rstark

Let it go to court. They all ready made the deal and you signed the contract. They have no case. It was their responsibility to asses the value of your car and they made a mistake. You should not have to pay for their mistake. BTW, what's the blue book value of your car and the blue book trade in value?

żGotJazz?

It's actually very simple. (... and I'm surprised that Ted didn't mention this.)

What occured here, once you get down to the basics?

(1) You came into the dealership
(2) You and the salesperson chatted it up for awhile
(3) You drove around in a TL and fell in love
(4) You showed them your trade-in

Here come the key points now ... pay attention!

KEY POINT #1: (5) Their estimator (and very possibly their service department) took a close look at your car and provided their estimation of the car's value. If they came up with the wrong value, it is completely their fault. Especially when they got the model type wrong, which is too basic - they almost certainly ran your VIN through CARFAX or an equivilent to see if there was any known accidents. The VIN also tells them what type of vehicle it is. Thus, if they did something wrong, they should be chewing out their estimation staff. Strongly suggest that they dock the estimator staff's pay whatever amount they fell short - YOU don't pay for THEIR STAFF's mistake.

KEY POINT #2: (6) At this point you haggled over the price. You offered. They counter offered. And so on, and so on, until there was signed paperwork provided by the Sales Manager with their final offer to you. They make the final, agreed-upon offer, not you. When you sign the official paperwork, you are agreeing with their prices as shown on the paperwork (which is why you need to read it closely - they can screw you here if you aren't careful). They made the final offer. Plain and simple. Point this out as well.

You should have no concerns on this issue.

Now, I have a question for you, Mr. 2004MT6TL: Why the heck did you you "debag" your Volvo for? I'm seriously curious ... please respond to this.

campIIIMAF

return the TL. and null the contract . . . go to another dealer. Better yet, do a little research and tell them that your TL is going for less someplace else and they should adjust those numbers too.
Hell, I bought my TL and 2 weeks later it was $50 less per month. jeeesh.

Modeler

First of all, they are bluffing. They will not take you to court, because they know they don't have a case. You're right, they are just trying to intimidate you into giving in. Small claims court is not a big deal; it will NOT take you much time to go through this. The judge is likely to dismiss the case at the first appearance because it's obvious to a 3 year-old that the dealership does not have a case!

Tristero

Option 2 is not so bad: go somewhere else. You are right they will be taking a serious hit.

BUT, do you really think that these untrustworthy, duplicitous SOBs won't concoct something else?

I wouldn't trust 'em. LEt them take you to court at this point; my guess is that you will be headed that way anyway....

good luck

fla-tls

Follow the advice of your lawyer. If you can return the car and get back your trade and the total ordeal costs you nothing, then you at least made out with a free week or two with an '04 TL. Consider it the longest test drive in history.

You've learned a lesson to never go back to that dealer again - and to bad mouth them wherever you go - online or offline. Leave it at that, and get the car for cheaper somewhere else.

BTW - what's the name of the dealer again, so we all know which one to avoid?

Lore

Gold Coast Acura is the lame of this bad dealer.

They're bluffing -- they don't have a case. Before you even do a THING I would highly suggest talking to another lawyer and explain your case to see what they suggest.

A contract is a contract, and small claims court really does not take a whole lot of time to get through. (Hence, small claims). Just for the principle of things I would hang on to the car and let them do what they will -- there are fees for filing in small claims, so they'd be losing even more money. I doubt that they would go that route -- they have a helluva lot more to lose in court. Their reputation has already been smeared.

nick79

their problem, be happy and drive ur new 2004tl. the court thing is only a scare tactic.

J0KER

I would call their bluff!!
They are the ones who are pressuring you with a deadline to resolve that matter. Your slate is clean, so you need to get the ball back in your court!
Next time they call, tell them you are not only going to not agree to their time limit, you are going to require more time to consult with your attorney. Don't answer your phone for a couple days, then call them back and explain that the contract that has been signed is binding, and they do not have a leg to stand on.
If they threaten to take you to court, say fine... If this ever makes it to trial, they don't have a chance as Tom mentioned, your peers will be on the jury.
Call their bluff!!
Edit - I almost forgot to mention, the fact that they have already come down $1,000 should be telling you something

Lore

Agreed -- if they really had a right to the money they would have stuck by the $3k. Believe me, this has SCAM and SHADY written all over it. DO NOT RETURN YOUR CAR.

