Chevy dealer sells car for wrong price, apologizes after having buyer arrested Priori

[csv8]

Chevy dealer sells car for wrong price, apologizes after having buyer arrested
Priority Chevrolet

By Zach Bowman RSS feed

Posted Oct 2nd 2012 7:14PM



A Virginia man spent four hours in jail after purchasing a Chevrolet Traverse from Priority Chevrolet in Chesapeake, VA. The dealer's sales staff accidentally sold the SUV to Danny Sawyer for $5,600 less than they should have, and when Sawyer refused to sign a new, more expensive contract for the correct amount, the dealership called the local police alleging the buyer had stolen the vehicle. Law enforcement then picked Sawyer up and held him for four hours before getting the situation straight.

Dennis Ellmer, president of Priority Chevrolet, says he owes Sawyer an apology on behalf of the dealership, and had intended to do right by the buyer by letting him have the vehicle at the agreed-upon price. But Sawyer's lawyer says it's a little too late for saying, 'sorry.' The briefly-incarcerated owner has filed two lawsuits against the dealer, accusing the business of malicious prosecution, slander, defamation and abuse of process. All told, the suits seek a total of $2.2 million in damages, plus attorney fees.

That $5,600 seems awfully cheap now.

The lawsuit says Sawyer originally purchased a blue Traverse on May 7, but took the SUV back the next day for a black one. The dealer's sales manager made the swap, allegedly without saying anything about a price differential between the two. Either way, Sawyer signed a final contract for around $34,000 when the vehicle he took home had an actual price of closer to $39,000. On June 15, Sawyer was taken into custody by police, but the Commonwealth dropped the charges after finding insufficient evidence to pursue the case.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/10/02/c...-after-having/
News Source: The Virginian-Pilot via Inside Tidewater

[DJM83]

Only in America, dealers stuff up cop it sweet.

[AU Mont]

why did they even let him swap for another car/colour anyway?

he drove the car off the lot, too late to change your mind!!......... the buyer sounds like a bit of a whinger

[FGII-XR6]

buyer sounds like a whinger? the dealer has him arrested because he undercharged what a scumbag, I hope the buyer bankrupts him

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by AU Mont

why did they even let him swap for another car/colour anyway?

They do that in America as an act of good will provided there is agreement by both parties and no cost difference.
Different to Australia hey....that's what competition does.

he drove the car off the lot, too late to change your mind!!......... the buyer sounds like a bit of a whinger

He was arrested by police on the say so of the dealer, how would you feel?

That $2.2 million figure is an attention getter, they will settle for much less...

[AU Mont]

yep, i will drive a new car off the lot, then decide next day i dont like that colour anymore, i want another colour. Now. And when the dealership wants me to pay the extra charge for a more expensive model and i refuse, im going be completely insulted when police are called. So insulted in fact, that i need about 2.2 million to get over it.

The dealership is the victim here

[gtxb67]

they are both wrong in my opinion - they should both just accept it and get on with their lives

swapping the car over and taking a more expensive car for no extra money is virtual theft
to get him arrested when he hasn't technically stolen it is pretty low too

they deserve each other

[Dave3911]

Originally Posted by AU Mont

yep, i will drive a new car off the lot, then decide next day i dont like that colour anymore, i want another colour. Now. And when the dealership wants me to pay the extra charge for a more expensive model and i refuse, im going be completely insulted when police are called. So insulted in fact, that i need about 2.2 million to get over it.

The dealership is the victim here

Did you read the same article as everyone else?

The dealer's sales staff accidentally sold the SUV to Danny Sawyer for $5,600 less than they should have, and when Sawyer refused to sign a new, more expensive contract for the correct amount, the dealership called the local police alleging the buyer had stolen the vehicle.

The dealer's sales manager made the swap, allegedly without saying anything about a price differential between the two. Either way, Sawyer signed a final contract for around $34,000 when the vehicle he took home had an actual price of closer to $39,000.

According to the article, your version is not what happened at all. As per the article, the dealership agreed to swap the vehicles. He signed NEW contracts. Took the car home and THEN the dealer realised the mistake and asked him to pay more.

I'm sorry, if I've bought something, paid for it, signed all the contracts and then when I get home I get a phone call asking for 5K, I'd tell them to get stuffed as well.

