what happened with the used/new camry lemon thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Not all state's have the same laws so that comment made as a blanket statement is not accurate.

I guess we will agree to disagree on the OP being even partly at fault for not finding the JB Weld repair prior to purchase.



Please point me to the state that has a lemon law that covers damage to the car caused by the owner?

Or to a state that has lemon laws that cover used car sales to a third or fourth party?

The statement is accurate, this car was never a lemon in any state of the union. It doesnt fit the definition of a lemon law car in any state.

I'd be glad to see evidence outside of conjecture/personal opinion to the contrary.



Sorry I titled the previous thread by law, incorrectly.


How about this text from an the Federal Trade Commission.

"When you buy a used car from a dealer, get the original Buyers Guide that was posted in the vehicle, or a copy. The Guide must reflect any negotiated changes in warranty coverage. It also becomes part of your sales contract and overrides any contrary provisions. For example, if the Buyers Guide says the car comes with a warranty and the contract says the car is sold "as is," the dealer must give you the warranty described in the Guide."

Wheres my repair and warranty? Its in the sales contract.....
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dja4260
This issue was listed on the national database, not on carfax.


So much for carfax. How one can access the national database?

BTW, if this was me, I would buy a new Hunday. Sonatas are very nice.
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Those are both fair options IMO.


I agree with this

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
ANY used car is sold "as-is" regardless of age of the vehicle...this is again a due dilligence issue and you didnt do proper due dilligence.


I absolutely disagree with both these comments, respectfully of course.
grin.gif


1 - Used cars are not always sold as is without any warranty coverage or buyer protection. Many states have laws that provide some buyer protection on used cars. Where I live there is a used car lemon law in addition to basic "right to be informed" laws. The damage on the OP's vehicle not being disclosed would have been held against the dealer. When you sell a vehicle here, privately or as a dealer, you have an obligation to fully disclose issues like that. Even when sold as is as seen you can still be held liable as a seller if the problem predated the sale and the seller knew about it.

2 - Most dealers here sell their vehicle with a limited warranty ranging from 30-90 days. All used vehicles at a dealer must have a window warranty sticker that shows what coverage or as is. Again, as is does not apply to serious issues like the OP ran into however that are not disclosed. Even if the dealer truly did not know, they should have known, so the buyer would have recourse here anyway.

3 - I am sorry but to those saying it is the OP's fault for not finding this problem before he bought it just amazes me. He was supposed to crawl under a 2011 vehicle and try and find where someone had JB Welded the lip of the block where the oil pan attaches? I find it hard to believe ANYONE on here, despite their high falutin claims, would actually have gone that far in inspecting the car or that they would have even found it had they looked. Just bull. If it was a 1991 maybe you look that close but not on a 2011. The dealer should have found this either via an inspection or from records shwoing the warranty was voided. The buyer though? Come on folks lets be reasonable here.


Of course SOME used cars are sold with warranty...but they are still "as-is" sales even with those limited warranties. The "as-is" applies as much to the unknown as the known.

You touched on it yourself. The dealer "should" have caught the faulty repair, but they didn't. Just as the buyer didn't catch the faulty repair. In order to show liability, the dealer would have to be shown to be grossly negligent(distinctly possible) or intentionally misrepresenting the repair.

As far as the Toyota warranty goes, it would have been nothing more than a simple phone call to verify that the warranty was in fact still valid. Yes, I easily find fault with the buyer AND the dealer for not taking this simple step.
If you are buying a Chevy at a Ford dealer are you just aking the Ford dealers word about what warranty remains? Seems foolish to me.

Please take note, I'm not saying the dealer isn't at partial fault here. I'm saying they are both at fault. And from what I've read of the situation, the dealer is making a fair offer to compensate for his part in the mistake...and getting badmouthed for the effort. Very typical IME in situations like this. The finger only points in one direction, when clearly two parties both dropped the ball on this one.
 
Every dealer has access to the national database.


This is how we found out when at Toyota, getting a key made. Guy goes "ugh, are you aware of this?"
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Not all state's have the same laws so that comment made as a blanket statement is not accurate.

I guess we will agree to disagree on the OP being even partly at fault for not finding the JB Weld repair prior to purchase.



Please point me to the state that has a lemon law that covers damage to the car caused by the owner?

