Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by berto62, Sep 28, 2012.
I do not see how this arrest could have happened without blatant false statements from someone at the dealership. Hopefully one of them takes the ride.
Sure doesn't read like "the employee."
Sounds like this was a conspiracy to defraud.
Yeah, I'd say it's worth $2.2 million even though that's just the amount plaintiff is asking for. Doesn't mean he'll get it. They'll probably settle.
IMO, the Cops are squeaky clean on this one.
They may not be so smart, mind you, but I promise you they were smart enough to have the i's dotted and t's crossed as far as actually taking someone to jail on behalf of the dealership. (At least I would freekin hope so!)
No, the dealership's owner is going to have to work to save his butt on this one, and rightfully so IMHO. A million bucks sounds fair to me; however, since I am bias towards the buyer on this one, I say 2.2 mill sounds fair, and settling for 1 million seems reasonable.
It actually looks like LE obtained a warrant so that means a judge also agreed with what was presented as evidence by the dealer.
'Ere ya go.
ETA: Did you read Dragoon44's post? He offers a different perspective from your side of the 'thin blue line.'
Watch for bankruptcy or "re-structuring" or "new ownership." it's not like car dealerships were loved And cherished before. This kind of publicity is kiss of death.
What is aggravating is calling the police on a customer for a mistake they made, but that is not unheard of a dealership. Did that to a client of mine, when they made a similar mistake, but his was slightly different. His salesman even went as far as to call me to tell me I had illegally insured a vehicle. (ignorant *****). I took the liberty of commenting and asking the owner when I ran into him at the Christmas tree Auction at the country club in front of ALOT of other people.
In liability? Absolutely.
The dealer elected to play hardball, and they're about (I hope) to lose. If it wasn't worth $2.2M to them, they should have left it alone.
you did change the contract after he had signed it..and it was a scumball move...not everyone that quits thier jobs is now broke and cant pay thier bills maybe he had a plan or was taking some time to do someting else with his life.
if i was him id ran out every ounce of gas id put in the thing and then brought it back and told you where to shove that 3%
maybe you should have not given him the car untill the bank says it was ok and all the loose ends were tied up..but like MOST car salesman they only care about getting you to sign the papers and to get your butt off the lot.
what you did could be compared to a mob shakedown...this guy went car shopping,went thru all the hub bub of paperwork, a contract was signed...3 days later you called him and said hey...we need 3 more percent or we take your car back.
In 1988 I bought a 1989 Ford F-150. My trade-in was paid for and I had the title. The deal was made. I left my trade-in at the dealership and drove home a loaner while my new truck was being washed, etc. I was to come by the next day after work and pickup my pickup. I got a call at work that there was a "problem" and that the dealership was going to have to have another $700 or so. In 1988 $700 was a fair amount of money-or at least for me it was. I went to the dealer after work, I told them that the new price did not work for me and asked to get my car back. Well my car was not on the lot and they did not know where it was-so I was just going to have to take their new deal. I asked if I might use their phone to call the police and report a stolen car. They looked at me and laughed. I was told that it was their property and they could do what they wanted to with it. I asked "Even without the title?". I had it in my pocket and showed it to them. They stopped laughing. In the end I got the truck and a rear bumper at the original price. It is a game to them and you had better understand that.
Uh no it isn't anything like a mob shake down. You sign a contract that says contingent on the lender accepting financing.. In this case the guy got the best rate through a lender who verifies income. The guy said he makes x amount of dollars at his employer. Based on this info ill bet the computer said he would most likely get the financing. The guy then quit his job which was a determining factor on his financing. They verified his employment after he quit therefore the original contract was invalidated because his income level was no longer valid...
Every car I've bought has specifically stated the entire deal is contingent on the acceptance of my credit application by the chosen lender. It then clearly has stated if financing falls through the vehicle is still the dealers, and if the terms change I may return the car.
I think you are conceptually correct. However, I've had the, "sorry we need to redo the contract and you owe us another X$s" and, "no you can't have your trade back because we already auctioned it off" scam attempted on me twice.
A quick FU solved the problem both times.
They don't carry some kind of umbrella policy to cover the weird unanticipated kind of screwups?
Just a few years ago my brother and his wife visited a well known and generally well liked car dealership in Fort Worth.
They told the sales guy, "we are just looking today and will likely buy next week". The guy said great. They drove the car inquired about pricing and prepared to leave. Somehow during the discussion the sale guy ended up with their keys and he literally threw them high onto the roof of the building and told them that A. now they had to drive the car home B. since they were going to drive the car home they might as well fill out the paper work and buy the car.
My brother made the guy go up on the roof and retrieve the keys. The next week he bought a nearly identical car from another dealership.
I agree with Dragoon. Responding to any stolen vehicle complaint from a dealership would have me skeptical to begin with. As soon as they started breaking out contracts and dealer paperwork I probably would have stopped them and said "civil matter, I'm out."
Just to let out a little more hate for the car dealerships, the other way they screw someone out of money, involving the customer, but salesman money is they ask the customer to come resign because of a "mistake".
The date of the deal gets pushed to next month. That was the car salesguy's 20th car. The car he needed to get his 20 car bonus, to get his 20 car % rate. The car he needed to hit the nearly impossible spiff the manager put out.
What do you call a nurse with an arrest record? An ex-nurse. Every 2 years we renew our license, and have to answer questions about arrest, etc. Say yes to arrest and you got a lot of hurt coming your way. Lie and get caught, never see a nursing license again. Employers always check criminal records because we have access to ALL the medication. Doctors dont get access to medications.
I dont disagree with your post, but what you said here is not always true on a number of levels.
You refuse to see the facts of the situation, and instead you'd rather throw a tantrum about how car dealers are scumballs. Thanks for proving my point.
I don't know or care why he quit his job.
More to the point, neither did the bank.
The bank lent him money because they thought he had an income. When they learned that it was not in fact true, they decided they didn't want to lend him any money.
"No job, no loan" is a pretty universal rule of lending.
Bull****. If I genuinely thought there was a chance he wouldn't get funded, I would not have let him take the car. No way in hell I'm taking the chance that he doesn't bring it back, or gets into an accident or whatever, unless I'm sure he can buy it.
People drive away on a signature, contingent on financing, literally millions of times per day. 99.99999999% of those deals work out fine.
Sounds like alot of mistakes were made in this case. Sloppy work at the dealership, sloppy police work and a greedy customer.
Guess who wins in this case?