Awesome dealership # 3487

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

once again they did tried to correct it and called and I'm sure emailed.....he ignored because he's a giant dousche.

so the dealership should get screwed just because they were the sellers, am I right?
That is correct.

Signed contract.

Only the buyer has the 30 days (in CA at least) to return the car for whatever reason.
 
At what point was it ok for the dealership to call the police on a stolen car?

What if the guy bought the car he believed he paid for and the dealership wasn't just dicking him around to get more money out of it? This is a common practice for some dealerships.

While there is a handful of good dealerships there's way more f-ed up ones. Try researching motorcycle dealerships....... Bottom line, the contract is what it is, if the dealership wanted to fight him they should have taken him to court, NOT called the police on a false claim.

That dealer is going to get ate up by a judge over this.

P.S this is why I buy 100% of my autos with money in hand. I only talk OTD prices with dealerships. Keeps things VERY clear on the deal we are agreeing on.
 
Last edited:
once again they did tried to correct it and called and I'm sure emailed.....he ignored because he's a giant dousche.

so the dealership should get screwed just because they were the sellers, am I right?

They tried to "correct it" (i.e. alter the contract to account for THEIR mistake) after the customer was presented with said contract, agreed to it, signed it, and drove off in the car. Explain to me why the customer should be OBLIGATED to sign a new, more expensive contract. If the dealership were to call and explain the situation and the customer believed the story and felt guilty about it and WANTED to pay the additional amount, then great, but why are you acting like this is the customer's fault or that he should be OBLIGATED to pay that amount?

And it says right in the article that he went on a cruise the week after buying the car, so he wasn't "ignoring them because he's a douche". And if I found myself in this situation, I'd ask them if I had any legal obligation to pay that amount. If they said yes, I'd ask them to prove it. If they can't prove it then I'd ignore their asses too. THEY fucked up. Not him. He just agreed to a price and signed off on it.

I mean, I understand that losing that 5k might have been a big deal for the dealership, but fire the salesman or the manager that fucked up the contract. What they did to this guy is just despicable. They took a situation that could have generated positive word-of-mouth for the dealership and a possible repeat customer and fucked it up to the point where it's going to do nothing but generate TERRIBLE publicity for the dealership.

So yes, the sellers ABSOLUTELY should get "screwed" in this situation. The customer didn't screw them. They screwed themselves...
 
And yes, I agree that he's over-compensating with the lawsuit, but I think that's the point...he's asking for all that so that they'll make him a compensatory offer of some kind.

And yes, this guy might be a bit of a pussy, but if I was harassed, wrongly arrested, and had to spend time in jail over something like this I'd seek some sort of compensation as well...
 
Last edited:
Yeaaaah... don't see how you're defending the dealership.

They screwed up on the contract
They wrongfully had him arrested, seized the car, made him walk home
He will always have an arrest on his record for theft
His reputation is screwed from being arrested

If I was the customer, I'd be suing too- because it would mean the end of my career, even though I didn't do anything wrong. All because the dealership was being a dick.
 
Ive been screwed by one dealership, and a second tried to get me too. From my experience, the car salesmen are the lowest form of life. Its usually the bank that helps me, while the stealership stands behind their under-educated sleeze.
 
Ive been screwed by one dealership, and a second tried to get me too. From my experience, the car salesmen are the lowest form of life. Its usually the bank that helps me, while the stealership stands behind their under-educated sleeze.
IDK how it is every where, but in my experience the salesmen are usually alright guys. They would sell everyone cars at invoice if they could because most are compensated more on volume than on one particular car. It's the managers that are the guys you have to watch for. Of course, I'm sure this varies between dealerships and new vs used car lots.

That being said, I'd still only buy a car from a private party. MAYBE from a dealership I worked at if the discount was good enough.
 
The guy that sold me the corolla saw me coming. He knew I needed a car. But it was my own fault for saying yes. When I bought the Veloster there was absolutely no pressure. I put a down payment on it after driving it a few times and then a week later I took it home.
 
it's all in how we look at it. I agree you you guys about the arrest being a little extreme but either way, the guy had to have known the dealership was making a mistake before he drove off.
- he walked home? yeah I guess he has no family or friends....
- at the end of the day the dealership will loose it's ass because, well they are a big bad dealership that sells cars and screws people. If a fat tard can sue a fast food company I'm almost 100% they will let him have some free money from this.
- I'm not "defending" the dealership, simply seeing from a different angle other than "salesman are the lowest form of life mentality". We'll see what happens.
- also the corrected contract wasn't simply the most expensive....it was the right one. If the price didn't match I'm sure neither did some other items such as vin and such. He signed promisary note for one car and decided on the more expensive one later. We don't know how exactly the deal went down but I doubt it's that cut and dry as some of us are reading it. When we provide quotes the figures match the vin and it tells us what the selling price/invoice so for them to miss that they had to have had the wrong car or just totally dropped the ball....once again very hard to oversee a mistake like that with the amount of people that price has to go through.


Anyway, in a sense i do agree with you fellas but not on all aspects....so we agree to disagree. :)
 
Seems to me like the customer is in the wrong here, technically.

He signed a contract for one vehicle, came in and exchanged it. Now the sales manager "agreed" to cancel the first sale but nothing was ever said about it being put in writing.

So technically, he has yet to "sign" a contract for the blue Transverse he has now.

I think the customer might lose this one here...
 
Seems to me like the customer is in the wrong here, technically.

He signed a contract for one vehicle, came in and exchanged it. Now the sales manager "agreed" to cancel the first sale but nothing was ever said about it being put in writing.

So technically, he has yet to "sign" a contract for the blue Transverse he has now.

I think the customer might lose this one here...

That's not the way I read the article. I read it that they drew up a new contract for him post-exchange which he signed off on, then realized their error and tried to get him to agree to an amended contract with a higher price. If that's the way it went down, then it's their fault and I don't see why he should have to pay more for their mistake.

If it happened the way you described it (he's driving the better Traverse and is still contracted for the cheaper one), then yes, they have a case...
 
This article says that the buyer signed a final contract on the black Traverse: Chevy dealer sells car for wrong price, apologizes after having buyer arrested

A Virginia man spent four hours in jail after purchasing a Chevrolet Traverse from Priority Chevrolet in Chesapeake, VA. The dealer's sales staff accidentally sold the SUV to Danny Sawyer for $5,600 less than they should have, and when Sawyer refused to sign a new, more expensive contract for the correct amount, the dealership called the local police alleging the buyer had stolen the vehicle. Law enforcement then picked Sawyer up and held him for four hours before getting the situation straight.

Dennis Ellmer, president of Priority Chevrolet, says he owes Sawyer an apology on behalf of the dealership, and had intended to do right by the buyer by letting him have the vehicle at the agreed-upon price. But Sawyer's lawyer says it's a little too late for saying, 'sorry.' The briefly-incarcerated owner has filed two lawsuits against the dealer, accusing the business of malicious prosecution, slander, defamation and abuse of process. All told, the suits seek a total of $2.2 million in damages, plus attorney fees.

That $5,600 seems awfully cheap now.

The lawsuit says Sawyer originally purchased a blue Traverse on May 7, but took the SUV back the next day for a black one. The dealer's sales manager made the swap, allegedly without saying anything about a price differential between the two. Either way, Sawyer signed a final contract for around $34,000 when the vehicle he took home had an actual price of closer to $39,000. On June 15, Sawyer was taken into custody by police, but the Commonwealth dropped the charges after finding insufficient evidence to pursue the case.
 
Back
Top