Or to a state that has lemon laws that cover used car sales to a third or fourth party?

The statement is accurate, this car was never a lemon in any state of the union. It doesnt fit the definition of a lemon law car in any state.

I'd be glad to see evidence outside of conjecture/personal opinion to the contrary.



Sorry I titled the previous thread by law, incorrectly.


How about this text from an the Federal Trade Commission.

"When you buy a used car from a dealer, get the original Buyers Guide that was posted in the vehicle, or a copy. The Guide must reflect any negotiated changes in warranty coverage. It also becomes part of your sales contract and overrides any contrary provisions. For example, if the Buyers Guide says the car comes with a warranty and the contract says the car is sold "as is," the dealer must give you the warranty described in the Guide."

Wheres my repair and warranty? Its in the sales contract.....





I'm sorry, they are NOT mutually exclusive of each other. A used car that is sold with limited warranty is still an "as-is" transaction. The warranty is limited in scope, and the "as-is" verbage applies to everything else.

Did your purchase come with a dealer limited warranty? The answer is NO it didn't, right?

You both relied on the faulty misrepresentation that the Toyota warranty was still in effect.

I hope you understand, I'm not saying the dealer has clean hands here...neither of you do...and thats where the ambiguity comes in. All I'm trying to say is, given the total picture, I think the dealer is trading fair with you at this point, he is giving you your cash back in trade...this will cost him, unless he can go back on the auction house somehow he will be stuck with that Toyota and the cost to repair it. My guess is he sues or threatens to sue the auction house or the dealer that pawned that car off on the auction house.

IMO, the real problem here started with the original Toyota dealer, they are the ones who pawned off a poorly repaired car on the auction house.

In the end the lesson is, get your used car purchases inspected by reliable third party, regardless of model year or promises of warranties from interested parties.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260
Every dealer has access to the national database.


This is how we found out when at Toyota, getting a key made. Guy goes "ugh, are you aware of this?"


No they dont. I cant pull up the warranty or repair history for a Toyota at a Ford dealer. Or at least in the past you couldn't, I would be shocked to see that has changed.

Warranty and repair numbers are usually pretty safely guarded statistics IME.
 
Its good that the dealership gave your dad a few options.

I treat a low mileage 'cream puff' car just as I treat a 10 year old car with 120K miles. I am very cautious and look at everything knowing they might be hiding some damage or repairs.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260



I'm glad that someone understands

This car had to on a hoist and with a flash light and mirror, to be found..... This issue eluded alot of people before it was purchased by us.


These two points just further mitigate the dealers responsibility imo.

You are saying in essence this was a very tough thing to catch, it has eluded a number of people that should have caught it.

I'm not trying to point fingers, I'm just trying to say it might not be unreasonable to assume the dealer had just as tough a time as you suggest, and just simply missed the repair. No harm intended and no fraud perpetrated...it was just missed.

IMO, the original Toyota dealer that sluffed the car off to the auctioneers is the real culprit here. They pulled a fast one and got away with it...for the moment.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Panda...

If you bought a one year old used Lincoln at a Cadillac dealership. And they told you the remaining warranty was still in effect on the Lincoln...would you verify that info with a simple phone call to a Lincoln dealer, or would you just take the Cadillac dealers word for it?


I would want them to have this info on the contract. and if they are lying on the contract I will sue them.

Everyone in the US can drive(well, almost), and it is the responsibility of a retailer (licensed dealer in this case) to have know what should be explained to the typical consumer who are not mechanics and certainly no one in there right mind would demand 3rd party inspection on a 2011 vehicle to be out of warranty due to voided repair.

You don't do that on a new car because the dealer wouldn't let you, and typical consumers trust the new car dealer because it has warranty and lemon law to protect them. A vehicle purchased from 3rd party would be more risky, but a zero year vehicle should still be in most warranty and have no repairs that voided it.

Good thing the "regulation" in California requires window stickers to list whether a vehicle has warranty remaining or not. Otherwise the "hard working rich people" would have "created value in transactions" on my dime.

Quote:

"The "as-is" matters in this case so heavily, because regardless of age this was a used car sale. The only way you could prove the dealer liable is if they had knowledge of the faulty repair. By all accounts is appears as if they just missed it. Their inspection was faulty no doubt, but at least they did an inspection, the buyer apparently couldn't be bothered with such trivialities."


