what happened with the used/new camry lemon thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Another great suggestion from the Illinois Attorney General:


Pre-Purchase Inspection
Once a consumer finds a vehicle they are thinking about buying, a used car vehicle inspection should be
conducted by an independent mechanic before a final purchase decision is made. An inspection is
necessary even if the car has been "certified," has been "inspected" by the dealer, or is being sold with a
warranty or service contract.
 
Read what the Illinois Attorney General wrote...There is no three day cooling off period for used cars unless explicitly wriiten into the deal.

Frankly, I take the written word of the State Attorney General over some third party info from who knows at the lender. You suppose she knows the law better than the Attorney Generals office?
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Another great suggestion from the Illinois Attorney General:


Pre-Purchase Inspection
Once a consumer finds a vehicle they are thinking about buying, a used car vehicle inspection should be
conducted by an independent mechanic before a final purchase decision is made. An inspection is
necessary even if the car has been "certified," has been "inspected" by the dealer, or is being sold with a
warranty or service contract.


What happens when this independent mechanic doesn't see this issue either, what happens then?

Same boat that were in now, correct?

Are you arguing for the sake of it?

I am fully aware of the laws because we spoke to our Attorney about all the avenues. We have a legit case, but not the 2 years it would take to settle in court. This auto group has multiple lawyers and all the time in the world.

I'm done posting here. I hope that we get something that is what WE not. Not a dam Hyundai or another junk Toyota.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260



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?


Was this a spot sale? Did your father take delivery of the car before the final terms and rate for the loan were finalized?

The only reason paperwork would be delayed is if the dealer were still tring to get your father financed. Often they'll let a car go off the lot without such things in place, if they have a high likliehood that "some" bank will eventually buy the paper. Otherwise it gets done right along with the rest of the paperwork. There is no 3 day hold on loan paperwork, what would be the purpose of that when there is no right to return the car in 3 days?
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Another great suggestion from the Illinois Attorney General:


Pre-Purchase Inspection
Once a consumer finds a vehicle they are thinking about buying, a used car vehicle inspection should be
conducted by an independent mechanic before a final purchase decision is made. An inspection is
necessary even if the car has been "certified," has been "inspected" by the dealer, or is being sold with a
warranty or service contract.


What happens when this independent mechanic doesn't see this issue either, what happens then?

Same boat that were in now, correct?

Are you arguing for the sake of it?

I am fully aware of the laws because we spoke to our Attorney about all the avenues. We have a legit case, but not the 2 years it would take to settle in court. This auto group has multiple lawyers and all the time in the world.

I'm done posting here. I hope that we get something that is what WE not. Not a dam Hyundai or another junk Toyota.



The Hyundai dealer has a legit case to enforce the contract your father signed as well.

Why would you assume the indie would miss the problem as well? Doesn't that lend credence to the fact this is an easily missed problem?

I'm not argueing for the sake of it...I'm argueing because I've seen countless situations like this where the dealer is expected to utilize extreme/caution and due dilligence and the buyer just skates, relinquishing any responsibility he had for the same extreme care/caution.

And as usual, the dealer gets bashed and the car manufacturer gets bashed. Your problem isn't with "dam Hyundai" or "junk Toyota"....it's with the original Toyota dealership that sluffed this car off on the unsuspecting buyers down the line. Unfortunately, you were the last in that line.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS


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.


My state has a "warranty of inspectability" that applies to used car sales from a licensed dealer. If an oil leak is so serious it can cause a fire, it does not pass state inspection. If a car is in shabby shape because of the previous owner's actions or neglect... like bald tires, shot brakes, etc it is the dealer's responsibility to fix those items before sale. If within 72 hours of sale, the buyer finds an issue, he can have a third party inspection station fail the car then the dealer is on the hook to bring it up to minimum spec.

Not exactly a lemon law by title, but the point is there...

link
 
eljefino...I get your point, but as you point out, that is entirely different from the lemon law. This Camry was never a lemon by any definition of the term.

