Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2007 Toyota Camry



  • bobgwtwbobgwtw Posts: 187
    Seems to me you might have run into an honest dealer.

    They told you up front that they couldn't guarantee
    delivery of the color you want within your time

    You made a decision to accept the Blue car, They
    didn't force you to take it.

    They offered 1 month's payment; you wanted 2. That'
    part of the negotiation process.

    If you didn't like their car and/or offer. why not try another dealer?
  • rhomsyrhomsy Posts: 5
    You're missing the point. I'm being treated differently/worse than everyone else because (1) I am leasing and will not have the car beyond three years and (2) I prepaid 1/2 my lease payments. That's not negotiating... that's trying to stick it to someone from a position of power... they have my money, and I have a non-functional car.

    Further, my decision was to accept a blue car that worked. Instead I got a blue car that drove for four days before it went belly-up. Now I'm without a car for 3-4 weeks. I didn't choose this.

    Lastly, it's toyota that made these offers and is trying to stick it to me and not the dealer. In fact, my dealer has been fantastic and they are trying to find me a new car much sooner rather than have me wait for toyota. Toyota could take a lesson in customer service from their own dealers.
  • mackabeemackabee Posts: 4,709
    rhomsy, sounds like YOU made these decisions. How is Toyota (not the dealer) treating you differently than any other customer? How long have you had the car? The contract probably hasn't been "cashed in" so you could have well gotten out of it. There's more than one way to skin a cat. I don't think we are getting the whole story here what are you waiting on "Toyota" for? Which Toyota? Toyota financial? Toyota Motor sales? Come on, let's get the whole story here. Something smells worse than yesterday's diapers with your story.
  • so40so40 Posts: 8
    rhomsy, you make some good points in your argument. I hope it works out for you. Have you read the Transmission (Snap Ring) problem thread? Edmunds has closed it, or at least made it "Read Only". I guess Toyota "asked" them to do that and they did.

    Anyway, I think there were several people in that thread that stated Toyota had offered to either replace the transmission, buy back the car, or get them another car. Have they offered you another car and just can't get you one quick enough? Have they offered to buy back the car?

    Also, when was your car made (on door label) and how many miles on it when it broke. If you don't mind can you post the last 6 numbers of the VIN?

  • smith1smith1 Posts: 283
    "I put down $8000 so that I have lower monthly payments."

    Sorry for your troubles, but why on earth did you do that?? I hope you realize that if your car is totaled or stolen during the lease, you will be out the $8000. Your insurance will pay off the leasing company, you will get nothing.

    Rule #1 of car leasing is to put as little money down as possible. You can't build "equity" in a leased car, since you don't own it. You could have put the $8000 in the bank and used it to help make higher monthly payments, while pocketing the interest on the balance. And Toyota wouldn't have your $8000 right now.
  • kiawahkiawah Posts: 3,666

    Unfortunately as you are painfully aware, you got snagged by a situation where the vehicle was made pre-May 2006 with a defective transmission, and the vehicle wasn't pulled or fixed by Toyota from the dealer inventory. Toyota doesn't appear to have made public any plans to fix these vehicles before customers buy them.
  • rhomsyrhomsy Posts: 5
    Mackabee, I am being treated differently because I am being offered less $$ than other customers. Monthly payments are not all equal if you paid more cap reduction. Further, their offer to extend the warranty does nothing for anyone leasing the car. Clearly, they place less value on their leasing customers. Also, I know the risk associated with putting down $8K on a lease, but with me, the risk that I'll spend the $8K somewhere else is more real to me. I knew that risk and I accepted it.

    As for what I'm waiting for, well that is very interesting... The Toyota TSB instructed the dealer to contact them and await instructions. They contacted Toyota, and were told that they would contact me directly within 24 hours. I called them later that same day, and I was told about the one month payment, the extended warranty, and that I needed to wait for my "case manager". That is the whole story. The only things that stick are Toyota's response to leaser, customers who put cap reduction down, and your condescending post.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    I dont understand why Toyota should be responsible for 2 monthly payments. Have they had your car 8 weeks? If so, then they should cover two payments. If not, I'm not sure why you're disappointed that Toyota is offering to cover one payment.

    It was your choice to put down an insane CAP COST reduction on your lease. As noted by several posters here, doing so has many significant drawbacks, not the least of which is the opportunity cost of investing that money, the fact that that sunk sum builds ZERO equity in the vehicle you are driving, and your signficant potential loss in the event of theft or accident (unless you purchased GAP insurance). I would add to the list of risks the potential "$$" (your words) if things go wrong...