It is common for people to return a car because they got repo, business who leases went bankrupt, etc and the car becomes perfectly fine. JB weld a transmission is not common and a voided warranty on a zero year vehicle is even less common.

In the best case, a dealer who bought a car from trade in, auction, customer return, etc should be responsible for not checking their own inventory rather than letting it slip to their own customers.

In the worst case, they are withholding this information intentionally and that is fraud.

Why are you defending against these kind of business practice?
 
Last edited:
The OP would have to prove INTENT to deceive him on the dealer's part, not easily done. To me, it doesn't sound like they could meet that burden of proof.

It also sounds to me like the offers made to him for clearing this up are fair offers. Choose well and put this behind you. Be glad they are willing to work with you.
 
If a mirror is required to detect the repair, it might get past the best mechanic.

Please clear up the Toyota warranty. I thought that the factory Toyota warranty is valid, but in this case, this particular damage/repair is not covered under warranty. If the original owner installed a K&N air filter that resulted in engine damage, Toyota would not warranty that either. If this is the case, than the dealer did not mis-represent anything.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Panda...

If you bought a one year old used Lincoln at a Cadillac dealership. And they told you the remaining warranty was still in effect on the Lincoln...would you verify that info with a simple phone call to a Lincoln dealer, or would you just take the Cadillac dealers word for it?


I would want them to have this info on the contract. and if they are lying on the contract I will sue them.

Everyone in the US can drive(well, almost), and it is the responsibility of a retailer (licensed dealer in this case) to have know what should be explained to the typical consumer who are not mechanics and certainly no one in there right mind would demand 3rd party inspection on a 2011 vehicle to be out of warranty due to voided repair.

You don't do that on a new car because the dealer wouldn't let you, and typical consumers trust the new car dealer because it has warranty and lemon law to protect them. A vehicle purchased from 3rd party would be more risky, but a zero year vehicle should still be in most warranty and have no repairs that voided it.

Good thing the "regulation" in California requires window stickers to list whether a vehicle has warranty remaining or not. Otherwise the "hard working rich people" would have "created value in transactions" on my dime.

Quote:

"The "as-is" matters in this case so heavily, because regardless of age this was a used car sale. The only way you could prove the dealer liable is if they had knowledge of the faulty repair. By all accounts is appears as if they just missed it. Their inspection was faulty no doubt, but at least they did an inspection, the buyer apparently couldn't be bothered with such trivialities."


It is common for people to return a car because they got repo, business who leases went bankrupt, etc and the car becomes perfectly fine. JB weld a transmission is not common and a voided warranty on a zero year vehicle is even less common.

In the best case, a dealer who bought a car from trade in, auction, customer return, etc should be responsible for not checking their own inventory rather than letting it slip to their own customers.

In the worst case, they are withholding this information intentionally and that is fraud.

Why are you defending against these kind of business practice?


"The dealer wouldn't let you".....?????????????

Do you have any idea what you are talking about. It is perfectly within your rights to get a used car inspected at a third party mechanics. If they wouldn't let you, I'd call that a good sign to shop elsewhere.

You keep getting hung up on the fact that this is a new model year car and that SHOULD mitigate the need for a pre purchase inspection. HMMMMMM...I wonder if I can think of an example that disproves that silly notion. Oh yeah...wait...remember that guy that bought the 2011 Camry with the JB Weld repair on the engine block....lol...how is it possible you cant understand this is the example that proves why it is sooo important regardless of year, regardless of how it looks at first glance. It's just silly to suggest otherwise.

As far as defending the dealers actions...I think you have your rose colored glasses on again. I've repeatedly stated that both the buyer and the seller here made mistakes. I'm defending the notion that some buyer would badmouth the dealer even though that dealer has made a fair offer to rectify the situation. The buyer himself claims the repair would have been near impossible for he himself to find, yet you want to act as if the dealer is commiting fraud of some sort here...IMO, the dealer is acting in a fair manner with this buyer, if your rose colored glasses cant allow that view, so be it.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260


#1- Use whatever we spent and add that towards a new Hyundai on his lot.

Or

#2- Have them find equal car at auction for us.



At first I thought these were pretty good options, but now I think they aren't great.