2004MT6TL

Just to get a clear understanding, this car was re-badged from a "2.5T" to a "T5" This is the major underlying issue, they think I delibertly tired to get more money out of the car. Like if I had a Mercedes E320 and rebadged it as an E430. Expcept both the "2.5T" and "T5" are both 2.5 litre displacement, so you cannot tell the difference between to two unless you call the manufacture with the VIN. I changed the badge myself from "2.5T" to "T5", this could be my down fall in court. In Ventura County we do not have a Jury in Small Claims, only a judge. :lol1: I'll try to make a mock up of what the form looked like and post it...

campIIIMAF

you've just lost your case. go for the 2g while their still in a good mood.

berlinrl

I've been following this thread because the whole story is so outrageous.
Until you most recent un-badging comment, I agreed with everyone else . . .
the dealer did not have a leg to stand on, and if they made a bad business
deal, they'd need to 'eat it'.

But the fact that you re-badged the car . . . some may interpret this as an
action of willful deceit. I still think you'd win in court since they already
signed all the papers. But IMO, this does change the complexion of this
case a bit.

scottt

Whoa, wait a sec, YOU(?) changed the badging on the back of the car from 2.5T to T5? Big oops in my opinion. You said you signed a document stating that you did not modify the car in any way. Sounds like a mod to me.

No different than if I take a PowerMac G4 that runs at 400mhz and overclock it to 500. Then I sell it as a 500, with no mention of the overclocking. I'm misrepresenting what it actually is.

J0KER

Oh oh, the plot thickens.
I would go back to the dealer, and meet with the GM. They have come down to $2,000.. I'd agree to part of the blame, and try to get them to split the $3K. Get them to meet in the middle with $1,500, as both of you are at fault.

Lore

You're telling me that the dealer did not bother running the VIN to find out what the car really was or if the car was involved in some shady accident? Even the average Joe knows that they need to do a CarFax report, which would list the car's actual model.

But now that you've admitted the re-badge, you do have a slightly more complicated case. Did you, during any point of the transaction, indicate the car was something that it was not? For example, if the sales person is talking to himself as he's filling out the form:

"Hmm, okay.. a T5. Black, with gray inter.."
"Excuse me, that's just a badge. It's actually a 2.5T"
"Ah, okay, so sign here."

jrudd

RE-badging is a lot different than DE-badging...which is what you said you did earlier. They would win based on you misrepresenting the car. Ask yourself this question, "At any point during the transaction did you think dang they are giving me a lot for this car?" If the answer is yes, then you know what the right thing to do is...

TLover

What does your paperwork say the car is? According to my dealer, ANY time they have a trade-in over $5000, they HAVE TO run a CarFax.

jrudd

That is on a dealer by dealer basis...not required by law or Acura

elessar

They're definitely trying to rip you off, if they suddenly changed the amount to $2000! I would tell 'em to go :thefinger and say you'll be calling Acura Corporate about this - i.e. call their bluff. I very much doubt they would actually take you to court, since it really doesn't sound like they have a case.

2004MT6TL

http://home.earthlink.net/~arimattson/formmockup.jpg

TLover

True, but I have a hard time believing the dealer didn't run a CarFax. Also, his paperwork should clearly spell out what his trade-in was.

AirlineMuseum.c

I was about to post something, which has now changed that I have read you RE-badged the car instead of DE-badging it as you originally said. Now what I will say is this:
First of all, I'm not a lawyer, nor is anyone on here who has expressed an opinion, with one exception (the name of whom I have forgotten). That person and your actual lawyer in CA are really the only people you should actually listen to.
That aside, I will offer my opinion based on what seems logical from the facts presented.
You said you signed a form which was a statement indicating two things.
1. The car was not in any accident.
2. You have not modified the car.

