Bought Used Car Which Was Mis-Advertised as a Higher Model

expatOz on 19/04/2018 - 02:51
Last edited 19/04/2018 - 11:55 by 1 other user

So I paid a deposit ($1k) for a used wagon that was listed at $18300. Visited the dealership, took a test drive, liked it and negotiated to close a deal at $17400.

Now something had been bothering me about the car cause it just seemed to lack some features. I researched quite a lot and finally figured that they've lied about the model of the car! In their Ad and the tax invoice provided they claim its an "SLi" whereas its clearly the lower base model "Si", I don't have to do much to prove it.

Based on Redbook data (where they sourced the car specs from), the "Si" prices are:

*Private Price Guide $15,700 - $17,700
*Trade In Price Guide $12,300 - $14,300

.. whereas the SLi prices are:

*Private Price Guide $17,900 - $20,100
*Trade In Price Guide $14,100 - $16,300

I have clearly agreed to pay more than its worth, but its been 3 working days already which means the cooling period has expired and I was about to take delivery today so just wondering what are more options now?

1) I do like the car and willing to take it but not at this price, I'd be happy to take it if they reduced the price by $2000.
2) And If I choose to back out and request my deposit back would the dealer charge me any fees although its not my fault?

Thanks!

Automotive

closed Comments

        • yeahnah-nahyeah on 19/04/2018 - 21:42
          +2

          @Euphemistic: so if it's always the buyers fault for not being wise enough, at what point does it become the salesman's fault and responsibility?

          Again, im genuinely curious. I've obviously no horse in this race

        • expatOz on 20/04/2018 - 05:07

          @Euphemistic: “Under the principle of caveat emptor, the buyer could not recover damages from the seller for defects on the property that rendered the property unfit for ordinary purposes. The only exception was if the seller actively concealed latent defects or otherwise made material misrepresentations amounting to fraud.”

        • chumlee on 20/04/2018 - 05:56
          +3

          @Euphemistic: it's irrelevant what you believe as OP has the law on his/her side so don't know why youbare still going on about it

        • Euphemistic on 20/04/2018 - 06:14

          @spo22a: never said it is always the buyers fault. In this case the buyer didn’t carry out due diligence. What is up for conjecture is wether the dealer was incompetent or deceitful.

          If you bought a house, inspected and approved and then found umout it was under a flight path is it the agents fault they didn’t tell you? Maybe if you asked and they lied to you you could get out if it, but if you don’t ask you’ll be getting earplugs.

        • Aneurism on 20/04/2018 - 09:21
          +2

          @PAOK11:

          It is clear the dealer was in the wrong.

          However, OP did pretty much ignore his intuition. If a buyer does know enough about a car , they should be able to use it to negotiate hard, or walk away…In this case OP failed on signing,..but at least was able to recover from the situation.

          Either way if a person tells a blind man they are giving them $100 when they are actually giving the $10, it is still stealing.

        • PAOK11 on 20/04/2018 - 09:28

          @Aneurism: Captain Obvious ^

        • PAOK11 on 20/04/2018 - 10:40
          -2

          @Aneurism: No, it's fraud

        • Euphemistic on 20/04/2018 - 11:07
          -2

          @PAOK11: or just a typo.

        • Aneurism on 20/04/2018 - 21:22

          @PAOK11:
          So obvious that people needed to debate about the outcome and who was to blame.

        • MessyG on 21/04/2018 - 10:36

          @Euphemistic: My god could you get any more ageist? People get duped by salesmen all the time for a variety of reasons. This issue is simple. Car was advertised as something it's not. Buyer is entitled to a refund, dealership recognised that and gave it. The buyer gets nothing out of this but a headache. Your opinion is moot because even the dealership doesn't agree with it!

      • keejoonc on 20/04/2018 - 17:49
        +1

        Whirlpool is full of idiots. Even the moderators can be so biased and stupid in the way they moderate things.

  • gimme on 20/04/2018 - 08:12
    +17

    Another pointless thread that inevitably attracts overcomplicated responses. Geez some people's problem solving skills leaves a lot to be desired.

