BlkFD

Since I'm new here I don't give the wrong impression. I don't want to start a ***** session but instead try to get some good advice from the board.

I got ripped in the lease deal of my TL. I've been working on this since April. The dealer put things in writing and then lied, calling it a mistake, putting me out $1500.

I've talked my way up the ladder at the dealership, contacted BBB and all they did was give them an unsat. rating. I now have Consumer Affairs looking at the claim.

Any good advice, other than small claims?

Thanks

r10apple

Could you be any more vague?

How about stating directly what your issues are, what is in writing, what is a 'mistake', and what the $1,500 is for...You'll probably get more help with soem more information...

BlkFD

r10apple, thanks for the reply, I just didn't want to list a drag on post. But here goes.

I leased a new 2003 Acura TL model from Pohanka Acura of Chantilly, VA on 4/24/2003. When we worked the deal, I had a 2000 Honda that was near lease end and was over the mileage limit. The salesman, Scott Bershader, looked at and drove my car, and said "it’s very clean, we can help you out" since you're leasing with Honda Finance already, because that's who will be the lessor for the TL. (I figured they had a special turn in arrangement) He said he would find out the pay off and left the table. When he came back he said he could turn it in for me and pay the remaining 3 payments along with the mileage overage. He filled out a check request for $1600.00 and said, "this will more than cover the remaining payments and additional mileage of your Honda lease." He clearly said, “this WILL pay your final three payments and the mileage penalty”. I was not confused, he did not say “I’ll offer you $1600.00” or “I’ll give you $1600.00 toward your lease”. Also, my wife was sitting right next to me and was also part of the purchase conversation. I asked if he was sure and he said, "yes, you'll even have a few extra dollars left over.” I have it in writing on a check request.

After 6 weeks Honda had taken another payment from my checking account for the Accord and it was still at the dealership and in my name. But to make matters worse, after 12-15 calls and/or emails to the dealership and to Honda finance (with only a few return calls) I found out by calling Honda Finance myself, that the figure the salesman came up with and assured me would satisfy the Honda lease is approximately $1536.46 short. The total, seems to be $866.81 for the last two (plus) payments of $367.37 ea. and $2269.35 for the additional mileage, which would total $3136.46. I talked to the GM, Lenny Gonzales and my salesman in person, and they both agreed that Scott, my salesman made a math mistake and it was a very bad deal for them. Lenny then said, since "they didn't make any money on the car, they certainly couldn't give me any money back". This statement was ridiculous because in the end I was paying more for the lease than the current televison ad campaign.

I then talked to Scott Crabtree, executive manager of the Pohanka dealership, on 6/4/03 and he said he would not help me either. He said it was a terrible deal and that I agreed to $1600.00 and that’s the deal. I told him I agreed to the figure HIS salesperson told me would satisfy my lease and release me from it, after he supposedly obtained that number by calling Honda Finance. Whether it was intentional or not, I was misled and entered the new lease contract based on that lie.

This has been the worst buying experience I have ever encountered and the great customer service that Pohanka Acura talks about on their web site is a joke. Their customer service is nonexistant. I demand that Pohanka Acura honor the agreement that was made on 4/24/2003 and pay the final three payments of $367.37 each, (actually turned out to be 2 about 1/2 mo. payments of $866.81) and the additional mileage penalty of $2269.35 to end my lease with Honda Finance.

To date, Pohanka Acura has sent me a check for $1600.00 to be used for the payoff of my 2000 Honda Accord. They now need to honor their agreement and pay me the additional $1536.46 so I can be released from the Honda as promised.

I have filed complaints with the Better Business Bureau and The Office of Consumer Affairs in Fairfax Virginia. I have also sent supporting documents as further proof of this fraudulent transaction. (check request)

Thanks

hangbok

wow.. dat suxs... i hope u win..
those damn greedy bastards!

fighting fish

How much pull does this website have with the Acura Dealerships???

I think its a good idea to start some kind of Good/Bad dealership listing so that Dealerships take notice of the buying power of this forum and think twice before ripping people of. And also inform people which are the fair dealers and the ones to avoid.

Has this ever been suggested to the moderators of Acura-TL?

BlkFD

Thank you, I was wondering the same thing.

BEIKAY

I am not sure how Acura dealers rate as to consumer satisfaction, but we are likely difficult customers. I have had one satisfactory contact and that was at sales time. My sales person and the sales manager were very nice. Sales person and manager at the local dealer were most rude. Service people are generally polite. If I didn't know the trade and inspected the job I'd be satisfied, except when oil was spilled on the leather. I suspect persons here are not representative of the typical Acura owner. So this forum likely has little influence.