The second point, if this is actually what it says, is going to be a serious problem for you. When I first thought that you just DE-badged the car, I was going to say this might be a technicality that if argued well in court could be your downfall. Now that I know you RE-badged it's even more of a problem for you. Again, I'm not a lawyer, but I am confident the arguement would go like this:
You altered the labels on the car - why?
To give the outward appearance that the car was a 5T and not the 2.5T it really is.
So you are attempting to represent the car to the general public as something that it is not?
Yes.
How is that different from representing it to the dealer as something it is not?
and so on.. you get the point.

This, along with the fact that you signed a statement saying you did not alter the car, makes you look really guilty of attempting to defraud the dealer.

Ok, so there are a few other issues to deal with:
1. VIN check. This appears to have been an oversight by the dealer, but in my opinion, it seems to me that they took you signature as validation that there were no accidents and there were no modifications, with the intention of validating the VIN later. Most likely they DID check the VIN later, which revealed the car was actually a 2.5T, and not the 5T they thought and they promptly went after you. Now you know why they had you sign something stating the car wasn't in an accident or modified - it gives them a legal out to go after you if you were lying, which they did.
2. The $3000 to $2000 switch. Many have said this was a move by the dealer proving they are shady. I agreed before I knew you RE-badged, but now I'm thinking it's more likely that they indeed don't want to deal with Small Claims Court any more than you, but knowing they are right, they decided to just write off the $1000 difference to resolve this issue quickly.

Finally, based on what I know and believe about this, I would say your best bet is to pay the $2000 (or try to negotiate it a little lower if you can as someone else suggested) and be done. I would not recommend taking the option of returning the TL for two reasons. First, as someone said you don't know what they might have done to your Volvo and second since the car really is a 2.5T, you will not get what you originally got as a trade in from the dealer. I guess you get a new car out of the deal, but what if the new dealer gives you even less for your trade in than your net value after paying this dealer the $2000? Most likely the best you will get from any other dealer would be the original $24500 that the original dealer would have given you had the car not been RE-badged. The net result is that you would be paying $1000 (or more possibly) for a new car - probably not worth it.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do. It's a shame you dragged this dealer's name through the mud when most likely they were not doing anything shady on this deal.

elessar

Just to be clear, I posted my response and THEN saw the post about the T5 RE-badging, which got posted while I was writing my message. I think it's an entirely different story now - I'd say they actually do have a bit of a case, probably enough to warrant them taking you to court. And needless to say, I no longer recommend giving them the finger. Yes, they should have run the VIN number, but now I think they at least have a basis to argue that you bear some of the blame.

jrudd

Believe it or not CarFax's are not standard protocol, each one costs money so dealers only do one if they feel there is a reason. Such as an indicator that there was an accident. Also, not running the VIN until later is not abnormal either, it may not be smart but its what happens. You would be surprised how busy everyone is when cars are being sold. This is one of the first instances I have heard about that running a VIN early would have been good.

TLGator

The re-badging of the car changes everything.

The CarFax factor is irrelevant. By analogy, if I write a bad check and the store owner decides I have an honest face and doesn't use Vericheck or one of those services, I'm STILL guilty of writing a bad check and I can STILL be held liable for that.

Frankly, Mr. 2004MT6TL, I'm a little disappointed that you sort of misled everyone in this thread...and now that you've finally come clean, it seems the dealer may have a legitimate complaint that you misled them too...

I won't even offer any advice. Others have said enough.

Formula 350

I have read this thread with some fun....

However, I think that you are the quilty one here. You DECEIVED US!!

Your statement of debadging was one thing. If it was true, then they do not have a case as everybody said. You got a lot of sympathy because we do not trust car dealers.

NOW, you come and ADMIT that you CHANGED the badge making it look like a different vehicle. If I was on a jury, or the judge you would lose the case.