    • gimme on 23/04/2018 - 10:48

      aaaaaand just as I had suspected, he was offered a discount and/or refund without having to contact ACCC, BGGGGG, GFFFF, bikies, lawyers, caveeat emptor, buyer's remorse and everything under the sun that was suggested on here. Geez some people like to go with the most complicated 'solution' vs the obvious simple one. Car doesn't match OTP/contract>> contact dealer >> ask for discount or cancellation>> Choose most suitable option>>move on…case closed!

  • [Deactivated] on 20/04/2018 - 11:19
    -2

    On one hand I understand the issue, but on the other hand you inspected it, test drove it, decided you liked it, and willingly paid whatever you paid. That seems to supersede any clerical error in the description. You saw it and liked it enough to buy it. At that point it doesn't really matter if it was listed as a tractor. I'd like to understand, how can you be happy one minute and next minute want to go through an enormous hassle to refund it?

    edit: not talking about law, or contracts, or ACCC or consumer protection. Just trying to comprehend OPs decision making and emotional journey.

    • Hybroid on 20/04/2018 - 13:04

      It's called buyers remorse. Pretty common. Either to think you don't actually want the item after buying it, or wonder if you could have got a better deal if you waited etc.

    • jerjergege on 20/04/2018 - 13:07
      +11

      Lets say you go to a bakery, you don't know how many slices you get in a loaf, or if it's premium or shit.

      The baker says you can get the premium bread for this price, but gives you the shit bread.

      You question if it is premium bread but because the it's the bakers job, he knows more about it than you.

      You decide to buy this "premium" shit bread.

      You later then find out indeed it is shit bread and not premium. EVEN THOUGH you liked it enough to purchase it before finding out it was shit.

      Would you still keep the shit bread?

      EDIT: Got inspired by the NBN post. You go to a bakery, you buy a loaf, but everyone gets different amount of slices even though they buy the "same loaf" and also pay the same amount.

      I'm now craving bread.

      • Dave Id on 20/04/2018 - 15:56

        Sorta like asking the pizza parlor to cut yours into four 'cause you're not hungry enough to eat eight pieces.

      • [Deactivated] on 20/04/2018 - 23:01

        If they say truffle, $5.

        If they say mushroom, $3.

        • follow on 21/04/2018 - 23:34

          truffle butter on the other hand……

      • pegaxs on 21/04/2018 - 10:00
        -2

        bad analogy… It's more like…

        Op went to the baker, was handed some bread. Asked if sure it was Premium bread and got no answer. OP bought the bread anyway.
        Got home and found out that the bread was only "shit bread"
        OP only paid shit bread prices, but wanted premium.
        Baker says "sorry, it was listed wrong. You want another discount or a refund."

        At no time was OP charged Premium prices for "shit bread".

        OP only became butthurt when they found out they were not getting Premium bread for "shit bread" prices…

        • Zarcady on 21/04/2018 - 12:11
          +2

          Are you really that deluded? In your alternate analogy, you conveniently decided to leave out the most important detail.

          'Op went to the baker, was handed some bread'

          Except it was advertised to him as premium bread NOT just handed some bread. You take an excessive amount of liberty when creating a scenario to fit your narrative its (profanity) incredible.

          Everyone has their own way of dealing with conflicts but it does not excuse them from having the same rights as everyone else. Who knows how he asked the question about missing features to the dealer and who know in what tone he replied with and how he phrased it. There is absolutely no need for you to create a narrative of the events that went down based on the OP's limited description.

          The only fact hard fact is, dealer sold car under false pretenses.

          They are lucky not to be charged with fraud

        • pegaxs on 21/04/2018 - 12:38
          -1

          @Zarcady:

          You take an excessive amount of liberty when creating a scenario to fit your narrative…

          And the original "bread" analogy didn’t? Good lord. At least mine was closer to what actually happened based on OP's story. The original bread analogy distorted it that the "baker" pushed it as premium bread and then sold it as the same price as premium bread. The other issues was that it says the baker knows more, and that is wrong, because OP asked the sales person about missing options, showing that OP did know more about the car than the sales guy.

          The only thing in hind sight I should have started with was "OP saw an advert for premium bread…".

