Please critique the following auto dealer disclaimer for adequacy and legality...
"INTERNET PRICE IS AVAILABLE FOR FINANCE PURCHASES ONLY AND WILL NOT BE HONORED AS A CASH PRICE FOR CASH PURCHASES. WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS."
Auto dealerships vehicles are typically advertized $1,000 below MSRP. A dealer addendum sticker is attached to each vehicle's window, which adds $2,940 for "paintless dent repair plus vinyl patching, small dings in windshield, etc." This service contract is disclosed nowhere else, neither in advertising, on website, or on the sales contract (it's included in the total sales price).
Wrong, right, correct, legal?
Tagged:
0
Comments
Edit: For example, a subcompact is advertised for $16,995. Elderly buyer isn't aware of sales price, but sees the dealer's sales price through the tinted window, $21,000, and thinks this is actual MSRP. Later, it's discovered that she paid $18,060 MSRP plus $2,940 for a "paintless dent plus service contract" (that's added to virtually all dealer's new vehicles).
Seems like a question to ask of your state's consumer protection agency or attorney general's office.
Yes, it is. However, sometimes the state and fed agencies don't do anything about a "one-off" consumer complaint. So I'm trying to get a sense of whether most buyers and sellers would even consider this an example of "bait advertising"...haven't found any other examples of it in research of the issue.
Unless I'm entering incorrect key words in my searches.
"Bait and switch" is the usual buzzword.
As a buyer, any dealer which adds an addendum for $2,940 to a new vehicle is not a dealer I would buy from. If a dealer has the gall to pull this old trick up front for such a large amount, a person can only imagine the games they play elsewhere.
And sales people wonder why car dealers have such a poor reputation?
What you're describing -- the "dealer supplemental sticker" -- is a source of frustration for a lot of shoppers. They also are often surprised and unprepared to talk about products offered in the Finance and Insurance Office after car purchase (such as paint protection and anti-theft devices).
This Edmunds.com article, Negotiating Dealer Add-Ons has some useful information about how to deal with cars that come with unanticipated add-ons.
The matter of determining what constitutes legal and illegal advertising really is the domain of consumer protection agencies. The Federal Trade Commission recently cracked down on a number of dealerships for false advertising, and the examples of what constitutes that really vary. More details in this FTC press release.
--Carroll Lachnit, Features Editor, Edmunds.com
Thanks Carroll for helpful info. Edmunds has been a huge help to me in the past. Found out about elderly mom's raw deal after the fact. She's been able to cancel $1900 extended warranty and $650 Gap insurance itemized on contract, thanks to reputable 3rd party provider. General manager insists $2,940 dent repair was "part of the deal" (front-end add-on) and therefore, non-negotiable.
Treading very carefully, because I don't want to go to TX-AG (DTPA) if that'll "foul the water" with FTC, or BBB, or arbitration, or whoever is most likely to get this dealership to see the light.
I'm glad to hear you had a good outcome. And yes--it's always a good idea to start at the dealership level as you try to resolve a problem. Many times, dealers will try to make things right.The ones who want to stay in business and succeed know that their reputations are everything. No one wants to turn up in a Federal Trade Commission press release! There is such a thing as bad publicity, no matter what the adage says.