Who knows if they'll follow through on the used Camry. They could try to force one on you that's worse than yours, or get you to pay more if they find a nicer one. Plus, in a couple weeks they could decide finding one is too difficult or it's not worth it to deal with you and start ignoring your calls. You'd be back to square one.

For those reasons, I think I'd take the second option. If I remember correctly, you paid $17k for the Camry? That would get you pretty close to a new Sonata. I like the new Sonatas and they get good reviews online.

If you went with a new Hyundai, you could get the deal over with probably in a few days. You could part ways with that dealer and put this whole thing behind you.
 
Last edited:
It is not gone, google Bought used LEMON from dealer HELP

Clicked cached

No secret, any attorney would know that
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear


In the worst case, they are withholding this information intentionally and that is fraud.

Why are you defending against these kind of business practice?


How much responsibility does the original selling Toyota dealer have?

That dealership KNEW the problem existed and yet they shipped the car to auction, apparently without disclosing this information.

Why are you alledging fraud when there was likely no such thing here?

This is where the liability lies, not with this Hyundai dealer. I'm not defending all dealerships here, just this guy who got screwed by the other Toyota dealership.
 
Since this transaction and how the owner spoke to us.

It left a bad taste obviously in our mouth.

-We asked for our $5000 Down payment back + our trade in (still on their car lot, worth $2500)

-Owner said NO. Buy a new Hyundai from us, or we can find another auction car for you.

We wanted our investment back so we could move on. Owner also said that since the financing as processed it was impossible to rewind the process with the lender. So we called the lender and they didn't receive ANY paperwork on this deal. Lady stated that the dealers always waits 3 days before sending in paperwork because by LAW, consumers have 3 days to back out of loan. This would lock in the buyer to the loan.

Again, the car isn't what we agreed on when purchased. We were lied to (regardless if they knew or not) and now have the hassle of not having a car, missing work, and at their mercy.
 
Again with the "3 days to back out" [censored]??????

Did your father buy this car sitting in his living room?

Did the salesman bring the car to your fathers house and pressure him into signing something?

Did your father buy and sign the paperwork in the dealership?

According to previous info given...YOU HAVE NO THREE DAY COOLING OFF PERIOD...PERIOD. The 3 day cooling off applies to very specific situations, none of which this transaction satisfy.

I know you think I'm just some jerk who is berating you, but the facts are the facts. This car isn't what the Hyundai dealer agreed on when he purchased it either. I guess for him it's as simple as "buyer beware", but when it comes to you and your rights...you get to make them up as you go.
 
If you don't believe me, maybe the Illinois Attorney General is a more reliable source:


No Three-Day Right to Cancel
Dealers are not required by law to give used car buyers a three-day right to cancel. The right to return the
car in a few days for a refund exists only if the dealer grants this privilege to buyers. Dealers may describe
the right to cancel as a "cooling-off" period, a money-back guarantee, or a "no questions asked" return
policy. Before you purchase from a dealer, ask about the dealer's return policy, get it in writing, and read it
carefully.
Please visit
www.IllinoisAttorneyGeneral.gov
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Again with the "3 days to back out" [censored]??????

Did your father buy this car sitting in his living room?

Did the salesman bring the car to your fathers house and pressure him into signing something?

Did your father buy and sign the paperwork in the dealership?

According to previous info given...YOU HAVE NO THREE DAY COOLING OFF PERIOD...PERIOD. The 3 day cooling off applies to very specific situations, none of which this transaction satisfy.

I know you think I'm just some jerk who is berating you, but the facts are the facts. This car isn't what the Hyundai dealer agreed on when he purchased it either. I guess for him it's as simple as "buyer beware", but when it comes to you and your rights...you get to make them up as you go.



Read what I wrote. The 3 day law refers to the LOAN portion of the transaction. The Lender's representative told us this. She stated that dealers use this tactic of holding loan paperwork till 3 days after signed for that very reason.

Where are you going with this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Polishing brass - what do you use?
Replies
9
Views
268
Toy4x4
M
What will happen to the value of non-Tesla EVs coming off lease?
Replies
18
Views
492
Brons2
O
Reddy heater 55 not getting fuel
Replies
4
Views
590
Orangepeel
Z
What happened to Yo yo's?
2
Replies
37
Views
792
yoprodale
M
How to deal with missing FedEx package.
Replies
18
Views
1K
SC Maintenance
Back
Top Bottom