# Backed out of a deal, need advice



## damyankee (Apr 3, 2007)

adrian's bmw said:


> :stupid: + 1,000,000
> 
> Who cares about the deposit! It's your *principaled agreement, hand-shaking signature* that matters. The *shopping stopped right there.* Whatever dealer #2 says is irrelevant, pointless, futile, and _*too late.*_ They had their chance.
> 
> ...


I'm curious given your strong response to this - it's a very common advertising strategy for auto dealers to claim they will "beat any deal" (just bring us your bonafide offer from another dealer!!!) in a manner just like the OP described.

Of course, one of the gimmicks behind this is you'll never get anyone to put anything in writing unless you go so far as to put a deposit down like he did, then of course dealer #1 responds like this.

Hardball maybe, but unethical?


----------



## adrian's bmw (Feb 14, 2003)

peakpro said:


> adrian,
> 
> how do you even know dealer two knew about the dealer one and the deposit?
> 
> if he did then you can chastized (sp) them.


peakpro, I'm in the business and I've seen this up close and personal. It's ugly sometimes. In fact, I've had a situation where the other dealer was trying to get the customer while they were in our business office to get them to still buy from them.

So it's not entirely the client's fault and I surely don't want to exclusively pin the blame on the OP, but it's the OP's decision to back out on center one. I'm easily assuming that the OP told center two that he already was going to buy from them, but if center two could beat their deal, he'd switch to center two. Therein lies the problem because he already committed to center one with a deposit and commitment and it's easy to presume that center two bit on the bait and tried to underhandedly get the business away from center one with a deal already on the table. Sure, that's cut-throat, but I think there's gotta be some sense of respect for a deal that's been made already. Indeed, you made a valid point earlier that the OP didn't sign a contract, nor did he drive off in the car, so there was no true glue to make the deal technically stick, but in the spirit of good business and ethics, it was bad taste on the OP _*and*_ center two.


----------



## 650 Ryder (Mar 31, 2008)

adrian's bmw said:


> peakpro, I'm in the business and I've seen this up close and personal. It's ugly sometimes. In fact, I've had a situation where the other dealer was trying to get the customer while they were in our business office to get them to still buy from them.
> 
> So it's not entirely the client's fault and I surely don't want to exclusively pin the blame on the OP, but it's the OP's decision to back out on center one. I'm easily assuming that the OP told center two that he already was going to buy from them, but if center two could beat their deal, he'd switch to center two. Therein lies the problem because he already committed to center one with a deposit and commitment and it's easy to presume that center two bit on the bait and tried to underhandedly get the business away from center one with a deal already on the table. Sure, that's cut-throat, but I think there's gotta be some sense of respect for a deal that's been made already. Indeed, you made a valid point earlier that the OP didn't sign a contract, nor did he drive off in the car, so there was no true glue to make the deal technically stick, but in the spirit of good business and ethics, it was bad taste on the OP _*and*_ center two.


With this being said, maybe you dealers should establish some kind of agreement that states you won't lowball each other. The real fact is you can't and won't.....why......everyone is trying to survive in this economy. Car dealers are no different. Why should the consumer play with ethics (not that this was unethical) and the very industry he's interacting with has always been known to be underhanded? This is not a slam on you personally, but the business you are in has had a bad rep for years........Phil


----------



## adrian's bmw (Feb 14, 2003)

damyankee said:


> I'm curious given your strong response to this - it's a very common advertising strategy for auto dealers to claim they will "beat any deal" (just bring us your bonafide offer from another dealer!!!) in a manner just like the OP described.
> 
> Of course, one of the gimmicks behind this is you'll never get anyone to put anything in writing unless you go so far as to put a deposit down like he did, then of course dealer #1 responds like this.
> 
> Hardball maybe, but unethical?


True, but not "after the fact" agreement, doing a dealer trade, shopping.

The fact of the matter is that the OP went to center one and agreed to a deal, gave them a deposit to get the car (buy it, floor it, stock it into their inventory and put $40k or more on their books) and then center two comes in and woos the OP with "we'll beat their price" greatest hits after he's already agreed to do business with center one.

