Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Going to jail for getting a good deal at car dealer

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by berto62, Sep 28, 2012.

  1. GlocknSpiehl

    GlocknSpiehl NRA Life Member Silver Member

    Aug 15, 2002
    Miami, FL
    Actually, the big issue, with any person in a medical career, is once you are arrested, you are screwed. I work as a Nuc Med Technologist and I must immediately report any arrest and I can immediately have my license suspended and/or lifted. Every medical facilty does background checks and, if they see you have been arrested, regardless if you were tried or convicted, they will pass you by for one of the many people out there with no baggage.

    The dealership has really screwed with this guy's ability to get/keep his license and to get/keep a job. Has nothing to do with him making less money; it has everything to do with him not being able to work in his field, ever.

    Frankly, he should not only get a big,fat check, but the dealership should have to pay to have his record totally expunged and pay for any future legal bills he has to deal with in regards to his illegal arrest. It could be years before all this is cleared up.
  2. im fully done about the car and am wondering about devildogs obsessive need to be right...i was going to google ocd but i remembered 4 pages back DD told uss he knew more then google

  3. berto62


    Mar 28, 2009
    Alachua Fl
    If this was a BS arrest cannot a judge make it all go away?
  5. Gallium

    Gallium CLM

    Mar 26, 2003
  6. badge315


    Aug 14, 2008
    Middleburg, FL
    Did you read the same story as the rest of us? Because I think you have that backwards.:dunno:
  7. Javelin

    Javelin Got Glock? Silver Member

    Feb 9, 2008
    N. Dallas
    I see what you are saying... but I am not hearing any logic. They made a false claim getting an innocent man arrested and did it with malicious intent. Now they got called on it and he now has grounds to seek justified legal recourse for the Dealerships use of using non-justified legal recourse.

    See the difference? He will win, the dealership will lose and pay big. You screw around with a man and his time he will have time to screw around with you and your wallet.

    And the world goes round and round. :wavey:
  8. Halojumper


    Mar 18, 2005
    Aurora, CO
    It's slightly off topic, but think of it as a sidebar, a while back my mom was buying a car and a dealer was giving her a real bad time. He finally got her to take a test drive so she took their car and went to another dealer and bought a car from them. She asked the salesman if he would return the test drive car and get hers back. Of course, he happily agreed.

    Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
  9. NeverMore1701

    NeverMore1701 Fear no Evil Platinum Member

    Jun 25, 2004
    Amarillo, Tx
    Heh heh, I like it! :supergrin:
  10. devildog2067


    Apr 20, 2005
    Define "they."

    Whether an employer is liable for the criminal actions of his or her employee depend very much on the details of the act. I don't know enough about this particular act to know whether or not the dealership should be made to pay.

    More to the point, unless someone in this thread is privy to details that the rest of us are not, neither is anyone else.

    When my guy got drunk and drove a car through a house, the dealership's insurance paid the liability claim. That was a clear case--he was driving a dealership-owned car, so anything he hit while he was driving the car, the dealership was liable for.

    If he'd driven his dealership-owned car to someone's house and assaulted that person, the dealership would NOT have been responsible, in any way. If the person who was assaulted chose to sue the dealership, and the story made the news, the GT crowd would be up in arms about how sue-happy the country is.

    All I'm asking is that people stop and think for a second before calling for blood. Is that really too much to ask?
  11. devildog2067


    Apr 20, 2005
    I don't have anything like OCD, if that's what you mean.

    Trying not to sound too much like a sanctimonious *******, here's why: people who choose to be ignorant, rather than taking a few seconds to think or a few minutes to educate themselves, make me deeply sad and angry.

    I'm a smart guy, but I'm no Einstein. I'm not a genius by any means. And I'm certainly not an expert on everything. Therefore, I try quite hard to keep my mouth shut on topics I don't know about (although I definitely fail, sometimes). I don't step into cop threads and talk about what it's like to be a cop, because I've never been a cop. I don't volunteer medical diagnoses, because I've never been a doctor.

    If there is something that interests me, and I want to have an opinion about it, I take a few minutes and read about it first. In the internet age this is easier than it's ever been. You have (almost literally) all of human knowledge at your fingertips, yet you choose to remain willfully ignorant. (I don't mean "you" specifically, I'm speaking to a generic "you." A recent thread on HIV and circumcision illustrates my point pretty clearly, I think.)

    I know about car dealerships. I'm trying to point out that the dealership, in this case, may or may not really be liable. We don't have nearly enough facts to make that determination.

    In light of that, I am trying to get people to take a step back and think for a second before spouting off with "they should have to pay for that guy's job forever and college for all of his kids and buy him a house and a dog!" The world would be a better place if people genuinely tried not to form conclusions without having the facts, and didn't get defensive when people point out what they're doing. People get emotionally attached to their own ignorance, for some unknown and unknowable reason.