Obviously we only have the one article to go on here and there is always two sides to any story, but I think it's pretty confident to say that whatever went on here it's not criminal and should've been dealt with civilly from the outset. Reporting the car stolen was the wrong thing to do - If I'd been jailed for 4 hours for something like this, I'd be going for damages too!

[Jim Goose]

Not to mention the dealer then made a false accusation to police... a chargable offence.

Contracts signed.... final price is on the contract. Adding extra money afterwards and then expecting the buyer to agree is pretty stupid.

Dealer should loose his dealership, thats not how you treat customers by having them falsely arrested.

[jpd80]

Edit,
Already answered perfectly by Dave3911.
No dealership would allow possession of the keys, until all contracts are signed.
I bet that after signing the contract, the salesman realised what he just did,
panicked and threatened to call the police when the owner was about to leave.....

[scottyg938]

Once the contract was signed the dealer lost any chance of getting the extra $5,600.
If a dealer called you a few days after you had bought a car and said you need to come back and sign a different contract and pay an extra $5,600 would you?
I sure as hell wouldn't, they made the mistake they lose out.

[jpd80]

I wonder what made the new vehicle $5,600 dearer, surely that would have been obvious to the salesman when he drew up the new contract.

A new contract at $34,000 was signed for the second vehicle, this wasn't just like an exchange at Coles or Target.

If after that a salesman came up to anyone ann insisted on you signing a contract or he would call the poilce,
would any of us have reacted any different to this guy, "Well mate, you whistle the dog for the extra.."

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by jpd80

I wonder what made the new vehicle $5,600 dearer, surely that would have been obvious to the salesman when he drew up the new contract.

should have been, but the buyer would have known too - a bit like years ago, when people would peel off lower price stickers and put them on more expensive stuff - it is virtual theft

maybe i should buy an xt and when i take it back, hope the salesman doesn't know i have taken a gt

i guess those putting down the dealership would be happy with a shop accidently over charging them - if a buyer can take a discount without owning up, then the shop doesn't have to either

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

should have been, but the buyer should have known too - a bit like years ago, when people would peel off lower price stickers and put them on more expensive stuff - it is virtual theft

maybe i should buy an xt and when i take it back, hope the salesman doesn't know i have taken a gt

Not the same thing - think 2011 FG II Vs 2012 FG II
Quite often, a superseded year model may have an incentive of $5600 but look almost identical to a full MSRP 2013 model.
Either way you slice it under US contract law, any confusion on the part of the contract benefits the buyer, not the person drawing up the contract.
If a valid contract was signed, keys handed over, the salesman has absolutely no right to call police and have the buyer detained and accused of stealing, none whatsoever.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Either way you slice it under US contract law, any confusion on the part of the contract benefits the buyer, not the person drawing up the contract.

i agree, but if the buyer knew about it, he is as bad as the dealer - once again, they deserve each other

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i agree, but if the buyer knew about it, he is as bad as the dealer - once again, they deserve each other

No they don't, the onus is on the seller to set the correct price.

[jpd80]

The buyer may not have known there was a difference in price, you cannot assume that...

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The buyer may not have known there was a difference in price, you cannot assume that...

i can assume that - if i was out looking for a brand new car i would know what i was looking at
human nature suggests that the average person is willing to get any discount they can whether honest or not


once again
"if" the buyer knew about it, he is as bad as the dealer was in my opinion

unlike the average person, i care about moral dealings - not what the law says is right, because the law seems to only look after crooks

[chevypower]

It could have been an honest mistake by a dealer followed by an overreaction by the dealer followed by complete greed by the customer. I bought a car years ago, thought I got a good deal, the previous owner realized he made a mistake and was very upset. I paid him an extra thousand, everything was all good. Sometimes what's legal isn't necessarily what's right.

[Mel-D]

I hope the dealer get taken to the cleaners. What a low thing to do. The vehicle was never stolen, it was an agreed and paid for price.

[99AUXR]

Dealer stuff up what the dealer did was spiteful and pathetic attempt. False accusation and the dealer knew it.

[2011G6E]

I'm sure I've heard of advertising for new cars saying that if you weren't completely happy with your purchase, bring it back within a week and they'd replace it with a similar one that suited you. I know they do this a lot in America, but I'm sure I've heard of it here.

Once the buyer has signed, and the cooling off period has ended, it's too bad for whoever stuffed up, buyer or seller.