          OP wasn't overcharged for the car, as evidenced by the Redbook pricing. At best, it was an error inputting the vehicle details into the system. OP knew it wasn't an SLi, but still chose to go ahead with the deal. This is nothing like the original bread analogy mentioned above.

          And lol @ fraud. Good luck proving that. Quick, call the police!! The dealer offered a further reduction in the price or the option to have a full refund of OP's deposit.

          So, the only one delusional here is you if you think that original bakers analogy is even close to OP's experience…

    • lysp on 20/04/2018 - 19:13
      +1

      It doesn't really have to do with features it has to do with price.

      The point is the purchaser would have done price research on the SLI and got an indication of a reasonable price for the SLI based on carsales/drive/etc.

      So they went ahead with the sale thinking they got a good deal on price ($2-3,000 under market value). So they may have been happy with the car, happy with the features, but due to the mismatch on model that affects the price they are happy with.

      It's like buying a new PS4 from a retail outlet for $500 with 3 included games, and then walking out being accidentally given the no-games model which has a retail of $300. You still want the PS4, and you're happy to accept it with 3 games for $500, or 0 games for $300. But not the 0 games model for $500.

    • c9 on 20/04/2018 - 23:09
      +1

      I think it's not so hard to understand. If you test drive a Samsung s9 , play with it, like it, paid $1349 for it then realize s9 only worth $1199, but it is the s9+ should cost 1349. Would you like to refund the difference?

      • lysp on 20/04/2018 - 23:29

        If the invoice said "s9+" - then yes!

    • spy on 21/04/2018 - 09:47

      But his expectations of market value were based on the model he searched up?

  • theone4u on 20/04/2018 - 12:59
    +1

    Just don't take the car, demand the SLi or money reduced to reflect on the lower model value.

    If they refuse, false advertising is on your side plus the contract states SLi

  • DiscoJango on 20/04/2018 - 14:02
    +3

    Op asks for help. Proceeds to argue with every response given. Classic.

    • Daabido on 20/04/2018 - 16:04

      It could have all been avoided if they just hadn't been a snowflake and tackled the problem with the dealer to start with, rather than ask for opinions on the two options they want. You confront the dealer (nicely), put the two options the table and walk out with the one that suits you. If you still don't get what you want, maybe then ask the question.

    • outlander on 20/04/2018 - 17:22
      +5

      Op's drowning and asks for help. Proceeds to fight off every hand pushing him further under the water. Classic

  • drprox on 20/04/2018 - 15:40

    I had this happen to me. The differences weren't huge (slightly bigger entertainment screen on newer one) and in the end I was happy enough with the price and car anyway. Wasn't worth the hastle :)

  • Herbse on 20/04/2018 - 16:34
    +1

    Haven't read any comments.
    Used car sales have a cooling off period after deposit has been given. They will fight it, but read your contract or contact ACCC.
    My had a similar thigh happen. The salesman cracked it before the deposit was handed back. Don't be pushed around.

  • WishIHadAfridge on 20/04/2018 - 19:26

    It wasnt by any chance a red Cerato was it??

    • ahara on 21/04/2018 - 01:11

      Thinking about it now, OP should ask a friend to go to dealership and show interest in the same car and get in writing the model and price (as an offer). If it’s still the same as per his original paperwork it would prove in my eyes that the salesman is shoddy and it’s clearly not an honest mistake but an effort to defraud.

      Salesman should clearly know now what he’s selling. He should have also known from the beginning as he’s selling a product he bought from someone else previously. I’m sure he did his detailed research when he bought at first so he should know what he has in front of him, and what not.

      • Euphemistic on 21/04/2018 - 07:45

        One thing I have learned from this thread is that too many people place all their trust in a salesman. In my experience, half a lifetime of buying all sorts of stuff, is that you cannot expect a salesman to a) know everything b) tell you everything and most importantly c) be telling the whole truth all the time.

        You have to do your own research and testing or you will get misled. Sometimes deliberately, other times by mistake. I’ve learned this the hard way on occasion and mostly more recently by knowing about what I want and testing the salesman’s knowledge before I purchase.

