dashotgun

Very interesting thread. time to lawyer up boy...BTw as another grey beard I agree with Gurney eagle. This was a simple negotiation with someone getting a profit andyou getting a commodity. Honesty in dealing even with a car dealer would have cost you a lot less in the short term. The situationl ethic metaphor was quite applicable. In the end you have to look yourself in the mirror and like who you see. It does seem to me you should have been more forthright with the possibility of the car having a problem before you traded it. Your decesion not to is while it seemed like a good idea at the time is looking less and less like a good one know I suspect.

neuronbob

My friend, you need to stop talking about the case online now.

*mod goes back to monitoring thread*

houdaman

sorry mod,
people asked for the update...Ill use all the info you have all suggested and let you all know its outcome.
thanks alot everyone!

acatmpf

Toyota dealers deserve every bit of this, It is about time a consumer has the upper hands instead of the other way around. I purchased a TL from a toyota dealer, 1 week later, I was changing my oil and realize the oil pan was leaking from a strip nut, told the dealer and they blamed it on me. 2 weeks later, i went it to replace my brakes and realize my rotor was warped...called the dealer and they said it was my fault....the dealer knew about all the problems the car had, but chose not to fix it instead.

I am actually happy hearing the dealer got a taste of their own medicine for once.

kenny5

Houdaman, do you know whether the law in Canada provides that a person who wins a lawsuit can ask the losing party to pay the legal fees and expenses? If that is the case, you may be able to convince your lawyer to take the case on a contingent fee basis since it is a general consensus here that you have a winning case.

sdaeb02

NO KIDDING. Oooooh poor mr. dealer....and how many times has he screwed others on used cars? I don't feel sorry for them, good for you for putting the AS IS. I don't know how things are in BC but in CA that I imagine would stand up for you. Um...and aren't your records of business dealings with another entity YOUR business? It took me almost a Power of Attorney to get the records from Ac on my new to me TL. I only got them with a photocopy of the DL of the previous owner, as well as an authorization to disclose letter from them....

StuartMMVITL

iTrader: (1)

This has really turned into an interesting story...

I think the best course for houdaman now is to not discuss any further details and consult an attorney as to how he should proceed and respond to the dealer's letter. It may cost some $$, but hopefully not a large amount.

I agree with Gurney & Rapid1 in thinking this could have all been avoided by being more upfront at the time of purchase. Knowing of the "possibility" of major engine problems, I couldn't sell the vehicle to a friend/relative or even a dealer without fully informing them. Unfortunately, I think I'm in the minority in that regard. The "long term" costs of this could negate any savings gained in the original transaction.

I personally have gotten burned in some deals, chalk it up to experience and am better prepared the next time around. But I'm not looking to get even at the other person's expense. Eventually this sorta stuff catches up with you and for me it just not worth the hassle.

I do hope that things work out for houdaman without any further expense. And the worst thing that happens is he has a good car-buying story to tell his friends.

DarkBlue

Here's a thought -

Since this case involves 'misrepresentation' on the 'suspected' basis of prior knowledge of serious problems with the vehicle, what legal presedent may arise from all this?

I ask this because -
1.) Most used cars (in the US) have a sheet attatched to the vehicle that has two sections AS-IS and Warranty.

2.) Even though I have traded many a car/truck, the fact that it was Used was a given, i.e. 'known' fact.

So if, hypothetically, the Toyota dealer won this case, would that mean that anyone who wanted to pruchase a car using a trade-in would have to have it checked out and fixed / certified in order to get a decent value amount on the trade?

Since dealers are in the business of making a profit on every sale, most are going to low ball your trade as much as possible, to maximize their profit (dealer cleanup/prep having been figured as a uniform cost of business).

And setting aside all the moral/ethical posturing, I see this as a potential problem for both consumer and retailer. Peep game:

Consumer - if I have to fix and certify that my current vehicle is problem-free and ready for immediate sale, then why trade it? (Yeah, 'cause I want that new 'XXX'...) If I fixed the problem, then I really don't need a new car 'payment'.

