Cash4Clunkers main website update

I showed this info to the dealer that's holding onto my new Prius pending C4C approval; I was basically told if I don't like it, we can cancel the deal and get my deposit back. In addition, I learned that my deposit isn't actually holding anything. They could sell the car out from under me if someone comes along that wants it without a clunkers trade. (The purchase agreement has no vehicle assigned to it.) When I do get approved, my car might, or might not be, available. And it seems all the dealers in my region are doing this. Yep, I'm a little irritated.

I have an email into two of the dealership's owners. If not resolved to my satisfaction, I'll be calling the CARS hotline.

Dianne, I trust your dealership is not holding deliveries pending approval? Do you know if the law actually prohibits dealers from holding deliveries, or is this only guidance from NHTSA?

Thanks!

 

Dianne,

As always, thank you for the information you provide us every day -- it's awesome! I wish I was closer to California (I'm in Kansas). If I was within a 10 hour drive, I'd drive my clunker out there in a heartbeat and buy a Prius from you. But alas, it's too far and my clunker probably wouldn't make it. out:

urlyadoptr,

If I were you, I'd show this to your dealer and give them a chance to fix this (and give you your Prius). If they don't, then you need to report them to the CARS hotline. If they don't budge, then they need to be expelled from the program.

Bryan

 

dealerships all across this country are struggling so badly that if they asked me to wait a few days for my clunker to be approved by NHTSA I wouldn't mind, even if they are not supposed to.

did anyone notice how when the C.A.R.S. ads first aired, they always said $4500.

but now they say $4500 or $3500, since most people only quality for $3500 (an improvement of 4-9mpg) and very few people actually quality for the $4500 (an improvement of 10+mpg)

 

I'm glad you made this so easy for me Dianne!! Didn't even have to worry about any of it...you're the best!

 

I showed the rule from the cars.gov website to the dealer, and the sales manager essentially said they refuse to comply. Last night I emailed the owners, we'll see if I get a response. If not, or if the response is not favorable, I will definitely report them. I was amazed by their arrogance, to insist they have the right to not comply with Federal law because it doesn't suit their interest. They absolutely joined the program voluntarily and agreed to abide by the rules when they did so. I don't think they fully comprehend that they're looking at some HEFTY fines - up to $15,000 per violation. It's a big dealership, so if they have, say, 100 cars they're holding back, that's potentially $1.5M.

Anybody else out there in the same boat?

 

Yup. My dealer made me wait a week before giving me the car. At least they wrote the VIN on the sales agreement so they coudn't sell it from under me. However; they actually expected me to write them a check for the amount I owed even though they wouldn't give me the car. I long suspected that they were suppose to give me my car given that my mother in law was able to take her new Honda home. I was very paranoid as they told me to keep my clunker, but they kept the title and proof of insurance. Needless to say I parked that baby until it was time to drive it back to them to get the Prius.

 

Thanks Diane! You're a great dealer; I wish more Toyota dealers behaved like you.

 

Unfortunately I found PriusChat after I bought my Prius and I used CARS to the max $4500. The dealer did require (or at least did not tell us it was not required) to sign a contingency agreement saying we'd pay them the money if our deal was rejected by CARS.

My question is now that we've signed the agreement, is it valid? Can the dealer enforce it? I don't expect any problems, but I would be interested in knowing my rights here. It seems to me the dealer violated the CARS program by requiring me to sign the agreement.

As another bit of info, they offered me a 7 year extended warranty for $2K which I declined and a $600 Dent Shield warranty (also declined-I later found out it only fixes small non-paint damaged dents, pretty worthless). I've since seen on this site the extended warranty from Toyota for about $1K.

It is refreshing to see a dealer participating here and being so frank and honest. Sadly, whenever I go into a dealer, I still feel I must assume that the dealer will try to take unfair advantage as they did with me.

 

If it comes to that, ask them if they want to eat the $4500, or eat the $4500 and a $15,000 fine when you report them

 

I agree with Dianne 100%. Our dealership was doing "paper" deliveries for about a week. But that was the week between 8/3 and 8/8. Once the senate approved the extra 2 billion, we started delivering all the "paper" deliveries. A paper delivery is doing everything as far as paperwork goes, money exchanges hands, contracts are signed, etc, but you don't actually take the vehicle home. Exactly what the CARS website says we can't do. We have not had a single person sign anything saying that they would owe the money if CARS didn't pay. What we have customers sign is a form saying they would return the vehicle or pay the difference, their choice. We aren't blowing up any engines until we get the approval from NHTSA. Basically, we can reverse everything, give back keys, and shake hands if it doesn't work out. So far, we haven't done that with any one of the 137 deals pending. And we have only had 3 approvals so far.

Back to the original query. Since the original details were recently changed, I have to wonder if any deals prior are still valid. My guess is they are, kind of like grandfathered in. In reality, if you don't have the money, the dealership will not take you to court. They will probably ask for the vehicle back and keep some of your down payment as payment for the miles and use of the car. Even that would be fairly shady and hard to enforce, but they might try it. Will the dealer get fined? I doubt it. Again, the agreement was in place before the ruling was issued.

URLYADOPTR, there is only one slight problem you have. This is not a mandatory program. If the dealership suddenly says, we are not doing C4C anymore, what would you do? The sales manager is being a little harsh in his words (based on what you are saying). I don't care for the way he is handling your transaction, but it is his car to sell you. You can agree with his terms and take delivery, or choose to go elsewhere. If you have not driven off the lot in your new car, you are not bound to the dealership in anyway. That is the legal side of it in Illinois. Check your local laws (call a different dealer and see what they say) to see if they are the same.