        Used car salesmen in a big dealership will not purchase he car, or detail it or prepare the paperwork. There is a good chance they don’t know what the car is until it is in the yard in front of them. They will probably be told the price it is listed at, and the minimum price they can sell it for.of course a good salesman will learn about the car to enable them to answer the customers questions as quickly as possible. They stand in the yard waiting for customers and try and relieve them of their money in exchange for whatever car they can.

        • pegaxs on 21/04/2018 - 10:28

          Absolutely spot on. Well said.

        • Mrgreenz on 22/04/2018 - 11:26
          -2

          Which is what OP did. Did his research and found it was mis advertised and didn`t go ahead with the sale

        • Euphemistic on 22/04/2018 - 13:26

          @Mrgreenz: but stupidly did his research AFTER buying and to further complicate it had to try and get out of a contract AFTER the cooling off period. Not the way to do it. If OP had researched properly (inspecting the car properly) there would have been no purchase.

        • Mrgreenz on 22/04/2018 - 13:54
          -1

          @Euphemistic:

          He didn`t “try” to get out of the contract, he got out of it (if you believe the narative) because it was mis-advertised. He also never bought the car.

        • Euphemistic on 22/04/2018 - 14:53

          @Mrgreenz: all which would have been avoided if he had done his research properly before hand and not purchased. Ie see a car advertised, go and look at it and find it was not as described then walk away. No deposit paid, no contract, no concern about being stuck in the contract - which is exactly what was described in the OP.

          It saves a whole range of drama if you don’t think that you can buy anything and take r back if it doesn’t suit.

        • Mrgreenz on 22/04/2018 - 15:28
          -1

          @Euphemistic:

          Sure could have been avoided in a variety of ways. In this case it wasnt but luckily op didnt listen to your advice and managed to not proceed with the sale after a deposit was paid.

        • Euphemistic on 22/04/2018 - 16:55

          @Mrgreenz: I don’t care, the op was lucky to get out of it easily. Made a stupid error in purchasing a car then finding out it wasn’t what they wanted after the cooling off period. Again, this is something that would not have occurred if they had researched properly in the first place.

          My whole point in this thread is that the buyer needs to apply diligence in a purchase, especially a big one like a car. Sure, there are consumer laws to prevent us being ripped off, but if the buyer had purchased the car and described as an SI in the contract they would have been stuck. No consumer protection.

        • Mrgreenz on 22/04/2018 - 21:13
          +1

          @Euphemistic:

          Well it seems you do care, given your frequency of posting, and gave bad advice (on a results orientated basis).

        • Euphemistic on 23/04/2018 - 06:42

          @Mrgreenz: I dont believe I have given bad advice. Buyer beware applies. Sure, sometimes you can get out of it, but not always and there are lots of snake oil salesmen out there, just look at the nitrogen in tyres thread, or dozens of others.

          A better title for this thread would be “inspected and bought a car then changed my mind” because despite the error in the ad, the buyer did exactly that.

          I must be turning into a grumpy old man. I am having less and less tolerance for people doing stupid things.

  • djmm on 21/04/2018 - 13:49

    There's only one solution to this, which is

    • Cheemeister on 21/04/2018 - 16:00

      Oh, everything is so clear now!

      • djmm on 21/04/2018 - 17:22

        Don't be sarcastic. What's unclear about

  • Bargainaholic on 21/04/2018 - 18:38

    Didn’t you look at the badge on the boot lid of the car to see which variant it was?

  • Baysew on 22/04/2018 - 15:15

    What are the differences between "SLi" and "Si"? Which car model is this?

    • pegaxs on 22/04/2018 - 15:59

      If it is SLi vs Si, then it is most likely a Kia, but the model is the question. OP mentions wagon, so possibly not the Picanto, Rio, Optima or Cerato. Rondo only comes in S/Si. Soul only has one trim level.

      Sorento, Sportage or Carnival wear the Si/SLi badges and come in "wagon" (I don’t know what year model OP's reference was to, so trim levels may have changed)…

      Differences between the Si and SLi models are listed at the bottom of the pages for the vehicles I have linked to.

  • Moderatormoocher on 23/04/2018 - 11:08

    As OP has resolved the issue, this thread will be closed.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join