Dealer - If the potential buyer thinks that it's not worth it to trade his/her current vehicle, then the result is no sale and the dealer is sitting on a bunch of new inventory they can't get rid of, and subsequently, goes out of business.

I always thought that their was a certain level of uncertanty in everything. That even buying a 'new' car doesn't guarantee a problem free car (2000 - 2003 TL, anyone?).

So if the dealer can emerge victorious over (this) a used car deal, what does that really means for the rest of us?

gurneyeagle - care to answer that one for me?
(and no, I am not challenging you or being funny with you - I am just curious as to how you see this...)

gurneyeagle

Interesting set of questions DarkBlue.

First off, this case isn't going to set any precedents. It's basically a small claims court case - Civil, not Criminal.

The law governing most transactions are based on the basis of "Good Faith". Not knowing Canadian consumer law, this is all a shot in the dark for me, so bear with me on this. Andrea25 seemed to be up on their laws, but the basic underlying principals should be the same.

Car sales involve negotiation. Buyer vs. Seller In this case a dealer). Each is trying to maximize the benefits of the transaction for themselves. Each is also basing their valuations on what they know about the vehicle. There is a level of Good Faith; i.e. trust necessary for the transaction to consumate.

A vehicle (or anything else) is only worth what the market will pay for it. That's why window stickers list the "suggested retail price". Hot cars get marked-up, slow movers get marked-down.

In the case of a trade-in, there are benchmarks; i.e. Kelly Book values, to help determine a starting point. These values vary depending on the condition of the vehicle.

From there the negotiations begin. If the parties can reach a mutually agreed upon price, a sale occurs. If not, the parties walk away.

At some point, the dealer needs to sell his inventory. Either the demand is there at the price he is asking, or he has to reduce the prices. Simple law of Supply and demand.

In this case, a trade in value for the X5 was based on what houdaman represented as its condition. There is now some some question on the dealers part as to whether houdaman was completely forthright on that part. If the car really has problems, then it isn't worth what they paid h-man. The legal recourse for the dealer is what everyone is now speculating. That's why the lawyers are now involved.

To answer your final question - So if the dealer can emerge victorious over (this) a used car deal, what does that really means for the rest of us?

I would have to go back to what I have been saying all along - be honest and disclose what you know is wrong with your car.

graphicguy

Could cost $15,000? Could? OK, then...if that's the premise they're going under, it could cost nothing, too. Dealership doesn't want to tear down the engine. Fact is (let's deal in facts here), no one knows, not the dealer, not you, not even the mechanic what, if anything, is wrong with the car. This is a total shot in the dark.


Misrepresented the car? It's a used car. It has wear and tear.....just like any used car. What's misrepresented?

Dealership test drove it. Nothing was amiss in their test drive. IF (BIG IF) something is indeed wrong with the BMW, they assessed the value wrong. Simple as that.

houda, do what you want. First, your concience should be clear because you've done nothing wrong. You're not a mechanic. Nor are you a professional auto assessor.

2nd, the dealership is trying to scare you because of your age. Fight back. Tell the dealership the value of their Acura diminished as soon as you drove it out of their lot. Tell them you will gladly take back the BMW if their dealership issues you a bank draft for $10K for the diminished value of the Acura.

Personally, I'd get in touch with whatever media "consumer agency" you have up there with your local newspaper/TV station and tell them how the dealership is trying to strong arm you. That should play well....especially since you're so young and not versed in these types of tactics. If the dealership keeps pushing the issue, and you indeed don't want to deal with it any more, I'd take a sledge hammer to one of the 1/4 panels of the Acura. Tell them to come get their car.

The dealership may or may not have screwed up in assessing a value to the BMW. That's their fault. They want you to pay for a bunch of "what ifs" and their mistake. That's bunk.

gurneyeagle

I don't know graphic, but I think it has already been established that something is wrong with the X5.

