Well, I'm puzzled even more. The practical issue is that you would be agreeing to accept a second hand car instead of a new car.

As an attorney you'd know that surely.

Jeff

 

Thought I'd pipe in here...

I used to sell cars and we would often have an 'Unwind' car, which was a car that someone had purchased at the dealership, but then a few days later we would find out that the bank did not buy their loan so the car needed to be returned.

They would usually have a couple hundred miles on them and we were told to tell the next buyer anything from the truth, to 'it was a test drive car at another dealership', blah, blah, blah.

Now, there was probably nothing wrong with the car, it's just the idea of you ordering a new car and being pushed into what is actually a used car. Even your trusted salesman may be telling you a white lie (or he may just be relaying what he was told) knowing that it's not a big deal.

I'm the most easy going guy around and I don't worry too much about little things, BUT even if it were me, I would insist on the new car unless there was a monetary benefit such as the gas tax covered, etc... There's just something about not getting exactly what you had expected and this definitely is not what you signed for.

Side Note: Their right, do not ever buy a used car from Texas. I have a good friend that is a (my) car broker and that is the first thing they check for. It's such a scam that some bad cars are re-registered in Texas and then sold out of there just to avoid any records, etc. It's a mess. Even cars that have been totalled have a clean title there.

Anyway, good luck with either car. Don't let them tell you why you can't get the car you want, 'it's sliver', 'it's got this package, that package', 'it's too popular'. If you have any problem, drop me an email and i'll have my broker find one for you. It'll take him 10 minutes to find one if it's out there. He's rock bottom works only off referals.

 

Maybe the car had serious problems and they took it back. LovinSL600 had a engine problem with the first thousand miles.

The point is that they said you was getting a new car and it turn out to be used. I would be pist for them misleading you.

In TN that is a criminal act. We even have discloser laws to protect us. I purchased a used Mitsubishi Eclipse in 1999 with 50 miles on it. The dealer even told me it was used, and it was a better deal than a new Mitsubishi Eclipse. The owner decided to take it back and the dealer by TN law can only sell it as used.

 

Thanks for all of the help. I heard from my salesman this morning. He said that when he pulled the car to write th VIN number for the contract, it showed as a new car. He did NOT try to push me to buy the used one but rather told me he was embarassed and that he would do a national search if necessary to get me the new car with the options that he had promised. After 20 years with him and seven cars, I had no problem giving him the benefit of the doubt. Now I wait and see what he finds.

 

Sometimes auto manufactures buy back a problem car just before it goes to Lemon Law arbitration (especially if it knows the car has legitimate problems and they would lose the case anyway), this allows the manufacuter to: Make the customer happy albeit a little late. Prevent the car from being tagged a lemon, allowing normal resale. On the downside the new owner never has a clue the car was headed to lemon law arbitration and had significant issues. Always try and obtain service records when buying a used car. MB dealer's (at least my local dealer, Autohaus Pomp Bch, Fl) can now access complete service records no matter the dealer. Buyer beware!

 

Well, this has certainly turned out to be a fascinating thread. Glad you balked, and glad your saleperson is working on getting you a truly new car...would still love to hear the rest of the story regarding that particular car, although I doubt we ever will from your dealer....and I agree, your salesman should be able to find the silver car with those options...they made a ton of silvers, it's just that an awful lot of them had the sport pkg., so that might be a small deal...they could just throw it in for the trouble you've been caused.

 

It aint over till its over. Although my salesman has located the car and it is an exact duplicate of what my CONTRACT calls for, my salesman has yet to get the ok from his boss to sell me the car at the AGREED price reflected in my CONTRACT, because Mercedes Benz pulled the rebate money on the car after January 3, 2006. Of course my CONTRACT was before January 3, 2006, as was my 65,000 trade in taken by the dealer before January 3 as was my actual balance paid before January 3. The only thing that didn't happen was that they didn't deliver a "new"car as my CONTRACT specified. I will give this another 5 days before the lawyer's letter goes to the dealership. If I have to go that route, rest assured my former placid response will change radically and the words FRAUD, BAIT and SWITCH, and ATTORNEY GENERAL will be prominently displayed in my letter. Right now, they have my 65K trade and my 12,000 plus balance and I have NADA except for that little ole CONTRACT. Want to take bets on how qucikly I get the car after the letter. Just kidding--I leaked the foregoing tactic to my salesman and I suspect I will have my car before five days from now.

 

Good Luck....

 

now THATS how its done

 

A man after my own heart. I hate to do these kind of things but sometimes it is what is necessary. I am not sure if you would actually go through with this but for me, I never bluff.

I too suspect you will get your car.

 

You'll get your car. They blew it and they'll eat the loss.

They have A LOT to lose trying to sell you a used car as new.

 

Just got word. They folded. I am to pick up the new car on Friday. However, it does not have the bixenon option but they are making an appropriate reduction in the price. Is NOT having this option a dig deal? My CL 500 does not have these lights and I have no problems.

 

I personally really like the lights and would rather not have a car without them. For the hassle factor, have them do a dealer install on them and forget the reduction in price.

 

I was told that this was not a dealer install item. Was I misinformed?

 

I think that xenon is standard and bi-xenon is the addition of a xenon high beam. No big deal to me if that is what it is. I can count on one hand the number of times I used the high beams. Just another stupid option to make $$. Keyless go on the other hand would be a deal breaker for me.

 

Don't sweat the lack of xenon high beams. You'll never miss them.

 

Good for you! Did they apologize and or offer a reasonable explanation?

 

Yes on the apology. No on the reasonable explanation unless you believe their story that their new car inventory mistakenly listed as new a car that they knew they had to sell as used. I will have more details after I pick it up today. Funny thing though. Although my deal was struck as 20K off sticker, when I was advised that the bixenons were not available, they said they were reducing my price by what I determined to be the invoice price for the lights, not the sticker price for them. While the difference is less than $100 dollars, it just goes to show that the "slick" treatment never ends. I intend to bring it up today before I pick up the car-- just for fun.

 

way to stay sharp! Good luck and keep up the good work.




.

 

$100 differance? The MBUSA website shows abount $780 option for bixenons.

 

Automobile dealerships are like Las Vegas...it's tough to beat the "house".

Enjoy the new car.

 

He's talking about the difference between sticker and invoice for the option.

 

I just cannot believe the markup.

 

Lets say the sticker is $780 and the difference (markup) is $100. That means the invoice is $680. That means the invoice is a little over 87% of the sticker, and the markup is less than 13% of the sticker, and a little less than 15% of the invoice.

Sounds about right to me.

Jim

 

so what's the latest on this JLR?