opinions wanted; car sales gone bad

-
What part of "USED" did this clown not understand?
Unless you held a gun to this guys head, I think he was the one to make the decesion to purchase.
 
Selling a car that is "supposed" to have passed the MIV with bad tires seems a bit sketchy to me. Probably just one of many "clues" as to what really happened.

Why come on here asking for vindication if your conscience is clear?

Sounds to me like the OP found a sucker and took full advantage of it.
 
inspection or no inspection, as is means as is . give me the cash and get it out of here any way you can. if its not in writing , or the dude didnt have it checked out first , it his mistake. the courts dont care.

if people dont have the sense to test drive the thing to their "mechanic" and have it looked over first before laying down the cash, and the seller offered no gaurantee in writing , then you get what you got. its that simple.
people need to make intelligent decisions when buying things instead of blaming everyone for their poor choices when they screw up
 
73AbodEE said:
inspection or no inspection, as is means as is . give me the cash and get it out of here any way you can. if its not in writing , or the dude didnt have it checked out first , it his mistake. the courts dont care.

if people dont have the sense to test drive the thing to their "mechanic" and have it looked over first before laying down the cash, and the seller offered no gaurantee in writing , then you get what you got. its that simple.
Click to expand...
This is true - true words con artists live by. =;
 
340-4spd said:
This is true - true words con artists live by. =;
Click to expand...

so your mechanic that checked it out first is a con artist too ??? very possible ... well , i dont sell cars. but i have watched people lay down cash , get the paperwork done, drive it away without ever having it looked at. then try to sue people 2 months down the road after the thing takes a ****. its a used car with no warranty... buyer beware. do your homework, take it to someone that knows cars before laying down the cash ..easy
if the seller isnt willing to that .... walk away .. even easier
 
73AbodEE said:
so your mechanic that checked it out first is a con artist too ??? very possible ... well , i dont sell cars. but i have watched people lay down cash , get the paperwork done, drive it away without ever having it looked at. then try to sue people 2 months down the road after the thing takes a ****. its a used car with no warrantee... buyer beware. do your homework, take it to someone that knows cars before laying down the cash ..easy
if the seller isnt willing to that .... walk away .. even easier
Click to expand...
Again this is true, but not the issue I see. The issue I see is the question of whether or not the car was misrepresented, and like I said, seems to me this may be the case here, from my perspective.

I could be totally wrong. Or not. Still waiting for the OP to answer my question and plead his case...

Why get it inspected if he wasn't selling an "inspected" car?"
 
340-4spd said:
Again this is true, but not the issue I see. The issue I see is the question of whether or not the car was misrepresented, and like I said, seems to me this may be the case here, from my perspective.

I could be totally wrong. Or not. Still waiting for the OP to answer my question and plead his case...

Why get it inspected if he wasn't selling an "inspected" car?"
Click to expand...

i completely see what you are saying. but if it were me in that situation, and i knew absolutely nothing about cars and the seller *guaranteed* it would pass inspection, regardless of what the seller told me, i would tell them that either you let me take it to someone i trust to look it over first or put it in writing that this car will pass a visual and mechanical inspection within an alloted time, or find another sucker.

all the courts see is documentation. if you sign an "as is" bill of sale without any other stipulations , you are screwed.

people have to protect themselves, so many cases get thrown out of court because they dont take the initiative to cover their asses. people get burned all the time because they simply take people for their "word" instead of taking a couple easy steps.
 
66plyValiant said:
he would have a copy if not DMV would have as per NS inspection laws the customer gets the white copy the shop gets the yellow till the MVI book is full then it goes to the DMV
Click to expand...
I,m thinking if he has taken papers to the DMV,the mileage(KM)indicated on the car(130,000)obviuosly doesn,t match the paperwork when you bought the car(230,000)I,m guessing.Swapping mileage on the car is an offence on cars from a certain year(not sure of what year this started).Also if you had the car certified recently and sold it to him,if the car has now been inspected by DMV mechanics,they will be contacting your vehicle inspector.They will go over the car with a finetooth comb.:evil3:
 
Even the title of this thread he started yesterday, "opinions wanted; car sales gone bad," makes me wonder about this guy. We all know the as-is-where-is mantra. And everyone was quick to point that out and re-hash it.

So why has it "gone bad?" His own words. If you ascribe to the as-is-where-is concept, which I believe we all do, should be no problem, right? What "went bad?"