As far as what it's going to cost, you're right, no one knows. The dealer seems to be relying on the BMW dealer's service report that it may need a new short block. That is probably worst case scenario, as is the $15,000 amount.

The question about misrepresentation is for the lawyers to decide. The point I've been trying to make for three days now is only if houdaman had disclosed the fact that there was some question to the integrity of the engine, he wouldn't be dealing with this right now. There may (and the court will decide so - not the lawyers and certainly not this Board) not have been any legal obligation for him to do so. We all have our own opinions about the ethics involved.

Right or wrong, this is a mess that h-man probably wished he didn't have to deal with. It is an example of what can happen when you are not completely forthright, whether anyone likes it or not. When you push the truth, sometimes you get bitten. Determining the risk associated with your decisions beforehand, can influence your actions. Life experiences are learning opportunities, you just have to be smart enough to recognize that and use them to the fullest extent.

However, that doesn't change the rules of law, where applicable. Push the envelope, risk getting burned. Unfortunately for h-man, that may be the case here.

I eagerly concede that the ratio of buyers coming out on the short end of a transaction with a used car dealer is way higher than the dealers getting burned. That's a given. Using that knowledge is wise, but it doesn't justify illegal or unethical actions.

Let's spin this further off topic - You are coming up to an on ramp where the person entering the freeway obviously isn't going to yield. What do you do?

Let's say you run into them on purpose. Legally you are in the clear, but you've got a wrecked car, possible injuries, and a lot of unwanted headaches. What if the other person is hurt?

You can be in the right legally, but still have made the wrong decision. In the end, we have a lot more control over what happens to us than a lot of people are willing to accept. Again the word RESPONSIBILITY comes into play.

toynaround

Sorry, no offense but this is alot of bad advice.

1. Asking for 10k for depreciation of the Acura is a waste of time and sends the message you are moran and are unreasonable

2. The TV angle would only generate the same debate you see here. The press would want to dig in and create a high level of controversy. They would not play it one sided for Houdaman, they would attack him for his lack of "full" disclosure. (report from BMW). Why? Because tv ratings outweigh the idea all car dealerships are bad.

3. The sledge hammer to the car is also a very bad idea. You will make this a personal issue for the dealership. Remember they have deaper pockets than you, if you become petty they will make your life a legal hell just because they can.

WdnUlik2no

Now the dealer knows how its customers feel when they sell them a car "AS IS" and it has problems the next day.

You got the service done on the car by a BMW dealer. You did nothing wrong, its the dealer's fault, they accepted the car, signed the paper work, done deal. If dealers can write "AS IS" on a used car why can't you?

GPerlInspire

bmoreTLS

@ ":cop: ethics police"

Anyway, I agree with what the kid is doing. They want to bully you. But like mod said, you might not want to keep telling everyone whats going on here.

Brons2

Did you send a response to the letter back to their lawyer?

davenlei

All I can say is in the end, the only winner in this case will be the lawyers. They will suck out any savings/profit that either side would have realized in this transaction and drive off in their S class Benz after high fiving each other on another job well done.

Do you hear the sucking already????

bluenoser

Three things:

1) I believe the dealer gave you well below the going value for the X5, which means you both accepted the fact that this vehicle may need more than cosmetic repairs.
2) If you did not disable the check engine light, and it was off at the time of transaction, and you had repairs to the vehicle that corrected the check engine light from turning on, then it's reasonable to assume the problem was misdiagnosed and no longer an issue. At that point you are not hiding anything.
3) You could have, in fact, had another diagnosis after the repairs and it would have been clean - now which one is right.

IvorBigOne

Note to self - never buy anything from Houdiniman.


gurneyeagle nails it perfectly. The dealer is only a middleman and the car is going to end up with another person. Sure, you may have screwed the dealer but only because the dealer discovered the problem. It was also possible for the car to be sold on to a buyer and then the problem is discovered. Oops! Now you didn't screw the dealer, you screwed a fellow driver, maybe a friend, your neighbor, a school teacher that saved for 5 years to buy their dream car. It's just not my way of doing business.

