On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:27:44 GMT, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>
><hsg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:soloe394f0s6s13n7sq1btjgortb83s2vn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:58:54 GMT, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I do not believe you have "damaged goods". I do not see that you have
any
>>>actionable issues.
>>>
>>>I believe you have a vehicle that was built according to specs. The
door
>>>went through a mfg. spec check, and it was found that a plate was
needed
>>>for
>>>whatever reason. They added said plate, presumably outside of the
>>>automated
>>>mfg line, and after some period of time that modification failed. Now,
>>>they
>>>have to repair it again.
>>>
>>>I agree with your position that for the money you paid for the car, you
>>>might expect First Quality goods. With Porsche printed on the hood and
>>>trunk
>>>lid, I'd expect better quality as well, but it is just a car. Let them
fix
>>>the car, then decide if you want to keep it or sell it. If you sell it,
>>>resist the temptation to buy another.
>>>
>>>If Porsche can not or will not fix it, THEN you might have an
actionable
>>>claim. But as long as they agree to put the warranty department to
work,
>>>then your subsequent action will arise from those repairs or the lack
of
>>>them.
>>>
>>>Your claim will be under what we call here in the States, the Lemon
Law. A
>>>lemon is a car that is plagued with manufacturing defects, but to make
a
>>>claim under the lemon law, they have to attempt repair the SAME THING
>>>three
>>>times. It they can't fix after three tries, then you can make a claim
>>>under
>>>the lemon law, but the manufacturer is only required to buy the car
back
>>>for
>>>your purchase price plus any finance charges you might have made.
>>>Depending
>>>on the good will they might want to express, they may elect to
compensate
>>>for your troubles, but most buyers are happy to be clear of the piece
of
>>>shit, and the related payments. I do not see your case as a Lemon Law
>>>issue
>>>yet, you have not said that they have been given several chances to
clear
>>>this up.
>>>
>> The US Lemon Law is a nice bit of legal stuff but here we have "the
sale
>> of
>> goods act" which itself is slightly better protection that you have in
the
>> US.
>> Generally it's "Caveat Emptor" in the US or Buyer Beware.
>>
>> Over her the basic rule is that whatever is sold in the way of TRADE or
>> Retail
>> and not person to person or trader to trader must be what it is
supposed
>> to be
>> and fit for the purpose it was intended to be used for.
>> An example would be as our friend said
>>
>> "Mr Porsche dealer can I have a new Porsche straight from the
production
>> line as
>> I want to drive it from London to Alicante in Spain"
>>
>> No problem if the car has 38 miles on it when delivered to the customer
>> and
>> smalls of dead cow hide (leather) and goes like a Saturn 5 rocket.
>>
>> However in our friend told the dealer he was a sheep farmer and wanted
the
>> Porsche to replace his tractor and the dealer told him it would do
>> everything
>> his tractor would do then he can have his money back as it clearly
won't.
>>
>> That is a bit OTT. But whatever it is it must be of merchantable
quality
>> without
>> any defects unless pointed out (sale goods - pre registered cars -
demos
>> etc).
>> To my mind under UK law if and I reiterate IF this vehicle was
delivered
>> to the
>> customer in a pre damaged - repaired condition then it clearly was NOT
in
>> the
>> advertised and sold as condition as a NEW vehicle as it had been
involved
>> in an
>> "accident" and repaired making it "TAINTED".
>>
>> However, as before a court might consider that the guy has had use of
it
>> without
>> this repair coming to light for however long but now this damage has
come
>> to the
>> surface the resale value of the vehicle has been lowered and the court
>> could
>> order a sum to compensate the guy for this loss at today's prices. The
>> company
>> could buy back the car at current retail selling price on the SH market
or
>> they
>> could give him his purchase price back + finance interest (unlikely).
>>
>
>
>Yes, but it is not clear that the vehicle was repaired because of damage,
or
>was modified at the factory during manufacturing because they found that
a
>plate was needed that was not part of the original design spec. We just
>don't know what the circumstances are surrounding the plate that has come
>loose.
Jeff
That is why I mentioned that this "plate" could be a modification for some
gizmo
that could be fitted as an accessory and installed on the production line.
It
was not mentioned whether this was a damage repair or where exactly it
might be.
I believe there are side impact bars in the doors and any half decent body
shop
would have re skinned the door if it was surface damaged or even replaced
it if
damaged on arrival off a transporter. My BMW had 2 scratches from the
delivery
driver and all the fuel siphoned from the tank. The company I bought it
from
gave me the money to fill the tank again and the local BMW dealer fixed
the
scratches (minor) FOC and it still carries the BMW 5 year paint warranty
and 10
year corrosion warranty.
>
>I understand the point that if the vehicle had been wrecked, and
repaired,
>then sold as new, this is an actionable fraud case. Let's say, for
example,
>the car was out on a test drive -- not delivered to the buyer (and not
this
>buyer) -- and was struck in the door. The dealership turns around and
>rotates the car through the body shop to get pounded out and painted,
then
>they sell it as a New Car. Technically, it IS a new car since it had
never
>been registered. This could be construed as a fraudulent sale, but it
seems
>to me that the dealership would not want the bad press that goes with
being
>discovered on this. They would avoid the bad press by putting the car on
the
>used car lot and selling it at a discount over the price of the same car
on
>the new car lot. The discount would be small because they would be
up-front
>with the buyer -- we had this car on a test drive and some putz ran into
it,
>as you can see it is in perfect condition but we did have to roll it
through
>the body shop for repairs, you can take advantage of our loss here and
have
>a brand new car for a used car price. Sign here. And here, and here.
>
>Barring any further factual information, I see no actionable issues here.
>Perhaps that's why I am not a lawyer ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sir Hugh of Bognor
The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys.
Intelligence is not knowing the answer but knowing where and how to find
it!
Hugh Gundersen
hsg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK
|
