspected, but don't assume too much based on prior ownership.
And, take that deal if you want out, but good luck finding another car that's as good as the one you already have!
>>> There really is no excuse for not catching contract mistakes at the time of signing, unless the mistake is really subtle. The customer should expect to be walked through the contract (and the other paperwork too) and have all the numbers explained - if you just sign where the F&I person points to without reading, you are an idiot. If you are in a big hurry, sign at a time that you arent.
Likewise, a good dealership will walk their customers thru all the paperwork and explain everything. ......
If a dealer doesnt volunteer to do all of this (except the rounding down bit ), they dont deserve your business. <<<
I might go a bit further and quote driftracers own words
>>> ** About a year and a half later... in June of 2004, I happened to be able to run a free CarFax report on my vehicles by using a friend's unlimited 30 day account. I found a big surprise... my Taurus was first purchased by a "Major Rental Car Company" ** hmm, interesting story .. has the vehicle for 18 months, piles up the miles with no problems and all of a sudden, they will take a $10,000+ loss just to make it "go away" .?!? .. <<<<
What is the problem if the car has provide the value of your $12,000 or so investment??? Why should you even consider going back to the car dealer?
while writing the above reply, a thought jsut crossed my mind. what would happen if you got married to a woman who claimed virginity before and fidelity after marriage, but few years down the road, you find out that she actually had borne a child before she married you????
Did anybody see that episode of the "Reposessors"? They had a fleet of tow trucks taking back 20+ Daewoo...LOL....rentals that the rental company didn't pay for !
Here in NY the previous use of a used car must be disclosed in writing and in all display ads.
A GM and a Toyota dealer near me got bagged with some big fines for not disclosing ex-rental, mfr. buyback, lemon law cars etc.........
if i didn't want to buy an ex-rental, I'd stay away from one model year old Tauruses with 20k miles...think about what you drove on vacation last year.
i've seen used cars on lots where the dealer didn't even bother to scratch off the bar code label from the rental agency and called it a "one-owner trade". Well, it did have one owner...Hertz, and it was just "traded" to the dealer for money. Funny, but technically true.
Tough to think that the dealer's counsel would roll over like that and rescind. They'd be taking back a lot of cars. Plaintiff has to prove his case by a preponderance of evidence, which means proving fraud (tough) or that not disclosing that a car was a prior rental is a material misrepresentation. If it's a violation of CA law, well, that's another story, but in either case I'd argue that the availability of the information on Carfax constitutes "notice" to the buyer. In real estate transactions, for example, a buyer is deemed to be on notice of the contents of every recorded document.
But hey, if they do roll over, I'd say take the $5k, keep the Taurus, sock away $2k for future repairs, and use a bit of the other $3k to take the Carfax friend to Sizzler for the buffet.
** I would love to hear the "other side" of this story.. **
Interesting ain't it.! .. I'm always waiting for the shoe to drop, well here's the first one:
** #898 of 899 FICO Scores & Loan Tiers for Nissan? by mikhail24 Also, I do have a large debt due to a current vehicle but the loan will be paid off soon. How soon will that reflect on my credit? I'm thinking if I pay off the loan then wait for that to reflect, it may bump me up enough to qualify for a better rate? Or another option would be... pay off my current loan, finance a new Nissan, then refinance later when my score improves? **
Isn't it interesting that "hinky" credit always has "hinky" stories .l.o.l...... by the way, what auction did you go to.? .. now is the time to be buying Burb's, in another 6/7 weeks (depending on the weather) they will be going "out" of the book ...............
Like most auctions, it's hit or miss...but big SUV's are really soft up here. I think we have about a 4 week window before they spike. GM cars are usually soft up here also.
"which means proving fraud (tough) or that not disclosing that a car was a prior rental is a material misrepresentation. If it's a violation of CA law, well, that's another story,"
There is no discussion here....in California the dealer MUST DISCLOSE it was a prior rental. If the paperwork does not say this, the buyer is right to bring legal action. The reason the dealer "rolled over" is because HE BROKE THE LAW. The question is; Was in DECEIT or Incompetence?
This is a tough world. And you have to make an effort. It all depends when you want to make that effort. Before or After the sales deal.
I generally prefer before(homework) and during the sales process(getting the most goodies). Once it is done, it is done. No need for fighting afterwards.
id like to know the language of the statute in question.
this sounds like one of those "my neighbor's friend's brother knows this dog whose owner's sister's ex-fiancee's babydaddy is a car salesman and said so."