Legally, I don't know what the likely outcome will be. From the information presented, it certainly appears that the BMW was taken to a dealer for repair because of an engine problem, and it was known that it wasn't fixed. Houdiniman then rushed to sell it before getting stuck with the cost of repair, and didn't disclose known problems.

If you did this with a house, you would 100% for sure be liable and sued by the new owner. I'm not so sure about this situation, but it's a darn shame that people want to pass along their problems to someone else and run far away. Eventually, you will get screwed by someone with the same ethics as yourself.

"do unto others as you would have them do unto you" can certainly apply to both sides of this argument. How do you want to be treated?

dandhelmick

I have been engrossed all morning with this thread!

Did I miss something? Did BMW say “houdaman your flux capacitor is broken. it needs to be fixed now. It is such a terrible problem we can’t let you leave until it is fixed.” So then houdaman said “f*#k that. put some new spark plugs in it and send me on my way so I can go trade it in, beotch!” it didn’t sound like that’s what happened.

it sounded like there was no conclusive diagnosis of a specific problem.

chill_dog

Houdiniman You think he pulled a fast one, huh?

This is an interesting thread...26 viewing, 12 members (chill_dog, yangkimchi, Thomwarn, mokTL, gurneyeagle, CPR, IvorBigOne, bluenoser, miltcoleman, Ben74, mikef, SpecialFX) 14 guests....lots of first time posters here, too...wonder what about this one compelled them...

Oh yeah, and I thought only Acura's had flux capacitors...BMW's do, too? You learn something new everyday!

Good luck with your impending legal battle houdaman...

gurneyeagle

You pretty much nailed it, there was no conclusive diagnosis of a specific problem - meaning the problem (which did exist) wasn't diagnosed.

In other words, there was some question as to the condition of the engine. Houdaman traded in the car knowing that. The dealer accepted the trade after inspecting the car and agreeing to a price with h-man.

I'm not sure the dealer has any recourse, but that doesn't releave h-man of some responsibility either.

davenlei said it best "the only winner in this case will be the lawyers" The money h-man thought he could save by not disclosing the problem, or fixing the car, is going to be spent on lawyers and possible court costs.

I can hear the dealer GM now:

Trade differential between an X5 and a TL - $5,800

Replacing the short block on an X5 - $15,000

Putting the squeeze on a 19 year-old punk who tried to slip a bum car by us - PRICELESS!

eneg

The proof is right here in this thread.
It seems that in every other note, they feel that they have to tell us that they only buy new cars, and they "Thank God" for that!

Eneg

IvorBigOne

I don't know. I just find it more than suspicious that the car is taken in for an engine problem, dealer tells him the engine needs to be opened up to find the cause, then it's traded a week later and the undisclosed problems are dumped on someone else. Not cool at all.

You might have been the buyer of that car, how would that work out for you all? Gosh, you should have known about the previous engine issue. Too bad.

In a different era, this kid would be taken out back and thrashed, cars exchanged, lesson learned, and it's all forgotten. Now the lawyers will get their pound of flesh and the kid might take a bigger beating in what he values more than his reputation - money.

gurneyeagle

Proof of what?

davenlei

Eh??

Were you quoting me by accident? I don't see where I said that?

jcondon

To those that asked about car dealers doing something bad to you personally.

My first new car was a 1995 Accord. It was a lease. I shopped 2 or 3 dealers. And went with the best price. When I signed the paperwork it looked like it might be slightly off in MY favor. I wasn't sure. But, I signed it. Next day (I think if not soon) they called me and said there was a problem with my lease and I needed to come to sign a new lease. I asked what the problem was. They figured out that THEY made a mistake in my favor. Ok fair enough. I go in and the manager (not sure which one exactly) and he tries to get me to sign a new lease that is now more then we agreed to.