Indeed, center two is definitely playing desperation hardball and the OP is being unethical in backing out of an agreement.


----------



## adrian's bmw (Feb 14, 2003)

650 Ryder said:


> With this being said, maybe you dealers should establish some kind of agreement that states you won't lowball each other. The real fact is you can't and won't.....why......everyone is trying to survive in this economy. Car dealers are no different. Why should the consumer play with ethics and the very industry he's interacting with has always been known to be underhanded? This is not a slam on you personally, but the business you are in has had a bad rep for years........Phil


That would be collusion.

I agree with you in many respects, but the point I'm driving at is that the OP agreed to a deal and kept shopping while center one thought they had a deal and was getting this car for him. The OP's stake is zero since we can arg, center one's stake is flooring a $40k car and having it in their inventory that they wouldn't otherwise want or need in their inventory.

I know our rep isn't the greatest, but nor is alot of other business'.

Center one didn't do anything underhanded. They made an agreement with the OP that seemed to be fair and a win-win on both parts. Center two comes in at the 11th hour after the fact and beats the deal by whatever $ amount- $50-500- who knows, at least the OP could've said look, I know we agreed to a deal and all and center two won't stop calling me to beat your deal but ... no, he didn't try. Just backed out because center two _*promised*_ a better price after the fact. That's easy. Like I said earlier, it's harder to earn the business than buying the business with just a discount.

Look, I've stated my opinion and I respect yours and everyone elses. I don't feel what happened was right and I wouldn't do it to another dealer. If the customer is still in shopping mode, I'm all for being competitive, but if one has committed and agreed to do a dealer trade, that's a big investment in both their time and effort, and I would respect that. I empathize for the OP and center one because all that effort and time went for naught.

End of story. I'm out on this discussion and closing my opinion. Good luck OP.


----------



## damyankee (Apr 3, 2007)

adrian's bmw said:


> That would be collusion.
> 
> I agree with you in many respects, but the point I'm driving at is that the OP agreed to a deal and kept shopping while center one thought they had a deal and was getting this car for him. The OP's stake is zero since we can arg, center one's stake is flooring a $40k car and having it in their inventory that they wouldn't otherwise want or need in their inventory.
> 
> ...


I realize customers can sometimes be a royal PIA; thanks for taking the time to post with the view from your position.


----------



## erdoran (Feb 29, 2008)

It isn't clear to me that OP went to Dealer #2 AFTER signing his contract. When I was shopping, at least two places where I shopped but didn't buy because their price was too high contacted me days after I had walked, offering a lower price. Perhaps that happened here. Also, we still don't know how much of a price difference there was. I think the answer to both these questions is pretty important in sorting out what really happened--whether OP is the bad guy or dealer #1 tried to gouge OP and got caught.


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

notatroll:

1) You are a f****** Weasle.

2) You had meeting of minds, which by definition is a contract.

3) No the dealer cannot keep your deposit.

4) The dealer is entitled to recover damage, to which you caused them when you decided to backed out an agreement.

5) However, the dealer probably will NOT come after you for it.

6) Although it was an deposit and you will get back, you cannot stop payment on that check. You are costing them and your self more $$ for that bouced check and you will pay for it. See: http://ag.ca.gov/consumers/general/badchex.php

7) The proper thing to do is to get a refund from them (that you actually DO entitle to in California) but you've just complicated the matter by placing a stop payment on the check.

Let this be a learning experience for all of us...


----------



## notatroll (Jul 14, 2008)

Can't edit my OP but here is more info:

1. The day after I sat down with Dealer#1, Dealer#2 called me and said they had a vehicle I might like. It was exactly specced as the one Dealer#1 offered me. Dealer#2 made me an offer over $2000 less than Dealer#1's quote. He did not know about me and Dealer#1 at the time. 

I didn't want to back out with Dealer#1, but after doing research it seemed like I was legally able to. I started thinking that my deal with Dealer#1 wasn't such a great deal, and that I should back out. So I did and as you can see in my OP they obviously weren't happy. He accused me of deliberately playing the "beatthisprice" game with him and other dealers and said he didn't want to waste his time talking to me and told me to call his manager.