Scott P

basically to me it sounds as though you may have to bite this one. you have taken as far as the simplest steps can take it, but unless it is in writing that the 1600 they offered you and you subsequently accepted was "to cover in full the balance owed to the lessor" then i can say with any certainty that you really have a leg to stand on. You do bring up an interesting point in that you entered into a new legally binding contract under the false pretense supplied by their sales associate. I'm not familiar enough with law to say if this would hold water legally in this case, but even if it did the most likely result would be that you would return the TL in exchange for that contract being voided, you may or may not be compensated for the difference owed (my guess is not) and you would still be out of a car given the likely scenario that your previous lease would be considered over and you have turned in the car.. sorry if that isn't what you want to hear, but given my history in automotive sale, and my very brief knowledge of the law as it pertains, that is what it looks like to me

fighting fish

i think the point here is not whether BLKFD was right or wrong but whether or not the dealership will give him extra customer service based on the fact that this site (with how many members???) will read about his experience.

forums are a powerful thing if used properly. talking about aem intakes, and scratches and trannies and dings are all good but why not use this forum to our benefit. (ie. squeeze the dealers or get special deals).

for example, www.manilatonight.com, its a forum dedicated to all the night life (ktv, lounges, stripclubs, massage parlors, spas, etc..) in manila, phils. needless to say, the webmaster of the board gets treated like a king in these places and the users are treated extra carefully as well.

whatever, im blabbering... back to regular programming.

r10apple

I was with you until this example. While I'm all for strip clubs, lounges and getting comp'd, the Phillipines??? Sheesh...

Anyway, laws very from state to state over aspects of a contract. In Florida, a contract is both oral and written. Further contract disputes require the legal process and in some instances--not all--your fees may or may not be recoverable.

The inference from your posts is that you have a new Acura for which you are leasing it for the going rate as "advertised". They gave you $1,600 on top of that. To them, that is a bad deal. To us, that is a great deal. However, assuming the above is true so far, another $1,500+ is owed on your old Honda lease. That means the dealer would have given you your new car for the advertised rate minus $3,100+ which is terrible for them and an unheard of deal for you. If your Honda is not listed in your sales/leasing contract as a trade, IMuHO you are screwed. It would be highly unlikely that even the litigation process would take sides to things of an oral nature over that of the written document--even if the sales people admit to telling you they were "paying off" your lease. Further, in the long run and most importantly, it is you who is equally responsible for knowing what the payoff and mileage penalty was to begin with as it is your vehicle and you cannot use the fact that the salesman told you what they were and claim ignorance as an excuse. Sorry, but that is life and no dealer is going to voluntarily give you another $1,500 no matter what this board does or what stink you make with them, Acura, HOA, AHFC, etc...

Now, if your Honda is part of the sales agreement (meaning all this math is included on your new purchase agreement with trade in figures, etc.), scan that document so we can see it for a different tack...

BlkFD

r10apple,

Thanks for the comments but, please don't misunderstand me, I DID NOT get the advertised rate because they built that $1600 into the deal. I put down more than the advertisement and my payments are more than the advertisement. So they did not just give me $1600.

If you read my post carefully you'll see that the salesman stated several times the Accord would be paid in full based on his call to Honda Finance. So when we go into a dealership should we go in believing they all lie? I am 47 years old and have purchased many cars in my life and I have never, ever thought that a dealer would
do this.

Again, I agreed to the $1600 as the payoff figure because I was told that was the amount that would satisfy the lease contract.

Here is a copy of the check request. It was very clear to my wife and myself as we specifically asked several times if that amount would TOTALLY release us from the Honda and he said yes.

http://home.comcast.net/~jm20110/check-request2.jpg

r10apple

I am no attorney, but I play one every day at work...

Your sales/lease agreement is the most valid part of this contract. It should reflect the cash changing hands, purchase price, interest, finance company, taxes and a trade if there is a trade. If the $1,600 is not reflected via a straight trade but rather a cash dispersement or "built into" the purchase of the car, and the return of the lease vehicle is strictly in your hands, you have a problem...

Let's say there is an adverstised lease of $399/mo for 39 months with $999 down. There is room to bargain here, but generally no more than $1500 or so (reasonably to the dealer). You can offset that with no money down or lowering payments by $30 a month or so. If you are paying more, you could still push the envelope with the dealer and the BBB over the oral aspect as your dealer isn't--hasn't lost anything on their deal if they have taken the advertised rate and addded $1600 to the deal...But legal remedies arguing oral promises when a written agreement is present are generally fruitless. It is also very expensive to even litigate (easily more than the $1500 we are talking about)...

Again Houston, I think you have a problem...

maxx96

After reading your post carefully, and looking at the check, it is my opinion that you are right and that they have to pay what you owe to Honda. Do not let them get away with this, it is not your fault that the math impaired salesman can't do numbers and that the manager that day didn't realized this mistake. Everything is in black and white, any Judge with common sense will see thru this.
Good luck and stay on it.

BlkFD

Thanks guys, I've also added this on a Subaru forum my son posts on. This is a different situation but it still shows the power of these forums can be incredible. Look at this:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...ark+mitsubishi

BTW, he got the car.

BEIKAY

I have a problem in that I don't have your contract in front of me. But, a general theory of contract law is that the court will use the plain meaning of the language in their interpretion of the contract. The next and possibly appropriate rule here is that any ambiguity in the language of the contract is to be construed against the drafter of the contract in the other party's favor (likely you.) This may be an excellent use of the small claims court forum. However, the above comments are not intended to be construed as legal advice and are hypothetical only. If you have any questions you should seek advice from a local licenced attorney.