Dealerhip totals owner's Camaro ZL1, won't replace

[Drew99GT]

I like this angle from a poster on the Camaro forum. I feel bad for the guy, but he's asking for more than he legally deserves; he's trying to get out of a hole financially. If the dealership burned down, would he still be asking for a brand new car???

"I cannot believe some of the postings... I guess it isn't surprising knowing what society has created by the "Entitlements ". Seems everyone wants to sue someone and think they are entitled to more than they have. I do know one thing... it isn't causing the dealership any hardship and it shouldn't. Man bought a new car for 60k or so.. drives it 10k and wants them to buy him a new one. Horse manure. Just because he THINKS he has the dealership for some kind of a mistake they made. What if the place caught fire, tornado ripped it to Kansas. The same result.. simply an insurance claim. Who gives a rip what kind of car it was? I support the dealership in their decision how to handle it and frankly it is out of their hands. That is exactly what Insurance is for. Let him sue the Geico Lizard. This whole fiasco has went clear out of control and the owner thinks all the hoopla on the web will get him more. It won't and shouldn't , and IF it does it only shows how ignorant society has become."

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I feel bad for the guy, but he's asking for more than he legally deserves; he's trying to get out of a hole financially.

I don't get the impression that he's looking for anything more than he 'deserves' but I haven't read through all of his posts.

He's not looking for a new car or special treatment, not that he hasn't already received 'way more' than he expected.

 

[Drew99GT]

I've looked through that thread and the guy hasn't said what the disposition is of his insurance is, or maybe I missed it. Did they total his car and give him fair market value, and he still has some loan amount withstanding after that? If so, and he made this purchase as an "investment", WOW.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I feel bad for the guy, but he's asking for more than he legally deserves; he's trying to get out of a hole financially.

I don't get the impression that he's looking for anything more than he 'deserves' but I haven't read through all of his posts.

He's not looking for a new car or special treatment, not that he hasn't already received 'way more' than he expected.


He deserves the fair market value of the car prior to wreck; nothing more, nothing less. [censored] happens. He wants the dealer to essentially pay him for what he paid for the car. That's not how it works!

 

[martinq]

How he purchased and why is really irrelevant. The story here is the interaction between the dealer and the customer.

 

[Duffman77]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I like this angle from a poster on the Camaro forum. I feel bad for the guy, but he's asking for more than he legally deserves; he's trying to get out of a hole financially. If the dealership burned down, would he still be asking for a brand new car???

"I cannot believe some of the postings... I guess it isn't surprising knowing what society has created by the "Entitlements ". Seems everyone wants to sue someone and think they are entitled to more than they have. I do know one thing... it isn't causing the dealership any hardship and it shouldn't. Man bought a new car for 60k or so.. drives it 10k and wants them to buy him a new one. Horse manure. Just because he THINKS he has the dealership for some kind of a mistake they made. What if the place caught fire, tornado ripped it to Kansas. The same result.. simply an insurance claim. Who gives a rip what kind of car it was? I support the dealership in their decision how to handle it and frankly it is out of their hands. That is exactly what Insurance is for. Let him sue the Geico Lizard. This whole fiasco has went clear out of control and the owner thinks all the hoopla on the web will get him more. It won't and shouldn't , and IF it does it only shows how ignorant society has become."


You are right and wrong. You are right that he is not entitled to getting more than the car is worth and the car is not worth what the owner thinks it is.

You are wrong that this wont or has not affected the dealership. The formula for dealing with these situations is to run to the media (in what ever form) and get your story on how you were screwed by a business. The momentum of the story builds and eventually the business caves regardless of the circumstance because the PR hurts more than the money. Society has gotten too in tune with what people feel they or others deserve, not what the legal or financial obligations actually are.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: martinq
How he purchased and why is really irrelevant. The story here is the interaction between the dealer and the customer.


How he purchased the car, why, and more importantly, what insurance he has is the only things that are relevant! If he overpaid for the ZL1 to the point of having to trade in 2 other cars and get a loan, and now he's upside down in the loan, that is HIS problem and his problem alone. Now he's whining and crying and trying to get the internet to essentially do his dirty work in bullying the dealer to cough it up the money to cover the loan amount, essentially. he basically said it himself! They offered 5 grand plus the 2012 ZL1 they found to replace his; he wanted 11 grand on the deal. Hmmmmmmmmm, Maybe he's 11 grand upside down in the loan???