------- No holder of any license issued under this Article shall do any of the following:
****
(t) Advertise a vehicle for sale that was used by the selling licensee in its business as a demonstrator, executive vehicle, service vehicle, rental, loaner, or lease vehicle, unless the advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses the previous use made by that licensee of the vehicle. An advertisement shall not describe any of those vehicles as "new."
-------
A careful reading states that it is illegal for the "selling licensee" (dealer) to use the vehicle "in its business" (dealer's business) and then sell it without disclosing the use "made by that licensee." (dealer). Under this as I read it, the dealer can resell all the Hertz/Avis cars he wants without telling anyone, but if it is the dealer's service rentals or loaners, that fact must be disclosed. Had the legislature or agency wished to include a disclosure for all former rental cars, they would have omitted the language twice referring only to use by the specific licensee.
Brands on a title that are required are listed on the following page:
In all seriousness and without being snide, if someone else (chuck1 maybe) knows of another statute which speaks to a prior rental disclosure requirement, i'd be curious to see it.
No, I can't site any additional statute.I am familiar with the law that you cited. But I can tell you what is practiced. A check of any Ford Dealer, Mitsubishi dealer, etc.(in California) will find dozens of "off rental" cars that came through the rental agencies. I have a personal experience with this. Back in December I purchased a slightly used '03 Mitsubishi Galant. It only had 16,900 miles on it. On the sticker on the window it had "Former Rental". Of course, I purchased it knowing it was just that, a former rental. I didn't really have any concern about where it came from, since it was under warranty and was covered. I was looking through the glove box and found a proof of insurance card with the Hertz Corporation as "self insured" out of Las Vegas, NV. So, apparently, my "new car" was a former rental out of Las Vegas. This would probably account for the lack of a California License plate. If you do a search for used Taurus on autotrader in California, you will find many at dealers that are "former rentals". They are so great in number there is no way they can be factory or dealer demonstrators. Since I know personally that ALL DEALERS sell vast number of cars that are "former rentals", I don't know if there is an additional law or a different interpretation of the law you cited. IF the previous story is true, then it would account for the labeling of "off rental" at dealers representing ALL MANUFACTURERS of cars.
explained that if it wasn't the DEALER'S rental vehicle, there was no need for disclosure. That makes the whole settlement and assuming liability issues quite foggy, given the situation that was described to us.
There is a Buick/GMC dealer located in Covina, CA called Reynolds Buick/GMC. They do have a website, but I don't know if the "rules of use" let me mention the web address, but you will be able to find it in a internet or yahoo yellow page search. They purchase Chryslers, Fords, and Oldsmobiles from auctions and sell them VERY REASONABLE on their used car lot. ALL are marked "Former Rentals".
just need a decent ride, it doesn't matter. If you're only keeping a vehicle a couple of years, especially if you're miling it up, why not?
People will sue businesses anytime they can get away with it - I know, I'm in that business and constantly have to turn away cases that I wouldn't want our lawyers going into court on. There's plenty of good cases out there, we can be choosy.
Remember that statutes and common law simply set forth a baseline standard of conduct below or beyond which one is subject to civil or criminal penalties. One is free to act as far above the law's reproach as he feels is appropriate.
For example, under Federal regulations when you cash a check, the bank need not give you any money on that day, and need only give you $100 on the next business day and can hold the rest of the check for further time dependent on several variables. However, market competition leads banks to balance the risk of paying a bad check with the risk of losing business by making customers upset. As a result, most banks will allow you to take $100 on the same day you cash the check.
Along those lines, I would think that a dealer who values relationships and repeat business wouldn't hesitate to tell a customer everything he knows about a used car's past above and beyond any required disclosure, to build a relationship of trust. Perhaps the dealer you mention is one of these. In defense of other dealers, since it seems like most people will ditch any good relationship with a dealer to save a hundred bucks, the market doesn't dictate that a dealer do much beyond offering a competitive price.
a law like that was likely written because it will only show up as "bob smith ford" as the previous owner, and not likely branded as a "rental" title.
an avis, hertz, or enterprise will show on the title history as a rental. in litigation, the availability of the title history on vehicles, whether by hard copies or with carfax, is generally considered full disclosure.
also, in most cases, the buyer wont ask "was it a rental?" if they dont, the dealer doesnt have a responsibility to tell them, unless it meets the criteria of the statute above.
Maybe the bottom line is "caveat emptor." Let the buyer beware. A little time spent making an inquiry with the dealer concerning the ownership pedigree is time well spent. I wonder how many "executive driven" cars are simply rentals? There seem to be a lot of euphemisms out there for what might be, by another name, a prior history that would chase off a lot of buyers.