And in the end...The law in Maine only requires the dealer to bring the car up to standard, there is absolutely no provision for returning the vehicle or a refund that wipes the deal clean AFAICS. Entirely different animal than the lemon law, not even of the same species.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
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.


That's between the 2 dealers, not the buyer and the Toyota dealer.

Quote:
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.


You got lots of ground quoting only half of my argument for this while ignore what I said one line above, you would make a great used car salesman. I agree with you that it is likely unintentional on the Hyundai dealer's behave, because they are selling it with a like new car price. If the car was sold at a "salvage title price" then this would be a buyer beware situation. Also the attorney of the OP already said it is a good case on legality but not on financial worthiness, and that's how the dealer could get away with.

Still, to reduce the hazzle I'd demand a replacement Camry just to get over with it. It is a bad experience and I think if the price of the car wasn't so high the buyer wouldn't be so [censored] off. The dealer already made the profit so they are unlikely to spit that back out, getting an identical car would probably be the simplest choice, and if the replacement car has warranty, it would still be fairly dependable.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260
.... 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.





Dont care at all what "the lady said"..she is simply wrong.

If your father used his home as collateral for the loan, then she could possibly be right. Did your father use his home in a equity line to fund the car purchase? Other than door to door type scenarios this is the only other 3 day cancel right I can find in Illinois. Spread the misinformation all you like, but it doesnt change the facts...see below.



"You can cancel some—but not very many—contracts within 3 days. Generally speaking, though, you can't cancel just any contract within 3 days.

This column has dealt with this issue before. But, the myth that you can cancel any contract within 3 days is so persistent it’s worth discussing again.

There are really only 2 situations when you can cancel a contract: a door-to-door sale, or when your house is collateral for a loan. If it’s not one of those 2 kinds of deals, you don’t have an automatic right to cancel. Otherwise, without fraud or something extreme, you’re stuck.

When it exists, the 3 day right to cancel permits people with “buyer’s remorse” to get out of deals they regret. By allowing second thoughts, the 3 day “cooling off period” protects people in particularly vulnerable situations.

Door-to-door sales can be cancelled within 3 days because they’re notoriously high pressure—people say yes just to make the salesman leave. While the 3 day right to cancel clearly applies to the classic door-to-door salesman, or to any contract signed in your home, it also applies to situations where a contract is signed away from a seller’s usual place of business.

The Federal Trade Commission rule about such “off premises” sales specifically says it applies to sales at “facilities rented on a temporary or short-term basis, such as hotel or motel rooms, convention centers, fairgrounds and restaurants, or sales at the buyer’s workplace or in dormitory rooms.” It does not, however, apply to automobile auctions or “tent sales” (as long as the dealer has a fixed place of business somewhere), or to arts and crafts fairs. Those both have special exemptions from the rule.

Besides door-to-door sales, the second kind of deal you can cancel in 3 days is a sale or loan where your house is collateral for the loan.

It’s important to understand that this particular right to cancel does not apply to loans used buy your house (“purchase money loans”). It does apply to home equity loans, mortgage loan refinancings, and when you finance something besides your house using your house as collateral. An example of that last type of deal is a home repair loan.

When a 3 day cooling off period applies, you get 3 business days to cancel. And when you sign a cancellable contract, you must get 2 sets of forms you can use to cancel. If you don’t get the forms, or if your right to cancel is otherwise interfered with (e.g., they mislead you about your rights or give you the run around), you have a “continuing right to cancel,” beyond 3 days."
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
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.


That's between the 2 dealers, not the buyer and the Toyota dealer.

Quote:
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.


You got lots of ground quoting only half of my argument for this while ignore what I said one line above, you would make a great used car salesman. I agree with you that it is likely unintentional on the Hyundai dealer's behave, because they are selling it with a like new car price. If the car was sold at a "salvage title price" then this would be a buyer beware situation. Also the attorney of the OP already said it is a good case on legality but not on financial worthiness, and that's how the dealer could get away with.