    I, in my tiny way, am trying to combat that ignorance. Why I do it here, I have no idea. I certainly don't change many peoples' minds. Most of GT surely thinks I'm an arrogant prick (I don't come off that way in real life, oddly enough). But that's what it is. I'm not obsessive about being right. It just bugs the hell out of me when others insist on being wrong, in the face of the facts.
  12. Javelin

    Javelin Got Glock? Silver Member

    Feb 9, 2008
    N. Dallas
    I think that his lawyer has a case against both to be honest. But the money is with the dealership so that's probably where the interests in litigation will be emphasized.

    As far as sue-crazy... well that's just the world we live in and there is nothing the GT community or anyone else is going to have much say in.
  13. say your not obsessed with this by replying to my comment with a 22 line response.

    you could have easily called me ignorant,a jerk go to heck but you wrote a "novel" witch included a quote a link refferances to einstein,circumcision,and used the word sanctimonious..:rofl:

    im really not trying to give you a hard time DD ..but its just so funny how emoitionaly involved you have become with this...:wavey:
  14. devildog2067


    Apr 20, 2005
    Again--you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think it's unlikely that either of us know enough of the facts to really judge.

    And the truth comes out. Doesn't matter who's wrong, just matters who has money.

    Doesn't that make you angry? Aren't you offended?

    I beg to differ, my friend. We all change the world, one little bit at a time.
  15. devildog2067


    Apr 20, 2005
    Why would I?
  16. Well IMHO the employee who reported this to the LEOs must have had the authority to make a police report regarding theft of company property. Would the police have taken the report from just any salesman with out data from the manager?
    The "theft" report was of company owned property made (I'm assuming) by someone given the authority to file police reports in the companies name for the company.
    Then the company is responsible. If not the city should be sued.
    You may think it is no big deal the have an arrest for felony GTA on your record but some people do.

  17. devildog2067


    Apr 20, 2005
    What makes you think that?

    I don't know. It depends on the cop that answered the phone and how convincing whomever called in the theft report was, I suppose.

    You know what they say about assuming.

    All I'm doing is choosing not to assume. Why should I? Why not just wait to form an opinion until I have more facts? None of us trust the media in general, so why trust them in this case?

    If the management team at the dealership sat down and had a meeting and decided this was the best way to deal with the situation, then sure, the dealership should definitely be liable.

    But what if (and I'm making this up) a salesman realized he'd made a mistake after the customer re-signed, and came up with this harebrained scheme on his own? What if he pretended to be a sales manager when he called the cops, trying to cover his own ass and fix his mistake? What if he did that from his personal cell phone, even? What if he lied to management about it and they not only weren't aware of this, but would have stopped it if they had known? How does it make sense for the dealership to be liable then?

    We don't know what happened. We only know a few of the details. All I'm saying is, why jump to conclusions?

    Where did I say it was "no big deal"? I neither said nor implied that anywhere in this thread.
  18. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    How much would the men on here think is acceptable amount of compensation for being sexually assaulted my another man? $10? $100? $10000? $1M?

    What sexual assault you say? Well if I were to force a female to disrobe on front of me against here will, that is sexual assault. If I forced a female to allow me to touch her genitals against her will, that is sexual assault. If I whip out my hose to take a leak, that is a sex crime.

    So how much is it worth to you men to be forced to take off you clothes and have your genitals touched by another man against your will?

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
  19. Gallium

    Gallium CLM

    Mar 26, 2003

    And much of that money is made in a way that FORCED you to leave that line of work, because you couldn't stand the lying (your words).

    The facts that we know are already outlined in this thread,

    - dude buys car
    - someone from dealer reports the car stolen
    - dude gets arrested on false charge

    I tell you, if you were in that dude's shoes, and your livelihood was at stake, not only would the note of the song you sing would be different, but you'd be singing a completely different song.

    I would be completely INCENSED if some asshat at a dealership caused my arrest, booking, fingerprinting etc over something like this. Really, I would have started out at a figure 4-5x higher.

    In the final analysis, we have a system for dealing with issues like this. The dealership, or someone in their employ went outside the clearly defined lines of what is permissible to sustain/maintain a profit. They were the ones (if it was one dude, a collusion or the entire dealership it does not matter) who opened a can of whoop ass.

    The dude, having suffered damages, is now using the framework of the system EXACTLY as is allowed by law to exact justice. I cannot comprehend how you fail to connect those dots.

    If he had, on release from jail torched the car and then torched a few more cars at the dealership and the paint balled a few other cars...and then try to sue, I would be singing a different song.

    My conclusion is, you are allowing your your "dealership" bias to over-ride that portion of your brain that deals with logic. (and I don't of course mean to be insulting in any way - we all have our biases.)
  20. frizz


    Jul 6, 2012
    You don't even know if he tried to screw them over. You are GUESSING and you don't have a good reason to make that guess.

    Really. Explain what he did "to screw over the car dealer."