2004MT6TL

I really don't know why some of you thought that I "DE-badged" the car, in the first post it says I changed it from "2.5T" to "T5"

fast-tl

Hopefully we now see that it's re-/debadging isn't even worth the trouble! Why try to make it appear as something it's not. It's just pretentious. And that little "mod" just cost a whole bunch of cash and confusion!

fast-tl

QUOTE: Okay, I'm not innocent in this tho, ***I had debagged the car***, but shouldn't they have checked out the VIN before closing the deal?

Now you don't even remember what you posted? Who's really lying here?

jrudd

Read the first post....

Modeler

No, you stated in your first post that you "de-badged" the car and said nothing about "re-badging" it as T5. You have no case, in my opinion, as it would be very easy for the dealer to argue that you intentionally tried to deceive them!

Frohlich

Maybe because that is exactly what you said in your first post "I had debagged the car," :banghead:

Aegir

IMHO...I think the ethical thing to do here is pay the $2K. The car was misrepresented. It's a tough spot for both you and the dealer, and they are willing to eat $1000 of the difference to make it easier. I think in an earlier post you mentioned they were willing to set up an installment plan to pay the difference back. They don't sound like bad guys here. You could push them legally to eat the rest, or you could stick them with a 'no longer new' car and have to look for a new one. Both of those options could end up costing you more than 2K - in cash and headaches - and I don't think either choice is an ethical one. Drive down to the dealer, explain that it was a misunderstanding and you want to straighten it out, and I think everyone can walk away happy. Good luck!

RhodeRunner

They gave you the option to return the car.... I would take that option. I do not think that the courts would look kindly upon your changing the badging. Almost like false advertising. Any reasonable person would see the badging and assume that the car is what the badging claims it to be. Dealers usually have buyers in place for the trade before making the deal for the new car. I imagine the dealer called the wholesaler, or whomever, and told them they have a T5. They then negotiated a price, from which your trade in number was derived. The wholesaler probably got the car from the dealer and said "whoa" this isn't a T5- the deal is off.

Troy36

It sounds like your best bet now is to return the TL, get your money back, and then shop around for a new one.

2004MT6TL

I stand corrected regarding the first post (I did say "de-badging" not "re-badging") I agree that the ethical thing to do here is to pay the $2000, that way both parties will be happy. I thought the $27,500 they were giving me for my trade was fair considering I got the Volvo for $34k new and had also got a quote from VW for $26k trade-in (before it was re-badged). I aploigize for using the wrong terminoigy as far as "de-badging" or "re-badging". Thank you for your comments (negitive or positive, I still value them), I will let you know how this turns out. :tflamer: (feel free to flame ).

Tristero

Now we should send this post to the ethicist at the New York Times--it would be interesting to get the response.

But, really, is it ethical of the dealer to demand 3K and threaten court; then 2k and threaten court; offer a deadline for action? None of that seems very reasonable or ethical. Of course, ethics demands that we behave ethically even when faced with SOBs. But, really. The transaction is over. The dealer screwed up. I am not sure using scare tactics to recover $$ lost because of an employee's f---up is really that ethical. Seller's remorse is just that--remorse.

I would not under any circumstances, however, make the dealer any offer; they could use that against our fair friend in small claims court!

AirlineMuseum.c

WHAT? Was it ethical for the original poster to change the badging on the car and effectively try to pass it off as a more valuable car than it was? Consider the reverse. Let's say someone walked into a Volvo dealer seeking a 5T, paid MSRP for it and found out soon after that the car provided was actually a 2.5T, but with the 5T labels on it. How quickly would that consumer have contacted the State's AG Office, BBB, and his/her own attorney. Same thing here. The dealer got screwed due to misinformation and is trying to get the situation rectified - if a little force or aggressivness is needed to do that, it's totally justified, reasonable, and certainly ethical.

2004MT6TL

I agree, I would not want to happen to me. Believe me, it was not my intent to "screw" the dealer. I never thought about them thinking it was a different car than it was after getting the 26k quote from VW. The dealer said it was an honest mistake on both our parts and is willing to resolve it with an offer we both now think is fair. Thanks.