Still, to reduce the hazzle I'd demand a replacement Camry just to get over with it. It is a bad experience and I think if the price of the car wasn't so high the buyer wouldn't be so [censored] off. The dealer already made the profit so they are unlikely to spit that back out, getting an identical car would probably be the simplest choice, and if the replacement car has warranty, it would still be fairly dependable.


I was aking a general question, no implication that this buyer has recourse with the original Toy dealer. Wanted to gauge if you agreed the original Toyota dealer is the REAL scammer here, not this Hyundai dealer, at least IMO.

If you agree that this Hyundai dealer likely committed no fraud, then in reality, the lawyer and this buyer have no case at all. Like I said with this set of circumstances it's more likely the dealer could win an enforcement of the signed contract. The buyer, short of proving fraud has verry little in his favor.

Which is why I think the dealers offer to return the funds in trade is a fair offer. Legally, he doesnt even have to go that far to please these customers, his contract is legal and binding.
 
Originally Posted By: dja4260
LS2JSTS said:
I'm done posting here. I hope that we get something that is what WE not. Not a dam Hyundai or another junk Toyota.



Please don't stop posting!

I'm super interested in hearing how this ends. I hope you can resolve it in a way you want.
smile.gif


Just don't respond to people who are trying to provoke you. I know it's very hard to do in forum threads.

I'm sure there are 10 people who hope you get a satisfactory result for every one person who is jumping all over you.
 
Last edited:
Hey, I hope he gets a satisfactory result...I honestly do.

But the facts have to be corrected as falsehoods and age old myths get posted, don't they? I mean, I know my nature is brash and harsh in itself...but some of the things posted re, lemon laws and 3 day back out provisions need to be clarified, else we all look like idiots when misinformation is allowed to stand.

Whether this Hyundai dealer is being fair or not to this guy, I'll let alone. I've made it clear imo, the offer on the table is fair and others see it differently.

To the OP, sorry for being so hard on you. I honestly do hope you get some satisfaction in the end from this dealer.
 
I have been watching this as someone who has bought a car from dealers and has worked in the business. -and has bought and sold at MANY dealer only auctions.

I am not an expert but from my experience (In Pennsylvania), my .02 cents:

As a SELLER at an auction (dealership A to dealership B) any major issues with a car need to be acknowledged. UNLESS the car is sold "as is" at the auction. (As-is auctions is where anything goes and you do not need to disclose anything, although often it will have "water damage" salvage title etc etc but sometimes its just a high mileage car. The dealer I worked for LOVED to gamble on these cars as some were a genuine bargain needing minor work - Cars that were true junk, he would just roll back into the auction the next week (assuming they COULD roll).

If a car is sold "green light" at an auction the car should be represented as one with no major issues -meaning that if "Dealer A" sold a car GREEN LIGHT to "Dealer B" - Dealer assumes he is getting a decent car with no major issues (INCLUDING BRAKES, as this is a safety issue) IF "Dealer B" finds a major issue -he can legally return it. And yes, this is AFTER arbitration (the hour or two immediately after the auction where the the seller and dealer work out any issues and finalize paperwork)

If I am not mistaken, its up to 10 days or if the title needs to be re-issued and mailed out, up to a month. (can't quite remember the exact number of days, but I do remember selling a BMW with some transmission issue- sold it green light but I didn't have the title yet -so if he found anything he could have returned the car and canceled the deal as long as it was before I mailed the title to the auction house)

I wouldn't be surprised if the Hyundai dealer will simply contact the Auction & original seller. He should be able to get his money back with no issue. If he DIDN'T know about the issue, he should have little trouble getting his money back.