EDIT: Just re-read your original post. You have not taken delivery. You don't even have a valid purchase order if there is no car or VIN on it. You have a piece of paper that will make it easier to start a fire in wintertime. I still don't like the way you are being treated, but it still stays the same. It is their car to choose who to sell it to. Did they take all your paperwork and are trying to get it approved?

 

I don't want there to be a misunderstanding here. Here's a little bit of my post:

I don't expect any problems. We have the car, we are happy with it, we don't want to give it up. We're not backing out of the deal and I don't think my post implies that. I wanted to know what my rights were.

I think you're taking a position that since I agreed to it, I should stick to it. Maybe so. What about the dealer that is not acting in full candor and is violating the CARS policies to which they've agreed? I've done nothing to violate what I've signed but the dealer has already violated the agreement they signed with CARS.

BTW during the blizzard of papers we were asked to sign, one was a "Waiver of Purchaser's Right to Sue." We were asked to sign this document which states disputes will be handled by the American Arbitration Association. The dealer representative very clearly told us that signing the document did NOT relinquish our rights to take the dispute to a court of law. However the last paragraph of the document, in bold, states

Now if that doesn't relinquish my rights, what does? Either he's lying to me or the document isn't worth the paper it's printed on. This was a one page document with the final paragraph in bold so I caught it and we didn't sign it. I'm not sure if he told us signing was optional before or after I refused.

I'm 63, and I've never sued anyone in my life, so it's not like I'm planning on going to court, but I did resent this. I'm positive we were not told it was optional to sign the document about reimbursing them for the $4500. I just looked through the documents we were given that night, and the repayment agreement is not included. Shouldn't we have a copy of that?

I mention these things because if we want to talk about acting in bad faith, I think that's at least 2 points against the dealer. I'd frankly add in the extended warranty that's been doubled in price for another point.

We wanted to buy a car. I didn't even think about finding a forum to research the Prius (I did do Consumer Reports for reliability) and when I did find this forum it was to read about my new car and see if I could add USB to it and do something to protect the doors. Reading about CARS was unexpected.

 

Jangell2,

Regardless of what was said, that paper would have absolutely taken away your rights to sue them. That paper (I have worked for a dealer that used the same type of lingo) would force you to go to arbitration. Good thing you didn't sign it.

As far as your rights now, I touched on it in the previous post. Since you signed the agreement BEFORE the NHTSA updated their rules, my guess is that it would be binding. Will a dealer sue you? Highly doubtful. They would just want their car back.

 

Before I come out as totally negative against my dealer, I'll mention some things in their favor.

We went in on the Monday before CARS was extended and the dealer was upfront by saying they were not currently doing CARS until they knew it would be extended. We made it clear we had to have CARS and they still gave us a test ride. We liked the car and I told the salesman to give us a quote.

We wanted a model III, mainly because of bluetooth, but couldn't find one that wasn't loaded with stuff we didn't want. We also wanted blue and failing that red. Boy talking about the wanting the world.

Our salesman found a black III configued the way we wanted, but it was black. We said ok and he started the process to get it delivered (it was out of state). We went in Friday to do the paperwork and noticed a grey Prius on the lot. He printed out the sheet and it was II but $700 bucks cheaper. We thought we can upgrade the sound system and to bluetooth for $700 if we so decide.

The salesman had no problem with our switching, even though he had started the process to get the black car. We were so not expecting to get a car that night, we had not driven the clunker in, I had to go get it.

I don't fault the salesman for not telling us about the grey II since we had been adament about wanting a III.

So complements for being upfront on Monday about CARS and letting us have a test drive anyway and for letting us change our mind.

 

How long does it typically take for the dealer to find out that the clunker has been accepted or rejected. Is there a potential for the dealer to actually junk my jeep and than find it's been rejected?

 

The dealer took copies of my paperwork to submit for reimbursement, and gave the originals back to me, and I drove home in my clunker (which they were required to take possession of before submitting for reimbursement). Did they disclose to me when we signed the worthless purchase agreement that they fully intended to violate the provisions of the program? Absoloutely not. If they had, of course, I would have walked away. Was it my responsibility to know all the dealer requirements when I signed the worthless contract? I don't believe so. Does this constitute fraud? I don't know, that would be up to a court to determine.

Isn't the dealer required to provide the VIN for the new vehicle in the reimbursement submittal package? I wonder what VIN they used for my transaction (if it's required). Sounds to me like civil litigators are going to have a field day with this when the dust settles.

I appreciate the contributions from the dealers on priuschat; but I think it's important for everyone to remember that this program is pumping BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars into the new vehicle market, and not a single dealer was required to participate in the program. Nobody has the right to "bend" Federal statutes; not me, not dealerships. If there was so much concern that they wouldn't get reimbursed in a timely manner, they should have hung a big sign out front reading "Sorry - No Cash for Clunkers." But that would have left lots of money on the table. If you're gonna play, play by the rules. Analyze the potential risks and rewards, and make a determination based on that. You can't just focus on lots of dollar signs and shift the risk to the consumer.

At least I only paid a $1000 deposit (on a credit card, which I can always dispute later if I need to). I feel bad for the folks who paid the full purchase price and are getting this treatment.

Speaking of the CARS.gov hotline, good luck getting through to anyone on it. I tried this morning at 8 AM; on hold for an hour before I had to go do something. Tried again this afternoon driving home; got an answering service who had no clue what was going on. I told them I'd call back.