    FWIW, that you didnt get the color you wanted has nothing to do with the transmission issue, and speaks a bit to your predisposition against your Toyota experience.

    As a fellow consumer, I wish you the best of luck, as this is not admriable situation for Toyota whatsoever....... but I cannot empathize with you.

  • rhomsyrhomsy Posts: 5
    Let me make it easier for you to understand then:

    John leases a car with nothing down, has to pay $450 his first month and does not receive a car for first 4 weeks because of a bad toyota transmission. Toyota offers to waive the first month lease payment, or the sum of $450. Total loss to John $0.

    Steve leases a car with 1/2 the lease payments down, has to pay his first month lease payment of $225, and does not receive a car for first 4 weeks because of a bad toyota transmission. Toyota again offers to waive the first month lease payment, or the sum of $225. Total loss to Steve, $225.

    Frank leases a car with all the lease payments down, doesn't have to pay his first month lease because he prepaid it, and does not receive a car for first 4 weeks because of a bad toyota transmission. Toyota offers to waive first month lease, but this is meaningless because it was prepaid. Total loss to Frank, $450.

    If you think this is fair and logical, then that is more scary than the bad transmission. Also, don't try to support your position by claiming that the guys who put cap reduction down did so at their own risk because they would lose it in the event of accident/theft. That is a red herring. Under those circumstances, it would be the leaseholder's insurance contract which would govern (and he purchased that risk), and under those terms, yes he/she would be at a loss, but under the circumstances at hand, it is the lease agreement that controls. Further, your feeling that the fact that I put cap reduction down "caused" the problem, is not legal causation. The causation is toyota breaching the lease agreement by not providing a functional car for the first month of the lease.

    It is scary to think that logic like yours sits on juries.
  • fsowirlesfsowirles Posts: 195
    To address your main point: Your financial terms of purchase were you own choice, so why should Toyota make you a special case and offer more money? Using your own logic, isn't it only fair that they pay for the monthly payment for the time your are without the use of the vehicle? What if this happened to me (I paid cash)? How much should I get? How about 6 months of payments....$0!!!

    Now lets get a little off topic: Let's assume you bought a loaded XLE for $30k (for round numbers). Let us assume you had no trade in, $8k to put down, wanted low payments, with the mind set of putting average mileage on the car (otherwise you wouldn't lease) and selling/trading in the car in three years. Your purchase loan terms would on a 72 month buy would be $330 +/- a month (at 7.5%) with a loan balance of <$14k at the end of 3 years. Your cost at this point is about $16k not accounting for any positive equity. Using general lease terms, the same scenario on a lease would cost you about $18k and you walk away with nothing.

    If you are scared of your own inability to discipline not to spend that money, wouldn't you have been better off putting it into a locked (no withdrawals permitted) type of interest bearing account that your payments could be pulled from automatically (many bank and credit unions have these types of set ups)?
  • kiawahkiawah Posts: 3,666

    In one way, you aren't really any different than someone who paid cash for the car. Neither would get any financial reimbursement for the period of the time you don't have access to the car.

    In a second way as compared to a cash purchaser, you wouldn't get the 'benefit' of an extended warranty period, whereas a cash buyer potentially would. But, you aren't as financially committed to the deal as a cash purchaser is either.

    Each consumers situation is going to be different, and I wouldn't spend a lot of time comparing to others who you perceive may be getting a 'better deal' in the handling of their problem.
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Posts: 3,855
    FWIW, I agree with you that you should get the same financial settlement as someone with lower down payment (or whatever you call that on a lease). Essentially what you did, as I undeerstand it, is pay 1/2 of your monthly lease payments up front.

    For example suppose you could lease a car for 36 months for $400 per month with nothing down, you will pay $14,400 total.

    Alternatively you could choose to pay $7200 up front and pay $200 month for 36 months. You are still effectively paying $400 per month for the use of the car.