This is my first car purchase so I may not know all the "rules" or "ethics", but I couldn't justify sticking with Dealer#1 and pay over $2000 more. I also do not belive a handshake and a one-page sales menu is a binding contract. The Sales form I signed had the offer and all the fees, the interest %, the monthly payments and downpayment amount. On the bottom it says the above numbers are estimates only to assist the customer in financing options. On the bottom there is a signature for "Buyer" and "Sales Manager"

I thought it was an agreement on the price, not the actual purchase contract. They wouldn't return my deposit, so I stopped payment on the check.

I agree it is a learning experience, and that I should do more research before going through the steps. I am done with he negotiating and the drama, I am buying from Dealer#2 and that's it. I just hope both sides just drop this. #[email protected]#@ happens.


----------



## skodaracer (Jul 21, 2008)

All you who criticize this person for being unethical seem to conveniently forget that a salesman's number one objective is to close that sale while the customer is there. He doesn't care whether the customer is finished shopping or not, his job is to manipulate that person into signing the deal, paying a deposit and making that symbolic handshake before walking out of the dealership. In this case it was an inexperienced car buyer who walked out of there, only to discover the next day that he got talked into a deal that wasn't very good at all.

You want to talk ethics? How about if the salesman offered him a fair price to begin with? That would have been ethical. Or how about if the automobile industry quit playing games with people and post real prices upfront so customers can comparison shop without getting railroaded into making a commitment, just like they can at a supermarket or department store?

We now know the second dealership is making a profit selling the same vehicle for $2,000 less, so whose interest did that first "ethical" dealer really have in mind when he came up with that price?

A handshake doesn't necessarily set the standard for ethics. It's a sales tool. And in this case, a pressure tactic for the dealer to fall back on once the dirty deal was exposed. 

No wonder people hate car salesmen.


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

adrian's bmw said:


> :stupid: + 1,000,000
> 
> IMO, any dealer down the street can match or beat a deal..that's one of the oldest "tricks" in business, but the first dealer that _*earns*_ the business with an agreement, commitment, and happy customer should always prevail over the second chance, 11th hour low ballers trying to be the den of thieves to steal clients away with price alone. Screw them.


Sealed bids. That's the way to go.

That's why I'll never tell a dealer what price the other dealers are giving me. I had one guy say "Call me when you get all of your prices."

Yeah right.


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

BmW745On19's said:


> We aren't talking about laws here. We are talking about business ethics.


Busness ethics in the car sales world.

:lmao:


----------



## 650 Ryder (Mar 31, 2008)

beewang said:


> notatroll:
> 
> 1) *You are a f****** Weasle.*
> 
> ...


These are the type of post that should get posters banned........the OP ask for advice, not name calling......Phil


----------



## peakpro (Oct 30, 2004)

650 Ryder said:


> These are the type of post that should get posters banned........the OP ask for advice, not name calling......Phil


 his usual MO...better to just ignore him...


----------



## 1Dreamer (Oct 23, 2004)

beewang said:


> you cannot stop payment on that check. You are costing them and your self more $$ for that bouced check and you will pay for it. *See: http://ag.ca.gov/consumers/general/badchex.php*
> 
> 7) The proper thing to do is to get a refund from them (that you actually DO entitle to in California) but you've just complicated the matter by placing a stop payment on the check.
> 
> Let this be a learning experience for all of us...


 The section code you reference involves people who write "consumer bad checks" for goods or services knowing the account has insufficient funds. It does not cover _stopping _payment on checks with sufficient funds for a legally legitimate reason (even if morally questionable). One legally legitimate reason to stop payment would be when someone indicates they will not refund a fully refundable vehicle deposit, and that appears to be what happened here.

Deposit checks related to vehicle purchase/sale transactions through car dealers and brokers in California are covered by the California Vehicle Code.


----------



## erdoran (Feb 29, 2008)

notatroll said:


> Can't edit my OP but here is more info:
> 
> 1. The day after I sat down with Dealer#1, Dealer#2 called me and said they had a vehicle I might like. It was exactly specced as the one Dealer#1 offered me. Dealer#2 made me an offer over $2000 less than Dealer#1's quote. He did not know about me and Dealer#1 at the time.


