Bought A Lemon Hybrid

[a priori]

Originally Posted by jburns

That all sounds so good but there are a few problems with it. First you have to find him. Secondly he has to have enough money to make it worth going after him. Most of these guys spend it as fast as they scam it. Buyer beware is not just a slogan.

While there aren't problems with the legal analysis, the reality of it is quite close to your warning: Caveat Emptor. Technically, the legal application of caveat emptor has/had been limited to real property transactions and not personal property transactions. This depends, though, on the jurisdiction.

Plainly stated: Buying a house? Buyer beware. Buying a car? Others laws exist to protect you, but you aren't hurt by being cautious.

Here, the OP actually did a couple of reasonable things, but still was taken in by someone who likely does scams like this on a regular basis. Take the name and a very good physical description to the police.

[a priori]

On the "As-Is" issue:

Each state has a way of dealing with this. In many cases, "As-Is" will ONLY be an acceptable defense to a contract claim if the statement is in a writing. Further, in many states it must be conspicuous in the writing (larger font, all caps, bolded, etc.).

Could this sale be "As-Is" even though there is an agreement about repair? Yes, it is possible. If there is one document for the sale that says nothing about the repair, and it has sufficient "As-Is" language for that state, and the sale was completed, with money, title and keys all changing hands, and the repair agreement was signed LATER, then the repair agreement has no value. This is because the transaction already had taken place, and the seller has neither given up nor gained anything by signing the document. Whether he knows it or not, the buyer likewise has not given up anything of value for the repair agreement.

On the other hand, if the repair agreement were part of the purchase agreement (written or otherwise), then I know of no state that would find the sale to have been "As-Is". The parties clearly contemplated a potential problem for which the seller retained liability. The buyer has paid more than he otherwise would have paid in order to get the repair agreement. These things speak clearly to the intent of the parties (aside from the seller's intent to defraud).

[zonie911]

Originally Posted by boughtalemon

Hi,

I purchased a 2002 Toyota Hybrid from someone last week. At the time of purchased he told me that his wife had been the sole owner of the car and was selling it because they needed a minivan. I bought the car for $5200. I had him sign an agreement stating that if any problems arose in a one months time that he would be responsible for repairs. Well, the check engine light came on the following day. I called the seller but his phone number was disconnected. I took the car Toyota to get it inspected and was told the transaxle (transmissions for Hybrids) needs to be replaced which will cost close to $5000. I obtained the vehicle information from the DMV. Its turns out that he was not the original owner. He purchased the car two weeks ago from the original owners who had informed him (I spoke with them this week) of the transmission issue and therefore, sold it to him for $3500.

I obtained his address from DMV and plan on either sending him a letter of complaint or going to speak with him directly. I also plan on fling a police report.

My questions


How much is it usually to replace a tranaxle?


Does anyone know Hybrid specialists in the East Bay, CA? How can a Hybrid mechanic specialists?
Should I just call this a lost and get rid of this car rather than repair it? (I found a mechanic who will do the job for $2200 with a 6 months warranty)?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

Don't blame this on the car, you were scammed. You bought a really used car, without checking it out. The car is not a LEMON, it just has problems.
Go to the police, and then go to a lawyer and see if you can get any of your money back.

[boughtalemon]

Originally Posted by The Electric Me

Yes, but a couple of things. First in the original post, the buyer did NOT buy it "As Is" he bought it with an evidently signed agreement that the seller would warranty it for a month. So it was not sold represented as "As Is".

Secondly, determining previous owner can easily be done. DMV's have records. Which is how the OP evidently found the previous owners.

Thank you for clarifying on my behalf. The agreement was not as is. The agreement was that if a repair was found that he would be responsible. However, the seller apparently had no intent of doing so, since I havent been able to reach him.

[boughtalemon]

Originally Posted by bedrock8x

Although the seller signed an agreement for repair, it does not mean it is not purchased As Is. Let the OP clarify this.
IMHO, the seller seems to be a flipper, buying cars and selling cars for a living, he will be smart enough to sell cars As Is to protect himself. The repair agreement is just a bait since he has disappeared.

When I sold my mini-van, I have the buyer signed an agreement that it is sold As Is and signed by a witness. This is to protect me from getting sued if the new owner claimed that the brake failed and causing him to crash into a pole and he get permanently disabled, even I know the brakes are good at time of sale.

The agreement was not AS IS. He signed a written agreement that stated that if my car needed any repairs within one months time he would fix it. Of course, he had no intentions of doing so. Hence the current dilemma.

[boughtalemon]

Originally Posted by a priori

While there aren't problems with the legal analysis, the reality of it is quite close to your warning: Caveat Emptor. Technically, the legal application of caveat emptor has/had been limited to real property transactions and not personal property transactions. This depends, though, on the jurisdiction.

Plainly stated: Buying a house? Buyer beware. Buying a car? Others laws exist to protect you, but you aren't hurt by being cautious.

Here, the OP actually did a couple of reasonable things, but still was taken in by someone who likely does scams like this on a regular basis. Take the name and a very good physical description to the police.

Thank you. I have filed a police report but they have already stated there is very little the can do.

[boughtalemon]

Originally Posted by a priori

While there aren't problems with the legal analysis, the reality of it is quite close to your warning: Caveat Emptor. Technically, the legal application of caveat emptor has/had been limited to real property transactions and not personal property transactions. This depends, though, on the jurisdiction.

Plainly stated: Buying a house? Buyer beware. Buying a car? Others laws exist to protect you, but you aren't hurt by being cautious.

Here, the OP actually did a couple of reasonable things, but still was taken in by someone who likely does scams like this on a regular basis. Take the name and a very good physical description to the police.

Thank you. I have filed a police report but they have already stated there is very little the can do.

[boughtalemon]

Originally Posted by zonie911

Don't blame this on the car, you were scammed. You bought a really used car, without checking it out. The car is not a LEMON, it just has problems.
Go to the police, and then go to a lawyer and see if you can get any of your money back.

Did I say I was blaming it on the car? The car needs a new transaxle thats what I stated. I bought a Prius because I believe they are good cars. However, I was misled. Thoroughly read the OP before you accuse.

[a priori]

Originally Posted by boughtalemon

Did I say I was blaming it on the car? The car needs a new transaxle thats what I stated. I bought a Prius because I believe they are good cars. However, I was misled. Thoroughly read the OP before you accuse.

I understand your position, but you must understand that what you purchased was not a lemon.

Certainly, the car is not safely operational, but that does not make it a lemon. A lemon is a new car that has not been successfully repaired, despite numerous efforts (between 2 and 4 times in California, depending on the conditions) to complete the repair during the original manufacturer's warranty period.

It is possible your car is a lemon that has been improperly offered for resale, but that is easily determined, because the car would have been tagged as a lemon by the original dealer or manufacturer's representative.

So . . . you don't have a lemon. You have a car that requires an expensive repair. The problem is that the seller deceived you and is not willing to live up to his promises and responsibilities. So far as I can tell, there is no liability, obligation or fault with the manufacturer. (And, yes, I know you've never accused Toyota of any fault or ever suggested Toyota has any liability or obligation.)

[richard schumacher]

Originally Posted by boughtalemon

I bought a Prius because I believe they are good cars.

As a class they are good cars when new. The one you bought was either a lemon or it was screwed up by a previous owner. This is a risk one takes when buying a used car. A careful inspection by a Prius technician before buying it probably would have detected the fault.