Having said that, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Hyundai dealer knew the car had issues. (and tried to sneak it by you)


FUN FACTS:
Personally, I have witnessed dealers: Steel stuff out of cars at auctions (Lexus shift knobs, floor mats the friggin' owners manual), roll back odometers, NOT fill out/send in the "extended 3rd party warranty" yet charge customers for the warranty. Fake signatures on title and paperwork...
The list goes on.

No its not every dealer, but I have seen enough to know its more than a few. I am extremely cautious about which dealer I will do business with.

Have bought only private owned cars for the last 7 years...
 
Last edited:
Here is another thing that goes on here in my state that I just thought of. When John Q Public goes to a dealer to trade a vehicle in you have a lot of paperwork to fill out about your trade. One or more of those forms is a statement by you that you have not altered the emissions system and that the vehicle has not been in a serious accident( if it has you need to disclose when and what ). Lie on those forms and they can come after you to fix those things.

Clearly the damage to the OP's Camry, if not a casting defect from the mfg, had to be caused by a driving accident and the repair $$$ is major. HERE if that was not disclosed to the dealer where it was traded in the original owner who failed to disclose could get in hot water.

Also, as eljefino mentioned above about Maine we in NH also have the same safety and inspectability clauses when a used car is purchased. Part of that buyer protection I talked of earlier. I forget how long it is in force for after the purchase as it has been a while since I dealt with used cars but it is there.

It can be waived at purchase by the buyer IF and only IF the issues is fully disclosed and included in the selling contract( dealer or private ). I have sold some used vehicles, as is as seen, with problems but every problem is listed on the bill of sale and the buyer has to initial next to each line acknowledging they were aware prior to purchase. That way I am covered and not liable for anything.

If a problem is found I did not disclose, even if I didn't know, it can come back to bite me in the butt if it falls into the time frame. If I disclose nothing and just sell as is and the vehicle fails the safety and emmissions inspection I can be held responsible for fixing the issues( or a refund if less than the repairs ). The vehicle MUST be able to pass our state inspection period unless it is fully disclosed at the sale that it won't pass/has issue XYZ.... A dealer here wouldn't sell a vehicle that would not pass on their lot. They wholesale them out to auction companies and/or used car shops.

Sounds to me like the OP's state needs to enact some used car buyer protection reform. Sounds like sellers can get away with anything and the buyer is left holding the bag. What a shame.

OP - please do not stop posting. Just ignore those baiting you. Most of us have genuine compassion for what happened and would like to know how it works out.
 
Last edited:
Just reading this thread and thinking "what would I do?" if I was in similar predicament, I think LS2JSTS is pretty much the only one in this thread with a voice of reason.

I am very surprised how quickly everyone jumps to defend OP and chastise the dealer.
Personally I think the dealer gave OP reasonable options to fix the problem, but of course the OP is so stubborn in his thinking that he was deliberately lied to that he wants his money back.
I may sound harsh by saying this, but things just don't work this way in used car sales, this is no Walmart.
 
Why would the original Toyota dealer have anything to do with this?

The original purchaser of the car probably damaged the car. The Toyota dealer will not apply the warranty to fix customer damage, which is legitimate. The owner then trades the Toyota for a Hyundai.

That is the likely scenario. No auction, nothing like that. If anything, the previous owner didn't disclose the damage.

I think all of this is speculation. Do we know where the Hyundai dealer got the car? Did I miss that in the discussion?
 
Hate to tell you this but I recently, this past year, sat in on a jury trial with almost the same identical situation. We had to decide based on the law. Did we think the dealer was a jerk? Yes we did, however, there is no law against that. The owner was a WWII vetern and we felt very badly for him. But, we had to go on the facts of the law and we could find nothing that the dealer had done wrong in the face of the law so we had no choice but to return the verdict in favor of the dealership. The owner had no clue and his argument was similar to yours. The question of due dillegence was raised, but onus was on the current owner. Take what you can and get out, you won't win if this thing goes to court and it will cost you well over the difference you are seeing now. Sometimes kraph happens to good people. Sorry to hear about your fathers situation.
 