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: Duffman77

You are wrong that this wont or has not affected the dealership.


I already said the Dealer's only option really is to cut the guy a deal to the point he gets on the internet and local media and says First State Chevrolet is a great dealership, they fixed the situation, and everyone should go buy a car from them! That is the dealer's only option now that the owner has gotten society and the internet to bully the dealer. That's a morally bankrupt thing to do IMO (especially if the guy is upside down on the loan); if the dealer loses a ton of business because of this, how do you think all the other employees who work there will feel if they have negative financial consequences?

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
How he purchased the car, why, and more importantly, what insurance he has is the only things that are relevant!

If I took a car to an official dealer for some warranty work I would have certain expectations on what I would receive when the work was done. If my car got wrecked under their care I would expect them to take care of it. I would not expect to have to compromise or fight to get it resolved. I guess those who are well versed in legalese, insurance, etc might have a different opinion.


Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Now he's whining and crying and trying to get the internet to essentially do his dirty work in bullying the dealer to cough it up the money to cover the loan amount, essentially. he basically said it himself!

Can you post that info?

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
They offered 5 grand plus the 2012 ZL1 they found to replace his; he wanted 11 grand on the deal.

His words:

"If the dealer had bothered to sit down with us and offer a few options in cars, maybe we would feel differently. But THEY chose the car (a trade-in) that THEY wanted us to BUY from them. Even $4000 (feel good money) was not important to us. We would have gladly PURCHASED an equivalent replacement with no "feel good" money. Money is not everything..."


Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Hmmmmmmmmm, Maybe he's 11 grand upside down in the loan???

I don't see how that's relevant.

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I already said the Dealer's only option really is to cut the guy a deal to the point he gets on the internet and local media and says First State Chevrolet is a great dealership, they fixed the situation, and everyone should go buy a car from them! That is the dealer's only option now that the owner has gotten society and the internet to bully the dealer.

Don't you think that's how the dealer should respond in the first place? Is there any other 'good' option here?

 

[Duffman77]

Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I already said the Dealer's only option really is to cut the guy a deal to the point he gets on the internet and local media and says First State Chevrolet is a great dealership, they fixed the situation, and everyone should go buy a car from them! That is the dealer's only option now that the owner has gotten society and the internet to bully the dealer.

Don't you think that's how the dealer should respond in the first place? Is there any other 'good' option here?


That is the problem with people's perception of insurance. Everybody thinks insurance is there to replace their used stuff with new. WRONG!, unless you purchase a policy with "Replacement value" it will not happen. In 99.9% of insurance cases the people involved come out losers in the situation.

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: Duffman77
That is the problem with people's perception of insurance. Everybody thinks insurance is there to replace their used stuff with new. WRONG!, unless you purchase a policy with "Replacement value" it will not happen. In 99.9% of insurance cases the people involved come out losers in the situation.

I do understand this, but if my car was wrecked by a third party I would expect (and hope for) them to make-good especially if they have the financial means to do so. It sounds like they don't have to, and maybe that's the case, but the alternative (which they, the dealer, chose) is the public backlash.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
I like this angle from a poster on the Camaro forum. I feel bad for the guy, but he's asking for more than he legally deserves; he's trying to get out of a hole financially. If the dealership burned down, would he still be asking for a brand new car???

"I cannot believe some of the postings... I guess it isn't surprising knowing what society has created by the "Entitlements ". Seems everyone wants to sue someone and think they are entitled to more than they have. I do know one thing... it isn't causing the dealership any hardship and it shouldn't. Man bought a new car for 60k or so.. drives it 10k and wants them to buy him a new one. Horse manure. Just because he THINKS he has the dealership for some kind of a mistake they made. What if the place caught fire, tornado ripped it to Kansas. The same result.. simply an insurance claim. Who gives a rip what kind of car it was? I support the dealership in their decision how to handle it and frankly it is out of their hands. That is exactly what Insurance is for. Let him sue the Geico Lizard. This whole fiasco has went clear out of control and the owner thinks all the hoopla on the web will get him more. It won't and shouldn't , and IF it does it only shows how ignorant society has become."


I agree.