"Maybe the bottom line is "caveat emptor." Let the buyer beware. A little time spent making an inquiry with the dealer concerning the ownership pedigree is time well spent."
You expect the average car salesperson to tell you the truth? C'Mon!
Comments
What is a troll ?
Wow - I haven't seen that before
My attorneys said that California DMV regulations require dealerships to inform buyers that vehicles were prior rentals.
Probably not, I hardly even know how to use mine .. so I use my neighbors, my g/f's, sometimes I even go to my dry cleaners and use his, Office Depot, I've even used the one at the marina ...... so, you were saying .?
Terry.
It looks like you got a good car for a decent price. I'm surprised the dealer is willing to unwind the 18 month old deal, but if that's what you want, go for it.
As for the set-off, you did put 35000 miles on the bugger in 18 months, there should be a set-off.
You come to the table with nothin', you go home with nothin' .. I have a feelin' thats what your lawyer will be tellin' ya next .l.o.l....
Terry
OK, the dealer lied or just didn't know. Who knows?
Nothing wrong with an ex-rental. I've owned two of them and they were both troublefree great cars!
If the dealer screwed-up, paper mistake, title error or even flat-out lied *if* they have it writing .. they would give him the "difference" between the rental vs reg retail, which would be about $500/$700, plus any incurred interest on said monies, minus the miles percentage after 18 months, thats if you could get someone to swallow the 18 month period .. where was he, in a coma.?
Terry :-)
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I would think you would be used to it by now with all those: "I paid $125 under dealer cost, minus all the incentive money" stories over at the Bimmer board .l.o.l...
Terry.
Sooooo.... some people get great deals, most get average, and most people that get bad deals don't post on boards like this, or they would know better. You just have to get through the clutter, and maybe one post out of six will have some good info.. I bought used and did great with your advice, so naturally I got the best deal of all!! LOL
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Either the salesperson was over-eager to try and sell me something that I had explicitly expressed disinterest in (even if I had given it a casual look-over)
Or the sales staff was nowhere to be found when I had a question.
I knew going in what I wanted, what it should cost, all the options, etc., but half the fun of car shopping is meandering around seeing what else is out there. As I knew what I really wanted, my questions were few and far between.
For those overly-pushy salespeople, I often respond with "I'm still undecided what I want, I just want to look around and see what's on the lot." and if they seemed overanxious to sell me something else, I'd wander over to a different type of car.
(I went to a local Lexus dealer to see if they had an IS300 sportwagon, and the guy kept trying to sell me an RX330, so I made a point to look at all the OTHER models as he kept following me like a lost puppy. I thanked him for the brochure he eventually got me on the IS300 and left when I was done looking.)
Another thing I don't care for is the markup that some dealerships put on new models above MSRP. Fortunately I found a local dealer that has the policy of not doing that, and I ended up ordering my new Dodge Magnum through them. They also had some of the better salespeople I encountered, willing to look into my questions when asked, and not pressuring me on anything for it (because I researched the car so much online first, I nearly knew more about it than the salesman did). They had a somewhat more laid-back, friendlier atmosphere than the other, high-pressure Dodge dealer across town (who was marking up $2-3k on the Magnum).
The only other dealer I went to that was equally friendly and unpressured was the Mini dealer, who only had one car on the floor anyway, so they really didn't have anything to push.
So what? I have learned a litle from my mistakes. I love shopping for cars. My golf swing is feeling better this year. I am having a very good day at work. No reason to go thru life being mad at the world.
How many "Major Rental Car Company" do you know of that would let one of their cars be repossessed.
Terry, I am sure you are bang on about the troll,
And...WHY?
Did anyone read my story in post #1740? I'm curious what the experts here think. Please reread #1740 and let me know what you think. My questions were as follows:
<<Now my question for you experts here, since the fine print of the contract was in their favor and I believe in a court of law, I would have lost, how could I have handled this any differently and what would the dealer have likely done if they did not finally agree to the negotiated $18K out the door price?>>
Terry, you are obviously a very biased dealership owner which I learned by reading your profile. Please try not to be so rude. At least some of the other people expressed their opinions in a logical manner without resorting to name-calling.
Yes, California DMV regulations which carry the force of LAW require dealerships to inform buyers that the vehicle was a former rental or service vehicle. I was not informed. I believe the dealership intentionally deceived me in order to sell the car for a higher price. Whether you believe that or not is your business.
Here are some key points -
1) Had I known the vehicle was a prior rental, I never, ever would have bought it. I've seen how some people treat rental cars and will never own one whether others have had positive experiences or not. I have lost confidence that my vehicle will continue to serve me trouble-free for any length of time.