Hmm.. I feel pretty bad for the OP and his father. I know I'd be very upset as well.

That said, I think I'd take the dealer up on the offer for a new Hyundai and I'd push hard for every perk available. Free service and maintenance, major discount on the car of your choosing, etc... perhaps? I'd be tempted to take a Sonata Limited off his hands for an equal swap.
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Here is another thing that goes on here in my state that I just thought of. When John Q Public goes to a dealer to trade a vehicle in you have a lot of paperwork to fill out about your trade. One or more of those forms is a statement by you that you have not altered the emissions system and that the vehicle has not been in a serious accident( if it has you need to disclose when and what ). Lie on those forms and they can come after you to fix those things.

Clearly the damage to the OP's Camry, if not a casting defect from the mfg, had to be caused by a driving accident and the repair $$$ is major. HERE if that was not disclosed to the dealer where it was traded in the original owner who failed to disclose could get in hot water.

Also, as eljefino mentioned above about Maine we in NH also have the same safety and inspectability clauses when a used car is purchased. Part of that buyer protection I talked of earlier. I forget how long it is in force for after the purchase as it has been a while since I dealt with used cars but it is there.

It can be waived at purchase by the buyer IF and only IF the issues is fully disclosed and included in the selling contract( dealer or private ). I have sold some used vehicles, as is as seen, with problems but every problem is listed on the bill of sale and the buyer has to initial next to each line acknowledging they were aware prior to purchase. That way I am covered and not liable for anything.

If a problem is found I did not disclose, even if I didn't know, it can come back to bite me in the butt if it falls into the time frame. If I disclose nothing and just sell as is and the vehicle fails the safety and emmissions inspection I can be held responsible for fixing the issues( or a refund if less than the repairs ). The vehicle MUST be able to pass our state inspection period unless it is fully disclosed at the sale that it won't pass/has issue XYZ.... A dealer here wouldn't sell a vehicle that would not pass on their lot. They wholesale them out to auction companies and/or used car shops.

Sounds to me like the OP's state needs to enact some used car buyer protection reform. Sounds like sellers can get away with anything and the buyer is left holding the bag. What a shame.

OP - please do not stop posting. Just ignore those baiting you. Most of us have genuine compassion for what happened and would like to know how it works out.


The safety and inspection clauses would be completely useless in this scenario. IT DOES NOT APPLY even if Illinois did have such a clause. Just look at the components inspected and then think about all of the major components that have nothing to do with a emmisions/safety test.

This Camry in all likeliehood would have PASSED the safety inspection for youir state...and even if it didn't, the repairs to make it pass would be all that is required of the dealer. He would NOT be required to vacate the deal and refund the money to the buyer.

No one is baiting ANYONE, sometimes hearing the truth just plain sucks...SORRY.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Why would the original Toyota dealer have anything to do with this?

The original purchaser of the car probably damaged the car. The Toyota dealer will not apply the warranty to fix customer damage, which is legitimate. The owner then trades the Toyota for a Hyundai.

That is the likely scenario. No auction, nothing like that. If anything, the previous owner didn't disclose the damage.

I think all of this is speculation. Do we know where the Hyundai dealer got the car? Did I miss that in the discussion?


The car was purchased at auction by the OP's Hyundai dealer. Then sold to him at retail.

The facts as I know them:

Original Toyota dealer sells Camry to buyer X
Buyer X damages car somehow.
Toyota refuses to make repairs to the car under warranty and voids the warranty.
Buyer X and/or the original Toyota dealer sluff the car off at auction.
Hyundai dealer buys car at auction.
Hyundai dealers inspection misses poor repair.
OP's father buys car from Hyundai dealer, both assume Toyota warranty is in place.
OP tries to get an extra key set at Toyota dealer and upon entering VIN into system is informed the warranty on this car is voided.
SHTF.

To me, either the original owner or the original Toyota dealer are culpable here, at least more so than the Hyundai dealer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom