offroadr35

Post removed as per the advice of my attorney. I will happily post an update once the matter is resolved if I am at liberty to do so.

-Steve

Edward

No referrals here, but hope you put the screws to them. Normally, I am not like that as, like you, I always give others the benefit of the doubt and the opportunity to make things right. But given their (or the GM's) beligerant attitude, I hope you get well compensated for your time and frustration on top of settling their liability on this. Scrupulous individuals really need to be taught a lesson, IMHO. Good luck!

Edward

Dan in Pasadena

Steve - Get 'em!

Not for vengeance....though you'll get that as a bonus, but because if you don't they are empowered to keep doing this to others. Someone is always put in the position of "over-the-barrel" before unscrupulous businesses are made to straighten up...or go out of business. I'm serious, if they aren't made to feel serious financial pain they will never change.

Good Luck!

wwest

Hey,....

When, if, you find out what the lemon "cause" was, please let us know.

Could be important to many other owners.

theasphaltgambler

I work in Va for a medium sized highline dealer. The policy for used, trades, auction, etc is that clean title verification is a MUST for anything over $2500. ACV (actual cash value). They, as most dealers, do not want to ever be in a position such as this especially with $$$$$ at stake for this level of car.


The one and only problem here is establishing liability on the dealer. Your 'case' rests soley on the fact that they knew this was not a clean car but was represented otherwise. It could be tough to prove. You will have to have documentation sent to the dealership via carfax or other popular credible source on your car with the VIn prior to your actual purchase. Clearly indicating they requested a title search on your car and then receiving an answer. The other way would be internal memos, sales documents, fax's between the SM and sales guy. Tough to get.


Being in the business, I still see all sorts of dumb s--t everyday for the sake of a few extra $$. I'm betting the farm that SOMEONE there knew the correct history and then dropped the ball......purposely.

Mike K

Steve,
Have there been any recurring problems that might indicate a past problem/s?
Do you feel you have equity in the vehicle? Was there a cap-reduction applied?
Is it a Porsche factory lease or bank lease? Being a lease i don't believe you have a true equity stake in the vehicle until U exercise your purchase option which is compromised by the lemon flag. What i would do is politely pressure the lein holder...they may be willing to settle or help influence the dealer.

theasphaltgambler

Mike, I think you are partially right. IMO lenders talk/ deal money only. They are only concerned when the responsible party is not making payments. The secured item is completely secondary to the buyers basic ability to pay. They do not typically get involved unless they see change of risk on their part.

Even though a lease is "Buying down a payment" his name is on the title and he is the owner and responsible for taxes, etc.

I would assume that if Steve was selling the car he must have at least enough equity to pay off and move on. There is still the basic question of serious mis-representation. Regardless of how the car is financed. They were the seller, he the buyer and the value of that item was based on the current market. Being a former 'Lemon' that would greatly diminish the value from then until the car was no longer usefull

Mike K

'gambler,

i'm not clear whether it's a fact that this car is indeed a 'lemon'. that needs to be established first, many stories out there regarding false findings on carfax etc. California consumer protection laws are probably second to no'ne. i find it hard to believe but not impossible that a car in Wisconsin would be deemed a 'lemon' and Porsche buys the car back only to put it in an auction pool where a Cal dlr buys it to resell.
There's also the matter of non-recourse...when i broker a lease through a bank or manufacturer once the deal is funded it's done...unless evidence of fraud is found, then my non-recourse lease becomes something else.
Lastly i would not assume because someone is thinking of selling their lease vehicle that they have equity.

r911

I don't live in Calif. but I have 2 items for your attorney to look into:
1. be sure to look into the Calif. Bus. Practices Act - it has some real hammers in it
2. mention the words "class action" to the dealer; and be sure to do some discovery to find out if this is an isolated instance or something they do a lot. If the latter, they are really in trouble.

Go get 'em!

JBO

I am a contracts lawyer. Not sure why you think it's an open & shut case (few are). You need to review your documentation carefully. It's tough with used cars (at least in Ga, not sure about Cal. which generally has more consumer protection laws), and often the documents say "as is". You then have to show actual fraud, which is tough to prove. In any event you should not have been treated that way by the dealer. Good luck.

hoffman912

give em hell man!

DCN 911

You will need to quantify your damages. What are they at present? You will probably need an expert report (perhaps from an appraiser) that the vehicle is worth $X less because of the non-disclosure with respect to title.

DCN 911

rbcsaver

A few thoughts come to mind, from a non-legal profession person. #1, isn't an auto lease based upon interest and depreciation, not neccesarily purchase as an end result. #2, are Porsche cars sold through P Dealers "Porsche Certified." #3 There is no excuse for treating customers as offroadr describes. I have had my own "issues" with Porsche dealers, even after buying a 996TT, the socked me $300 for an alignment on my 84 that couldn't be done.

Porsche owners like to make destinctions between P Cars and "others." However, far too many seem to be cut from the same slimy cloth. It is a shame!
regards,
Steve