Dealership Doesn't Like Deal, Takes Car Back

News Channel 5 ^ | 07/17/2006

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Deal, or no deal?

[Responsibility2nd]

Click the links to the attachments. There are two statements from the dealer. Very important that they be read, as the add insight to the article.

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/investigates/BHstatement.pdf

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/investigates/BHreport.pdf

[HitmanLV]

This sounds like a deal to me.

[ThomasThomas]

Just to throw something else into the mix. Post dated checks are not legal.

[LongElegantLegs]

Dude, where's my car?

[VOA]

Biggest screwing I ever got was at a Toyota dealership.

Well, I didn't mean that dirty deeds couldn't happen with any brand.
That sort of bad dealing goes anywhere humans go!

Given how Toyota is doing...they can survive a few stinker dealers.
But Chevy having one of their largest (maybe biggest) dealers getting this
sort of publicity at this time ain't good even for the parent GM.

[capt. norm]

Deal, or no deal?

He had possession of the vehicle and all the correct, signed paperwork.

At that point in time it makes no difference on whether or not the check was post-dated...they accepted it. Even if he paid them in "magic beans"....if they accepted it, that's their problem from that point on.

[Responsibility2nd]

I'm beginning to side with the dealer.

OK, now I'm flip-flopping on the issue like John F'in Kerry. As I read that the dealer was trying to sell a truck that they had $3000.00 into for over $8100, then it looks to me like they were trying to rip off the buyer big time.

[capt. norm]

Post dated checks are not legal.

They become a legal negotiable instrument automatically when they are accepted.

The bank is free to ignore the post date on the check and cash it immediately in this state.

[Responsibility2nd]

True dat. But it sounds like Bill Heard Chevrolet cares little for laws or ethics.

[samm1148]

I don't know: I never saw a reference to any post dated check in the story or Bill Head's response. But perhaps there was more information on the actual channel 5 story?

Head's statement also mentions the wrong stock number being used for the sale. Having purchased vehicles I know that stock numbers are attached to real products. It seems fantastical that no one realized that the wrong product was being sold when most car contracts consist of multiple signings.

Furthermore there were references to several other complaints against this dealership. I don't know; sounds a little like an inexperienced salesman working with a con artist dealership. Sounds like a case of the good guy winning maybe; especially if the gentleman gets his truck returned.

[Lacroix]

The deal is not final until the title is transferred. If the dealer holds the title he can return the man's money and still hold the title. No harm, no foul. If he gave him his money back he didn't hurt anybody. If the buyer disagrees then he should sue him. Take it into court and get a legal opinion.

[4yearlurker]

Sounds like the salesman made a mistake and wrote the contract for 10 grand less than what the dealership wanted. If the customer gave the dealership a post dated check that was the loophole they were looking for. If a cashiers check was involved then the car dealership has to accept the deal.

[Responsibility2nd]

I don't know: I never saw a reference to any post dated check in the story or Bill Head's response.

"Mr. Kiesselhorst provided a check in the amount of $8,100.00 which could not be deposited until July 23, 2006."

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/investigates/BHstatement.pdf

[Responsibility2nd]

The deal is not final until the title is transferred.

I agree. This and the fact there was a PDC (post dated check), leads me to think this was NO done deal.

[JennysCool]

None of that matters now, it's hit the press, along with Bill Heard Chevrolet's bad Better Business Bureau reports.

Bill Heard probably hasn't, um, heard the worst of it.

In terms of public relations, this is a million dollar disaster. At least.

They shoulda just written the thing off.

[demkicker]

Let a jury decide and I guarantee Kieselhorst will get his truck back at the price he paid to their stupid salesman. And he should, IMO.

[4yearlurker]

Maybe the 8,100,00 was the down payment. Now that I read the story again there could have been an error in the writing of the contract and the customer is trying to take advantage of that. Still,the BBB says hundreds of complaints. Personally I HATE the crap you have to go through when you buy a new/used car from a dealership.

[SouthTexas]

Sounds like a scam to me.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

We had a case where a decimal was put in the wrong spot and an item that normally went for $24.98 a pack was sold for $0.2498. We corrected our error two days later and swallowed the loss. It wasn't the customers fault.

To do otherwise is very bad publicity and very bad customer relations.