    As I see it, if you are without the car for a month, then your loss of use for that month is worth $400 in either case.
  • topgun7topgun7 Posts: 412
    fso, I think you misunderstood how the gap insurance work. For Toyota/Lexus and Honda, on every car they leased it include the gap insurance. It provide the gap for between what insurance company paid vs what is lease contract buy out cost. So if insurance company pay you 20K and you lease contract show a buyout cost of 18K. Gap insurance won't kick in. Toyota will get 18K and as the leasee of the vechicle, you will get 2K. However if insurance pay out is only 15K, there will be a gap of 3K. Without the gap insurance, leasee will be responsible the 3K. With the gap insurance, leasee just walk away. It is not true to say that just becuase someone who put 8K down will automatically lose the 8K.
  • lzclzc Posts: 483
    Why isn't the dealer (or Toyota) providing you with an equivalent loaner car for the period involved? If they did, would that satisfy you?
  • ray_h1ray_h1 Posts: 1,134
    Would it be "nice" if Toyota leasing forgave an extra lease payment? Yes, it would. Is Toyota leasing obligated to do so? Probably not, because they're not even obligated to forgive any payments due to the unforeseen trannie troubles. But they obligingly did decide to be "nice" enough to cover one payment for buyers' inconvenience in that regard. Hopefully, you'll have your car back by next week and your concerns will be just an unpleasant memory of a potential hassle that was resolved satisfactorily. As others have already observed, you, not Toyota, made the choice to accept an alternate exterior color choice. You may not be entirely satisfied with your choice, now, but how is that Toyota's fault?
  • mackabeemackabee Posts: 4,709
    Well I may sound condenscending as you put it but go back and read your own words again. If the transmission went after four days as you state why didn't you take the car back and demand another one? Most contracts (lease or purchase) are held in the dealers finance office until all stipulations are met, finance approved, insurance verified etc.. I'm sure yours was still hanging around and they could have unwound the deal. With so many dealers to trade with in the network I'm sure they could have gotten you an XLE in a few days at most. Heck, a call from the General Manager at the store to the district regional manager would have probably had your car in the next day and we wouldn't be having this conversation or discussion. How about taking some responsibility for this mess instead of feeling sorry for yourself.
  • msisengmsiseng Posts: 369
    Why should this person feel sorry when it was Toyota who produced garbage product? It appears to be more than inconvenient for the consumer. This is not something one would expect from the all mighty Toyota.
  • rhomsyrhomsy Posts: 5
    No, they can't get me an XLE in a couple of days.... It will take about 3 weeks to get me one.. but they are still looking.

    Further, they are not being nice by offering me a lease payment. I paid $8K and $225/month for a total of $16,000 for 36 months of vehicle use. If they are providing me with only 35 months of use, they are obligated to compensate me. I don't need to "unwind" the deal. I am entitled to enforce the lease, just like they would be entitled to enforce it if I breached the lease and failed to make my payments. It's a two way street.

    Honestly, I can't believe the toyota apoligists posting on this board. Do you people work for toyota and are posting anonymously or something.
  • tomdtomd Posts: 87
    Gap insurance won't kick in. Toyota will get 18K and as the leasee of the vechicle, you will get 2K.

    I don't think you (the leasee) will get anything. You don't own the car, the leasing company does. If you don't put down anything and the car is totalled, you get to walk away assuming you have gap insurance. If you put down 8K and the car is totalled, you still walk away but you are out the 8K. I may be wrong but I don't think the leasing company has to be nice and refund any money to you. I guess the question is that when you put down a lot of money and the book value of a totalled or stolen car is more than what is owed on the lease, does the insurance company pay the lease company book value or what is owed on the lease? If they pay book, then the leasing company ends up a winner but as I said, it is not clear that they have to refund any money to you.
  • lzclzc Posts: 483
    I bought a new Accord at the last major model change. Paid cash. Within 4 days a main transmission sealed failed. The dealer had no parts for the new model. My new car would be in the shop for a while. Did the dealer compensate me? Only with a loaner car and free mats (nice tough).

    Still, I wasn't pleased having written the big check and no new car to drive. In hindsight, it was a minor bump. As is your problem.
  • smith1smith1 Posts: 283
    tomd, I don't think the leasing company has to refund anything to the lessee in the scenario you describe.

    First, gap insurance does not pay the difference between net cap cost and residual (end of lease) value as topgun7 stated. It pays the difference, if any, between net cap cost (what is due to the lessor) and the current value of the car at the time of the loss (what the insurance company is going to pay out).

    Since rhomsy reduced his net cap cost by giving the lessor $8000 up front, chances are that if he totalled the vehicle the gap insurance would never kick in. On a $30K Camry lease, the difference between the depreciated value of the vehicle at the time of the loss and what has been paid to the leasing company in monthly payments is not very likely to exceed $8000. But, I don't think he will get any of that $8000 back either. The insurance company will pay the lessor the depreciated value, and as far as I know the lessor is not obligated to refund anything to the lessee.

