Dr.Bill

I'd tell them to pound sand. There will be plenty of the GT4's for all who want one. It will appeal to a very limited market. Grab the internet and a phone - there are plenty of dealers who are not greedy and/or crooks.

khooni

Dan,

All Mooty is implying is that drafting all that on email, shouting and losing time to prove a loss of say 20k at most (some would say not even) is not really worth the time nor effort and I agree.

If a dealer proves to lack good judgement and sense in this day and age, name and shame him. That will do him worse than the private litigation (if it even comes down to that).

Remember, sometimes faster to swerve than building muscles in your butt.

sechsgang

Please, when one's child wants things, I could see people paying bonkers money for it to make their kids happy...




...in cases like these its just US who wants the toys!

hfm

I read what Mooty said directly without implication and it wasn't just about time or effort. He has a fundamentally different way of handling business from the way I do and there is nothing wrong with either method. I don't care what's worse for the dealer, I care about getting what I want. It's not about swerving or building butt muscles, it's about getting the car at MSRP as promised by the dealer and not having to deal with shenanigans or having to drag a dealership's name through the mud on a forum because they screwed you after they said they'd have a car for you at MSRP. That's it.

I'll fill you in on what happened after I took 20 minutes to draft the contract. My deposit was taken, the contract was in force, when I went into see the GM to go over my build options, the first thing he said was, "it's the lawyer." He had obviously read the email and had authorized the deposit effectively accepting the transaction at MSRP. I thanked him for agreeing to MSRP per my email and he confided in me that that the dealership was negotiating more than MSRP with other customers. My SA and GM were straight with me through-out the transaction. It definitely did not hurt to have MSRP clearly agreed upon, by contract, before taking delivery. We didn't talk about any numbers after that, I went straight to Porsche Finance to complete the purchase agreement at MSRP when I took delivery. I was well optioned, the dealership made good money off of me with over $20k in options plus some add-ons like wheel and tire insurance and other stuff that I did not try to negotiate down since the dealership was holding up their end of the bargain.

That's all I have to say about this and folks can handle their transactions anyway they care to.

Dan (goes back to work)

dark knight

I didn't pay over retail for it, I got in on sale by waiting at 12 am in line at kmart and on xmas noone cared for it, i was like, i waited in line for this everyone wants one, nobody at my house did

dark knight

i wonder if any lawyers know, that if you and a contract that wasn't honored, could you sue for breach and file an injunction against them to prevent them from selling/driving the car until your court case was settled?

vantage

Usually such a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order requires a showing of irreparable harm. Probably not that easy to show for an item that is not that scarce vs a one of a kind item.

I am not a contract attorney though.

JasonAndreas

And maybe include those dealerships with parts and service departments that tack on 15% for their walk-in customers. I've had a few play dumb while others claim it was okay because they weren't alone.

rwcsn1

Lol, all the talk of consideration and acceptance brings back memories of being a 1L. I hope you realize though that in California no car "contract" is binding, at least for the customer. Dealers can have you sign any contract mandating you to pay whatever amount of deposit they like, and you can refuse car at delivery and they have no recourse and have to refund your deposit. I'm also willing to bet dealers can use all sorts of excuses also to get out of a "contract" with you...if say someone came along and was willing to give them 20K extra above yours.

California Civil Code Section 2982.7 Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act
2982.7. (a) Any payment made by a buyer to a seller pending execution of a conditional sale contract shall be refunded to the buyer in the event the conditional sale contract is not executed.

mooty

dan, i want to make it clear that my comments are in no way directed at your or reacting to your comment. and you are right, we tend to do things differently. one is no more correct than the other. there are circumstances that i will execute contracts mainly b/c transaction is complex and misunderstanding is common. then we have executed contracts over 1000 pages long and took 8 months to draft ;-) and didnt reach a deal. perhaps b/c it was so complicated that both side couldn't understand what we were doing. but dragging names or complain about something.... there's a lot more to it. they now have very few repeat customers. and it is not just with me. most of the bay area multiple p car owners stay away from them....

oh, i see that they have IMPROVED. they told you over the phone that you will be reamed BEFORE the act of actually reaming you. that's honor right there.

yes and yes.
you can retire legitimately or retire in moral fear.
i like to sleep well at night.

hfm

Straight-road, I contacted one other, Beverly Hills Porsche. No I didn't speak with GF. I got an offer for a 2014 for MSRP with replaced motor, all the baggage that goes along with having to explain that, it effectively being one year old, none of the consideration Porsche paid 2014 owners for their patience/loss of use, use of a loaner, memory seats refund and with who knows what options when 2015s that I could spec were available for MSRP. I didn't bother with Auto-Gallery knowing they mark up $25k plus. I stuck with Rusnak Pasadena when I got an email from my SA for the GT3 at MSRP. I'd do business with them again and will do my service there. They were really terrific through-out the process.

Rwcsn1, yes, I was aware and in fact, the email contract referenced an ability to demand refund of deposit and my concern, since we're talking 1L, was whether the consideration was "illusory." We could spend a page discussing that, I think we'd both rather not. I concluded it was not illusory due to my loss of use of the deposit for the period in wait regardless of my ability to demand refund.

Mooty, we're all good. By the way, I love the picture where your kids are rolling around in tires, that's awesome! Let me know if you would like to coordinate a track day in the summer with So. Cal. guys planning to come up to No. Cal. It might make it easier for a head count on one of your private track days and I bet there are many down here who'd love to do that and meet up with you guys.

stronbl

If only we could take emotion out of the transaction ... some random topical thoughts below ...

IMHO there are a couple key issues at work in this thread - 1) value and 2) fairness.
On value - for any transaction to take place, both parties need to seek an agreement on value. You decide your value and the dealer decides their value. If they match, then there is a deal. If not, move on. Rather emotionless and simple.

Fairness on the other hand often has a more subjective, maybe even an emotional, aspect. Clearly if both parties agree on value, they'd view it as a fair deal and perhaps establish a durable relationship (i.e. future deals). If, however, one party views it as unfair, but decides to compromise on value to get the deal done, then the compromising party may view it as unfair and certainly question whether they've created a durable relationship. Likewise they may be offended that the value proposition from the other party is so much different than theirs, and hence choose not to enter into the transaction at all.

Fairness has gradations too. Some of us may consider MSRP for a Porsche borderline fair depending on certain criteria - since most dealers do not pay MSRP to purchase the car from the factory, MSRP has a built in profit for them. But MSRP + some added % simply defined as extra dealer profit (aka market adjustment) is typically viewed as unfair to us, the buyer.

As others have already stated, I don't begrudge a dealer their point of view on value, but I do believe it should be within reasonable limits of fairness as I perceive it. As a dealer friend of mine once said, "I don't need to hit a home run on every sale, just a few of them once in a while". Of course I prefer them to hit a single when I'm pitching.

(ok poor metaphor but I think it makes the point)