See what I mean, folks? Perhaps OP should have done his homework but hey, this wasn't the asumed "bring me your best price and I'll beat it by $100", it was a classic case of "rip off the novice car buyer". If Dealer 1 hadn't been so greedy he might have had a leg to stand on...

and that bit about "estimates to apply for financing" reads like weasel-ese to me. Is this common practice when a deposit is left? Sounds like OP could have come back, checkbook in hand, to be told that "it was just an estimate, the final price is $x more than we ESTIMATED".


----------



## adrian's bmw (Feb 14, 2003)

notatroll said:


> Can't edit my OP but here is more info:
> 
> 1. The day after I sat down with Dealer#1, Dealer#2 called me and said they had a vehicle I might like. It was exactly specced as the one Dealer#1 offered me. Dealer#2 made me an offer over $2000 less than Dealer#1's quote. He did not know about me and Dealer#1 at the time.
> 
> ...


Just when I thought I was out, they bring me back in. :rofl:

notatroll, next time, would you please clarify this from the jump? You left everything nebulous and then responded with a link to 1addicts with a situation far different than the one you initially described.. 

Most guys would've simply asked dealer #1 to match the price or at least come close just to keep the business there. There's nothing unethical about asking for more money and making more profit. Dealer #2 was just more desperate and hungry for the business, so no fault on them for not knowing you had agreed to a deal. I retract my position on them. While you're right about not truly having a binding contract, a deal is a deal. You were definitely entitled to your deposit back, but if the trade went through and the car was transported, I think you should've helped out there at least. I think you simply got closed by dealer #2 and they did a good enough job in giving away the money just to make a little money. That's the only card they had left, but you gotta use it sometimes, ya know.

As long as you're happy, I'm happy. :AF330i: I take back some of the stuff that may have come across as disappointed and disgruntled with you. Again, were it clarified, I probably wouldn't have been as defensive for dealer #1. I'm still empathetic only if they did indeed go through with the trade, but I don't think they did and they can cancel and tell the sister store they had no deal.

Congrats on your purchase and, uhh, welcome to the Fest. :bigpimp:


----------



## beewang (Dec 18, 2001)

1Dreamer said:


> ..Deposit checks related to vehicle purchase/sale transactions through car dealers and brokers in California are covered by the California Vehicle Code.


Link please... thank you!


----------



## erdoran (Feb 29, 2008)

Adrian, on the adage "a deal is a deal"--it sounds to me like Dealer #1 was ripping off OP, and leaving himself the option to increase the price still further with this estimate stuff. I would have had a real hard time trusting #1 enough to buy from him after learning about how he was gouging me, and I wouldn't have gone back to him to give him a chance to beat #2's price--I thinik that tactic is actually what you and others have spoken up against, shopping a quote from dealer to dealer, isn't it?. 

And if "a deal is a deal" then what about the stories we've all heard where buyer thinks the price is $x, and all of a sudden high fees and taxes show up and get added (beyond what is normal) or, even worse, the dreaded post-sale phone call "We made a mistake on your deal. the car you bought is $x more than you paid. You have to come back in and re-sign the papers" or the various other ways the amount the buyer pays gets increased AFTER the deal is made.

I'm not picking on you personally, but I am sticking up for OP because that $2k gouge is what gives dealers a bad rep--the only way to kill that type of behavior is to vote with your feet, like OP did!


----------



## 1Dreamer (Oct 23, 2004)

beewang said:


> Link please... thank you!


The following link to the CA DMV site will give you a summary for each section and subsection of California Vehicle Code violations. Start with Section 11713(p) and 11736(c) of the code and follow the trail from there. You may have to read the full text of the code (not just the summaries) to understand it in context. www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/lov/lovd5.htm

*Division 5 -Occupational Licensing and Business Regulation*

See Section 11713(p), Provides that no licensee shall accept a deposit unless the vehicle is present at the dealer's premises or available to the dealer directly from the manufacturer or distributor at the time the dealer accepts the deposit.

11736(c) Failing to refund purchase money or deposit upon demand by consumer prior to completed sale.​


----------