I had the original quote with me and said that isn't right either. He said we can't do it for that price. I said well then I will just go with the lease I already signed. He said we haven't sent it into American Honda yet so its not binding. He said the difference is only $400 (or something like that). I told him either honor your original price quote or shove the car. He was 'surprised' that I would return the car over such a small amount. I said then you eat the difference.

He thought about it and I got it for the original agreed to price.

If I had to do it over I would have not budged off the deal I actually signed.

I took my car there once for service and paid too much for a basic service. I have NEVER been back. Bought another Honda after that from another local dealer.

graphicguy

BINGO!

I've had more than my share of experience with BMW dealerships. They'll drop a tranny to change the oil, and charge you for it, if you let them.

Of course, I'm exagerating, but this particular BMW mechanic doesn't know what, if any problem, exists with the car. He's shooting in the dark. And you want houda to tell the other dealership that something's wrong with the BMW when the BMW mechanic can't even tell them what's wrong?

PUHLLLLEEEEZE!

gurney....I respect what you're trying to say, but if that was the case, every time we trade in a used car, we'd have to tell every dealer "hey, this car is used.....there might be something wrong with it. Don't know what it might be, since it's got some miles on it and there's some wear and tear. Plus, none of the many computer sensors....enough of them to control a NASA Saturn rocket, that monitor the whole vehicle, are lit up. But you might want to tear down the drivetrain, just to be certain I'm wrong."

As far as taking a sledge hammer to the 1/4 panel, I was being facetious. I don't expect houda to do that. I might, but I don't want him to do it.

I'd go after this strong arm dealer with a vengeance. There's nothing any business hates more than bad publicity. Going to the media would give them exactly that.

The original selling dealership fired the first shot over the bow by threatening legal remedies. As my much loved and dearly departed Father would say...."never start a fight, but you damn well better finish them".

Hang in there, houda. First one to blink.....looses!!!!

gurneyeagle

Has a world-wide epidemic of A.D.D. broken out?

Everyone who has ever owned a car has stories about dealers, I can name four instances off the top of my head. I've been screwed in the past by two Ford Dealers, a Honda dealer, and a Toyota dealer.

Does that mean I should "take the offensive" and try and rip-off my Acura dealer? Come on, you guys can't be that cynical.

gurneyeagle

graph - my previous post wasn't directed at you.

All I have been saying is that by not disclosing what he knew about the potential problem (remember, the dealer thought it might need a new short block) houdaman opened himself up to what's going on now.

Knowing that the problem was yet to be diagnosed, he should have either:

a) let the dealer identify the problem and a fix; or
b) get a second opinion on what the problem was.

At that point, you either fix the car, or at least tell the potential purchaser (dealer of private individual) there is a problem. Sure it will cost you some bucks, but look at what he is facing now.

Yea, I know to some of the guys here, that sounds stupid, but look what our poor hero is facing now. Even if he prevails (the dealer is playing hard ball right now), he's still got some legal fees and mental wear and tear. Let's just hope a judgement isn't reached where he also has to fork out major bucks.

Donte99TL

Sound like houdaman is pulling a jackmove on the dealer. He knew cyl 1 is leaking 28%. That's not normal.

ludachrisvt

iTrader: (2)

gurneyeagle

lud:

You win the post of the day award - a free leak test on the #1 cylinder of any car of your choice, plus a free "Get Out of Court" card.

Good night guys, gurney's checkin' out.

jcondon

Maybe not an epidemic but, you seem to have a touch of A.D.D. Someone claimed that people unfairly hate car dealerships due third party stories. So I thought I would respond with a story that really happened to me. You can choose to believe it or think I made it up. I really don't care. I have another story that happened to my mother too. The whole new / used car industry is very shady. Other then a house or boat were else do you see so many games played with the price of a car? They play games with interest rates, trade in values, holdback, dealer kick backs etc.

The only point I was trying to make is they have a shadey reputation for a reason. Not just a few bad cases getting blown out of proportion.