2) I'm not looking to "get over" on anyone, I just want my money back. I will accept a "set-off" or usage fee based on the amount of miles I put on the car, and more than likely will accept the dealership's first offer. I think it is a fair one.
3) Consumers have rights. I am excercising mine which are afforded to me under rule of law. Opinion really doesn't matter here...the law speaks clearly in my case. The Dealership was requried to inform me of the vehicle's history, and whether they failed to do so on purpose or on mistake doesn't matter. They screwed up, and I will not be the one to pay for that mistake.
Your "case" is one of the cookier ones on these boards. I understand that you didn't want an ex-rental, but I don't see the big deal NOW, 35k trouble-free miles later. Mind you, I wouldn't be happy about it, either, but apparently , you got a good car anyway.
Now you're telling us that the dealer will step up and rescind your contract? We're all baffled here, because (i) ex-rental is no big deal to most people and (ii) we have a hard time believing they'd just take the car back (with $$ adjustments) 18 months later. $5k sounds good, less than 15 cents/mile... cheap anywhere.
We're also all telling you, take the deal, wow.
The reason people said you're a "troll" (someone who tries to start heated discussions over nothing on the web) is because you stated that the car had been "repossessed" -- that term means the owner doesn't make the payments and the car gets forcibly taken by the previous owner. THAT doesn't happen with rental agencies; more likely, the car was leased to the rental company, and went back when the term was up.
Finally, don't mind Terry -- He is so inundated with stuff ("I get more email than Santa") that he doesn't spend a lot of time reading each post or email ("I have the attention span of an Asparagus").
So if something looks kooky -- and your post does, at least to non-Californians -- it gets labeled troll and he moves on. I can understand that. So you're in luck, I woke up early and I can 'splain stuff to you :-)
I have a soft spot for people named "Mikhail": 'twas a deal between Gorbatchev and Helmut Kohl in 1989 that got me out of military service. Praise Allah!
Oh yeah, and next time, run a carfax BEFORE you buy.
Take care,
-Mathias
;-)
Turboshadow
Don't tell me thats still in there .?!? .. that means it still shows I have those Simon & Garfunkel tattoo's - I'll get right at it ................................
Terry.
Also, ever wonder how many cars are traded in because they are problematic? Too much time in the shop?
ANyway, my point is, buying a used car exposes you to some risk (the reward is less $$). So, do a car fax if it makes you happy, and have it inspected, but don't assume too much based on prior ownership.
And, take that deal if you want out, but good luck finding another car that's as good as the one you already have!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I've owned two in the past and they were just fine. Most of the rental companies keep up pretty well on maintenance too.
For that matter, ANY car can be abused.
The fact it has gone 35,000 troublefree miles should attest to that fact...RELAX!
I would take that 5000.00 in a heartbeat! If you are that paranoid, sell the car, put the 5000.00 with it and buy something else. Seriously.
And, yes, there are people who should never buy a used car because of fear.
Thee are a lot worse things to worry about in my opinion.
Likewise, a good dealership will walk their customers thru all the paperwork and explain everything. ......
If a dealer doesnt volunteer to do all of this (except the rounding down bit
I might go a bit further and quote driftracers own words
"They deserve to be skinned"
hmm, interesting story .. has the vehicle for 18 months, piles up the miles with no problems and all of a sudden, they will take a $10,000+ loss just to make it "go away" .?!? .. <<<<
What is the problem if the car has provide the value of your $12,000 or so investment???
Why should you even consider going back to the car dealer?
while writing the above reply, a thought jsut crossed my mind. what would happen if you got married to a woman who claimed virginity before and fidelity after marriage, but few years down the road, you find out that she actually had borne a child before she married you????
(.....troll warning....)
They had a fleet of tow trucks taking back 20+ Daewoo...LOL....rentals that the rental company didn't pay for !
Here in NY the previous use of a used car must be disclosed in writing and in all display ads.
A GM and a Toyota dealer near me got bagged with some big fines for not disclosing ex-rental, mfr. buyback, lemon law cars etc.........
rental companies finance because you cant sublet most auto leases.
but they finance because of future diminished value of the dollar, and to maximize cash flow.
i've seen used cars on lots where the dealer didn't even bother to scratch off the bar code label from the rental agency and called it a "one-owner trade". Well, it did have one owner...Hertz, and it was just "traded" to the dealer for money. Funny, but technically true.