Should be interesting...
 
Sounds like you did everthing right. I don't think you should have apologized in your reply to him.
 
340-4spd said:
Selling a car that is "supposed" to have passed the MIV with bad tires seems a bit sketchy to me. Probably just one of many "clues" as to what really happened.

Why come on here asking for vindication if your conscience is clear?

Sounds to me like the OP found a sucker and took full advantage of it.
Click to expand...

I agree with you only if the tires weren't talked about prior to the sale. In this case it seems the OP did in fact tell the buyer about the tires needing replaced prior to the sale. If this is the case then who cares what was on the car when inspected. If it was talked about then I see nothing wrong.
 
Glue Man said:
I agree with you only if the tires weren't talked about prior to the sale. In this case it seems the OP did in fact tell the buyer about the tires needing replaced prior to the sale. If this is the case then who cares what was on the car when inspected. If it was talked about then I see nothing wrong.
Click to expand...
So why get it inspected if your intention is to talk about it and undo things that make it pass inspection?
 
I'm guessing the car was due for an inspection, and he was still using the car personally. At the time, he would have no idea whether it would take two weeks, or two months to sell it. Here in Ontario, we don't have annual or bi-annual inspections. Vehicles only get inspected when they change hands. The safety certificate is only valid for 36 days here. (Ontario). The buyer knew the car would coming with bald tires, and it was up to him to get them. In the time the buyer has had the car, who knows how he has driven it. If he managed to blow all 4 struts and consume copious amounts of oil, I'd say he wasn't easy on it!
 
jd340 said:
I'm guessing the car was due for an inspection, and he was still using the car personally. At the time, he would have no idea whether it would take two weeks, or two months to sell it. Here in Ontario, we don't have annual or bi-annual inspections. Vehicles only get inspected when they change hands. The safety certificate is only valid for 36 days here. (Ontario). The buyer knew the car would coming with bald tires, and it was up to him to get them. In the time the buyer has had the car, who knows how he has driven it. If he managed to blow all 4 struts and consume copious amounts of oil, I'd say he wasn't easy on it!
Click to expand...
You can speculate all you want, don't mean a thing. I was trying to go on only the facts that have been presented.
 
Fair enough, I just get the impression the OP was up front with buyer. Until he gets back to this thread, we're just keeping each other company.
 
When I sell a used vehicle here is what I do.

I list pertinent vehicle info: VIN#, mileage, engine - you get the picture.

I then list everything that I know is wrong with the vehicle, visually and mechanically that I'm aware of. Mechanical, oil usage, gas mileage EVERYTHING.

I then put a clause in, this vehicle VIN# blah blah blah, year, make and model, blank in color is sold to SO and SO on whatever date, whatever year. Purchaser agrees to this vehicle being sold/bought AS IS/AS WAS for the amount of:_________


I date the document and have the buyer sign it. I also provide them a copy.
 
340-4spd said:
This is true - true words con artists live by. =;
Click to expand...

I had it reinspected because I planned to drive it this winter but a really good deal on a 2005 came up and the friend needed the money. so I sold it and removed all the snow tires because with the tires I would have lost my shirt on what I had into the car


so I'm a con artist because I removed the $600 worth of new snow tires and put old ones on? what would you do? let the tires go with it for free?

by that way of think that means if you are selling a duster for $6000 and you remove a crate engine because its worth half as much as the car and the buyer knows its a rolling chassis your a con artist? really people...

so that means I should have filled the tank too?

around here your lucky to even get something inspected for $1200; witout inspection you can't drive it
 
You bought it off Craigslist or some such local webvert "with issues."

You ..
66plyValiant said:
... $800 into it in new parts and get it re inspected before selling it
Click to expand...

So why did you get it inspected? To sell it? That's what you said.

We're not talking about a crate engine. We're talking about flipping a POS with a new inspection sticker on it to some sucker, right?
 
chryslerfat said:
The laws here are as is the buyer can have the car inspected before purchase by a qualified shop at his expense. If he procedes to purchase it then he is accepting it as-is no turning back.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that statement. A co-worker sold a 140K miled Porsche 944 for $4000 as is. Even his signed receipt said as is. The buyer was shady with a lawyer buddy and it went to a jury trial. In Michigan there is no such thing as "as is" per the Judge that made my co-worker give $3000 back to the buyer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top