I believe the original poster suspected something more serious might be wrong. He traded the car. The dealer should have probably checked it out more throughly. Looks like they low balled him on the trade and where happy he took it. They now claim it might be 15K in repairs. Probably at most 5K in parts. Rest in inflated labor costs. They could probably fix it for far less then 15K. Or likely what they will do (or even have done) is to sell it an auction as is.

I am not saying what he did was moral or not. But, don't expect me to feel sorry for this dealership.

automag928

ERNT!!!!! Wrong! Let me get a little more in depth about this leakdown test for some of you that arent as technically into a engine...not saying im some engine all knowing mechanic, but I've assisted with putting a motor together, doing several leak down tests (several on good motors, a few on bad motors and one on my motor), swapping clutches, intakes, headers...all on cars with alot more HP than a x5 or TL

Anyways, back on topic...The person that responded to my thread about a "spark plug could have been loose causing the 28% leakdown" that is WRONG. When you do a leakdown test, what you are doing is taking the sparkplug OUT, and pressurizing your cylinder with an air pump/compressor. You have spark plug threaded recepticle, you screw in where the spark plug goes and with a big gauge on it, and you pressurize the cylinder...NOW....on a normal everyday motor build by the big auto makers you are going to have 7-8% leakdown normally...Race motors are built with a little higher tolerance and are typically less - regardless you will always have a little leak in EVERY cylinder. Ok, so when you pressurize this cylinder, you are going to hear an air leak somewhere (I am skipping a BUNCH of steps and details to make this post a little shorter), and that air leak is either going to point to an intake valve (air coming back towards your air filter), an exhaust valve (air flowing out your exhaust pipe), piston blow-by creating crankcase pressure, possibly enough to shoot the oil dipstick out, etc etc...For the most part, you can almost isolate WHERE the air is leaking out TO then tracing it back to where the air is coming FROM in the cylinder...
With a 28% leakdown on cyl 1, I guaran-damm-tee they could hear that air hissin like crazy somewhere...But also, with a 28%, he should have noticed *somthing* a miss with the drivablity...

My point....if everything Houda is saying is true...Maybe the BMW techs are incorrect in their assesment, and maybe someone SHOULD open up the motor, or AT LEAST repeat the leakdown test...(Houda - offer that up to 'yota...someone there should be able to do a leakdown on it...they arent difficult, and i promise they will have the tools necessary.)

Good luck!

your_mom

So what you're saying, automag928, is that the Toyota dealer should have noticed something wrong when driving the car?

fast-tl

...but they didn't and neither did h-man, according to him. How did Toyota get wind that there might be a problem after all?

subinf

"Yesterday I get a call (March 6) from the salesman saying that we have a problem. They took the car to the BMW dealer because the check engine was on, and the BMW dealer reconized the car, and printed off my invoice for them.
I replied" Ill call you tomorrow" and ended the call there."


From the very first page.

automag928

Absolutely...it should have felt like it was running on 7 cylinders, low on power, stumbling some with WOT acceleration...because you wouldnt be getting proper combustion in that one cylinder, air would be leaking out of it... It would have felt "different" some how for sure. I blew the exhaust valve on a #1 cyl on an inline 4 cyl.... It had a hole the size of a peanut in it, leakdown showed us where the problem was, and my car for sure felt like a 3 cyl when it was on...The idle was off, acceleration was hestiant and not smooth...The car didnt run right, and get this...I didnt even get a constant CEL, just a quick blinking one on a short drive, which we were able to figure out from some clues from the dealer service dept, was a sign for random misfire (the end of my spark plug was melted off, flew through the exhaust valve, and out the exhaust! )...

Hence why I think, either the problem needs a more thorough examination, or they may have screwed up on the leakdown testing and the CEL is just a coinciding factor...

moat

My 2 cents..

BMW told you the car was OK. So as far as you knew, the truck was repaired. There is no problem, you just wanted to trade it in because you weren't happy with the BMW.

Mark