Tough to think that the dealer's counsel would roll over like that and rescind. They'd be taking back a lot of cars. Plaintiff has to prove his case by a preponderance of evidence, which means proving fraud (tough) or that not disclosing that a car was a prior rental is a material misrepresentation. If it's a violation of CA law, well, that's another story, but in either case I'd argue that the availability of the information on Carfax constitutes "notice" to the buyer. In real estate transactions, for example, a buyer is deemed to be on notice of the contents of every recorded document.
But hey, if they do roll over, I'd say take the $5k, keep the Taurus, sock away $2k for future repairs, and use a bit of the other $3k to take the Carfax friend to Sizzler for the buffet.
Interesting ain't it.! .. I'm always waiting for the shoe to drop, well here's the first one:
** #898 of 899 FICO Scores & Loan Tiers for Nissan? by mikhail24
Also, I do have a large debt due to a current vehicle but the loan will be paid off soon. How soon will that reflect on my credit? I'm thinking if I pay off the loan then wait for that to reflect, it may bump me up enough to qualify for a better rate? Or another option would be... pay off my current loan, finance a new Nissan, then refinance later when my score improves? **
Isn't it interesting that "hinky" credit always has "hinky" stories .l.o.l...... by the way, what auction did you go to.? .. now is the time to be buying Burb's, in another 6/7 weeks (depending on the weather) they will be going "out" of the book ...............
Terry.
Like most auctions, it's hit or miss...but big SUV's are really soft up here. I think we have about a 4 week window before they spike. GM cars are usually soft up here also.
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
There is no discussion here....in California the dealer MUST DISCLOSE it was a prior rental. If the paperwork does not say this, the buyer is right to bring legal action. The reason the dealer "rolled over" is because HE BROKE THE LAW. The question is; Was in DECEIT or Incompetence?
ROFL .......
Didn't she try to sell that extended warranty (which was refused) while in the church?
It all depends when you want to make that effort.
Before or After the sales deal.
I generally prefer before(homework) and during the sales process(getting the most goodies). Once it is done, it is done. No need for fighting afterwards.
this sounds like one of those "my neighbor's friend's brother knows this dog whose owner's sister's ex-fiancee's babydaddy is a car salesman and said so."
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d05/vc11713.htm
California Vehicle Code s 11713 states:
-------
No holder of any license issued under this Article shall do any of the following:
****
(t) Advertise a vehicle for sale that was used by the selling licensee in its business as a demonstrator, executive vehicle, service vehicle, rental, loaner, or lease vehicle, unless the advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses the previous use made by that licensee of the vehicle. An advertisement shall not describe any of those vehicles as "new."
-------
A careful reading states that it is illegal for the "selling licensee" (dealer) to use the vehicle "in its business" (dealer's business) and then sell it without disclosing the use "made by that licensee." (dealer). Under this as I read it, the dealer can resell all the Hertz/Avis cars he wants without telling anyone, but if it is the dealer's service rentals or loaners, that fact must be disclosed. Had the legislature or agency wished to include a disclosure for all former rental cars, they would have omitted the language twice referring only to use by the specific licensee.
Brands on a title that are required are listed on the following page:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr33.htm
In all seriousness and without being snide, if someone else (chuck1 maybe) knows of another statute which speaks to a prior rental disclosure requirement, i'd be curious to see it.
People will sue businesses anytime they can get away with it - I know, I'm in that business and constantly have to turn away cases that I wouldn't want our lawyers going into court on. There's plenty of good cases out there, we can be choosy.
For example, under Federal regulations when you cash a check, the bank need not give you any money on that day, and need only give you $100 on the next business day and can hold the rest of the check for further time dependent on several variables. However, market competition leads banks to balance the risk of paying a bad check with the risk of losing business by making customers upset. As a result, most banks will allow you to take $100 on the same day you cash the check.
Along those lines, I would think that a dealer who values relationships and repeat business wouldn't hesitate to tell a customer everything he knows about a used car's past above and beyond any required disclosure, to build a relationship of trust. Perhaps the dealer you mention is one of these. In defense of other dealers, since it seems like most people will ditch any good relationship with a dealer to save a hundred bucks, the market doesn't dictate that a dealer do much beyond offering a competitive price.
an avis, hertz, or enterprise will show on the title history as a rental. in litigation, the availability of the title history on vehicles, whether by hard copies or with carfax, is generally considered full disclosure.
also, in most cases, the buyer wont ask "was it a rental?" if they dont, the dealer doesnt have a responsibility to tell them, unless it meets the criteria of the statute above.
You expect the average car salesperson to tell you the truth? C'Mon!
Your best bet is a CarFax.
Car Faxes aren't 100% accurate either.