I do remember one guy I work with who ordered a new XR6 Turbo on his lease plan a couple of years back, who when he went away forthe weekend to pick it up after all the paperwork had been done and signed and the lease plan organsied, was told that "by mistake" the XR6T they got was the right colour and trim, but it was fitted with the premium stereo and sat nav instead of the standard stereo. They wanted him to pay extra for it...after he had the keys and all the finalised paperwork in his hands...
His only reply was to wave happily as he drove away.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i can assume that - if i was out looking for a brand new car i would know what i was looking at
human nature suggests that the average person is willing to get any discount they can whether honest or not


once again
"if" the buyer knew about it, he is as bad as the dealer was in my opinion

unlike the average person, i care about moral dealings - not what the law says is right, because the law seems to only look after crooks

All US vehicles have an MSRP sticker in the window which contains the price of that vehicle without discounts.
There is absolutely no way that the buyer can deceive or mislead sales staff as to the price of their own vehicle
and continuing to suggest otherwise is extremely hard to sustain and further to that, I think you'll find that
the dealer principle's statement of apology is proof to the contrary an hones mistake was made by both parties
presuming that the cost of the replacement vehicle was the same as the one returned.

Where the story goes pear shaped is how the dealership sales staff have reacted after realising their oversight,
now that is truly disgusting and deserving of a penalty.

As a person of good moral character, I'm sure you would be extremely upset if a sales person you had dealt with
suddenly accused you of being a thief because they made a clerical error and then called the police to arrest you..

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by jpd80

As a person of good moral character, I'm sure you would be extremely upset if a sales person you had dealt with
suddenly accused you of being a thief because they made a clerical error and then called the police to arrest you..

have you even bothered to read my posts - argue with someone else

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

have you even bothered to read my posts - argue with someone else

I have read your posts,you pursue a line that the buyer was somehow dishonest let's list them:

human nature suggests that the average person is willing to get any discount they can whether honest or not

once again
"if" the buyer knew about it, he is as bad as the dealer was in my opinion

unlike the average person, i care about moral dealings - not what the law says is right, because the law seems to only look after crooks

And I'm done.................



Those three statements show your prejudice in assuming some sleight of hand has taken place.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by jpd80

I have read your posts,you pursue a line that the buyer was somehow dishonest let's list them:






And I'm done.................



Those three statements show your prejudice in assuming some sleight of hand has taken place.

try reading them all before you are done

Originally Posted by gtxb67

to get him arrested when he hasn't technically stolen it is pretty low too

they deserve each other

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

try reading them all before you are done

Missed one:

Originally Posted by gtxb67
to get him arrested when he hasn't technically stolen it is pretty low too

swapping the car over and taking a more expensive car for no extra money is virtual theft

they deserve each other

How can a person falsely accused of stealing and his accuser be deserving of each other?

to get him arrested when he hasn't technically stolen it is pretty low too

Correct.

[Ben73]

Pathetic act by the dealer.
If they swapped a car over, signed a new contract and this contract did not say the car was worth an extra $5000 then bad luck. Dealer stuffed up and I'm glad that guy is looking to sue them for having him arrested over their own stupidity.
Police should also fine the dealer for making a false claim about a stolen car.

I highly doubt this guy will be getting his services done by the dealer. Another way they are going to miss out.
Wonder if the $5000 was worth all this trouble.

[AU Mont]

Originally Posted by Dave3911

According to the article, your version is not what happened at all. As per the article, the dealership agreed to swap the vehicles. He signed NEW contracts. Took the car home and THEN the dealer realised the mistake and asked him to pay more.

I'm sorry, if I've bought something, paid for it, signed all the contracts and then when I get home I get a phone call asking for 5K, I'd tell them to get stuffed as well.

youve just justified what you were trying to argue against. The dealership IN GOOD FAITH let this whinger swap his car over, accidentally let him drive off with a more expensive model, and this dishonest person refused to pay the difference OR take his car back............. so the dealership resorted to any means possible to make this DISHONEST person have a difficult life for a day, big deal.

You reckon you would tell them to get stuffed, thats being low in my books. Some people do the right thing, and some people dont, then whinge when life doesnt go in their favour..........

[MITCHAY]

The guy got locked up for no good reason. Well within his rights to sue though $2m+ is rather excessive it gives a lot of scope to get a decent settlement.