    Which is why everyone counsels against making a big downpayment on a lease.
  • I am considering the VW Passat or the Hyndai Sonata as an alternative to the Camry. (not wild about the 2007). Anyone have any impressions about either of these 2 cars? And any ideas of a nav system that could be instatlled in either of them that is similiar to Toyota's? Thanks
  • mackabeemackabee Posts: 4,709
    If you insist on being stubborn so be it. I just gave you a couple of alternatives you could have and can use rather than mope around because you are out of a car. Find another dealer, get your money back, anything but be pro-active instead of coming on to a public forum and whining about how "Toyota takes advantage of leasing customers" Please.
    ps. yes I do work for a Toyota dealer and I have seen cases like yours where something has been worked out for the benefit of the customer. We tend to bend over backwards for customers but it seems you were just satisfied with what happened, left it at that and are now complaining.
  • Rhomsy: I feel for you. You got shafted, and the dealer/toyota is treating you like crap.

    Did they at least give you a decent long-term loaner?

    After just scanning a few of the posts here I agree that people are throwing a lot of hate at you...for what? Because your new car is going to be in the shop for a month or so?

    I'd be pissed too. I still don't understand why Toyota didn't issue a recall on every one of these v6 trannys and do the right thing from the beginning. Selling the cars and waiting for failures from customers seems like a bad idea.

    Good luck.
  • fsowirlesfsowirles Posts: 195
    Huh??? I didn't address GAP insurance or the loss of vehicle scenario.
  • fsowirlesfsowirles Posts: 195
    Is there a lease program called 1/2 payments or something? If not, then you merely put a large lump sum down payment which lowered the amount financed hence lowering your payments. It is semantics to some extent, but you did not pay half of your payments in the eyes of the bank. Paying half of your payments up front would have included interest, which your $8k did not do. You paid $8k towards the initial cost and the balance has interest applied to it.
  • alpha01alpha01 Posts: 4,747
    It seems there are two issues here.
    1) What Toyota is obligated to provide under the warranty.
    2) What Toyota is obligated to provide under the lease agreement.

    1)Your methodology for making reparitions regarding warranty repairs would set a standard that no manufacturer could possibly follow. My understanding is that, contractually under their warranty obligation, Toyota is NOT required by law to even offer you either the extended warranty (which is indeed useless in your case), or one month's payment to cover the fact that you are not using the vehicle. They are obligated to make the repair, which they are doing.

    2)You state yourself WHY, legally, ONE MONTH's payment is an appropriate sum. "The causation is toyota breaching the lease agreement by not providing a functional car for the first month of the lease." So, if Toyota's "CRIME" is breach of the lease to the duration of ONE MONTH, as you YOURSELF state, then why should you expect their "PUNISHMENT" to be equal to two month's payment? For all intents and purposes, it seems that their breach of lease agreement will indeed be no greater than one month, and yet, you feel you are entitled to two because YOU made the CHOICE to use Cap Cost reduction as a method of lowering your monthly payment. To me, THAT is flawed logic.

    I never stated that your excessive Cap Cost payment 'caused' your transmission problem, not even close. I did state, however, that high Cap Cost payments on leases have inherent risks associated with them, this type of situation being included among those myriad risks. There was no implication of causation.

    Certainly, Toyota had an issue with initial Camrys and their 6 speed automatic transmissions. It is unfortunate that you have experienced this problem, and it is further unfortunate that you are upset with Toyota's response, as you seem to be among the few who are displeased with the handling of the repair.

    That said, trust that I, sir, find your logic of individual entitlement equally as scary as you find mine especially when you YOURSELF have stated that Toyota's breach of lease agreement is to the duration of ONE MONTH, the exact payment duration the company has expressed willingness to absorb.

    I hope that Toyota makes right by you, I just think that you need to understand your expectation and the services with which Toyota is required to provide you by law are likely not at equilibrium.

  • thatzmagicthatzmagic Posts: 4
    You can opt to equip them with all season tires at no extra cost.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    This is correct.. prepaying a huge amount up on a lease is a horrible financial decision. Be careful it isnt wrecked.

    Another way of looking at 'buying down' your payment is this:

    A typical lease payment for 48 mo's would be $375/mo or about $18,000 in total. By putting down $8000 you have prepaid the first 21 months of lease payments. The remainder of $10000 is just divided over the 48 mo's.

    Either way you are spending $18,000. It's just that TFS has your money and it's working for them not you.
  • glanwinglanwin Posts: 28
    What do you mean the extended warranty is useless? The Toyota Extra Care Platinum includes rental car up to $50/day when the insured car is out of service. If you take the extended warranty now, you can ask for a rental car right away because Toyota Finance pay for it :).
Sign In or Register to comment.