Also maybe this guy paid a dealer mark up on the car so he really is upside down with no GAP insurance.

Like I said something doesn't add up.

He is owed what his car was worth, lets say $45k-$49k, plus maybe a bit for his trouble. The dealer offered him $4k or so which to me seems quite fair.

If he ordered a new example form the dealer for $60k, I bet they would make him a good deal and if he worked his insurance company to get $49k I bet he could get himself a nice upgrade for $5k or less out of pocket.

Something doesn't add up, or the guy is simply an idiot.

Let me go out on a limb here and this is what I suspect is the case:
1. He traded in the other car and had no or very little equity in it, ie it probably had the typical 60 month 0% GM loan with little down.
2. His 69 wasn't worth much.
3. He paid to much for this car, possible the dealer "market adjusted" the price up.
4. He had improper insurance and/or no GAP coverage.

So now the number they are giving him probably somewhere in the $40k range is way short on his loan, so he is stuck.

 

[Scott_Tucker]

This is a classic case of "the squeaky wheel gets the grease".

As someone who works in the collector car business, this car is a poor investment. They would be better off in other investments. It will take a good 40 years until this car is valuable and by then it will be in poor shape. The cost to completely restore a car like this is a couple hundred thousand dollars.

He will walk away with more than he deserved. I think the dealer really was the one who blew it on this one, though. They let it go far too long and said too many dumb things. There is such a thing as "hush money" and this would have been the perfect opportunity to use it because the negative press. It wasn't blackmail, just a loud mouth customer.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: martinq
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
How he purchased the car, why, and more importantly, what insurance he has is the only things that are relevant!

If I took a car to an official dealer for some warranty work I would have certain expectations on what I would receive when the work was done. If my car got wrecked under their care I would expect them to take care of it. I would not expect to have to compromise or fight to get it resolved. I guess those who are well versed in legalese, insurance, etc might have a different opinion.


Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Now he's whining and crying and trying to get the internet to essentially do his dirty work in bullying the dealer to cough it up the money to cover the loan amount, essentially. he basically said it himself!

Can you post that info?
Look at he original article!!!

"The dealership claims to have had their replacement car reviewed by a certified classic car appraiser, and on top of that they offered $5,000 along with the car. This is money outside of any dealings the Hoopers have with their insurance company.4

The general manager told me that the Hoopers then asked for $11,000 instead of $5,000 to take the replacement car. That offer did not pan out.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: martinq
Here's the latest from the forum:
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7328804&postcount=898

"
For the record, the car was a TWO-OWNER car, not a one-owner car like the dealer told us. The dealer NEVER mentioned the front end damage--my wife found that out on her own. WE paid $55 for the CarFax--the dealer never offered one. The dealer also did not mention that the car had aftermarket tinted windows, aftermarket emblems, and NO DOCUMENTATION. The car just looked like it had been run hard and put away wet. My 10K tires still had over 60% tire life remaining. The so-called replacement needed new tires at 13K miles.

If the dealer had bothered to sit down with us and offer a few options in cars, maybe we would feel differently. But THEY chose the car (a trade-in) that THEY wanted us to BUY from them. Even $4000 (feel good money) was not important to us. We would have gladly PURCHASED an equivalent replacement with no "feel good" money. Money is not everything...



So if anyone had asked if asked here on BITOG if he should buy this car there would have been a almost unanimous "no it's been abused, don't touch it"...

So question is it's now OK to take it because the dealer ex employee totaled it???

If it were me and I couldn't get satisfaction I'd beat this thing till the dealer had a "Under New Management" sign out front... If damaged it there'd be a fight with the insurance co of same proportion...

 

[whip]

Originally Posted By: stro_cruiser
Empty that stealership & burn it to the ground.

An employee steals a car and you think arson is the answer? Intelligence is slowly dieing.

 

[Eddie]

What intelligence? None with that arson answer.

 

[nleksan]

I am no lawyer, believe me, but if it were me in such a situation, I would expect to be reimbursed with something of greater value than was destroyed.

The way I seeit, tthe wreck was a result of Grand theft auto, meaning it occurred during the occurrence of another crime, one in which the dealership is at least partially responsible for, via gross negligence on their part to adequately protect the property of a customer. I imagine that, being that employee committed the crime, it falls under their purview for responsibility.