If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AutoBlog)   Got a good deal on a new car? That's a jailin'   (autoblog.com) divider line 128
    More: Asinine, malicious prosecution, Chesapeake, arbitrages, legal burden of proof, sales managers, arrest records, Chevrolet Traverse, false arrest  
•       •       •

11372 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Oct 2012 at 5:02 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-03 10:25:13 AM  
Had a body shop once find out that my insurance paid me more than the shop had charged me, so they called me, days after I signed and paid for the work.

Shop: Um...we replaced a "bumper reinforcement bar" and forgot to charge you it, pay us for that too please.
Me: I signed a contract and paid for the work performed already, so, um...NO.
Shop: B-b-b-but the insurance paid you more than we charged you
Me: So? That's none of your business. We agreed and signed a contract
Shop: We're gonna sue you
Me: See you in court *hang-up*

I then go to look for the replaced part they spoke of....it was not replaced, it was the old one they bent back into shape and I could see the tool marks...so I called back, to tell them what I found and that I've contacted the Attorney General's office. They weren't very happy.

/I always mark my parts and check afterwards
//I always ask for my old parts back
//Caught several shops and dealerships red-handed (gotten me alot of free work)
 
2012-10-03 10:26:32 AM  

imtheonlylp: Well-played. My thoughts exactly. I do hope the dealership gets some sort of punishment for calling the cops on the customer, but I also hope karma steps in on behalf of the customer and deals him a little dishonesty later in life as well.


Yes, won't someone think of the poor oppressed car dealerships? Always getting screwed by their customers.

I'm sure that if the mistake had gone the other way the dealership would have gone out of their way to rectify the situation ASAP. Sorry, sir, you've paid over MSRP! Here's the difference and a little something for your trouble!

No one got screwed. They negotiated a deal and tried to back out of it.
 
2012-10-03 10:27:36 AM  
Better story, with more details. He was arrested and had to post bond.

Link
 
2012-10-03 10:29:04 AM  

MycroftHolmes: Musikslayer: MycroftHolmes:
So, while the detention is not a small thing, I see no indication of wrongdoing on the part of the police.

Only if the police follow up and charge the dealership for making a false charge etc. If they do that, the police did nothing wrong. If the don't, any business can do this to anyone. Mickey D's could have people arrested for giving them the Supersize instead of the regular. In addition to any lawsuits, the Police need to step up to the plate and charge them with a crime.

Well, that wouldn't be the police, that would be the DA. At this point, the police are probably not involved.


True. I should have said "Da Man" needs to charge the Dealership. It's the same outcome though, if the DA doesn't file charges than any business can do this.
 
2012-10-03 10:31:23 AM  

MycroftHolmes: So, you are saying that if call the police and tell them I saw a guy driving away from my house with my stuff, before they go detain him to sort things out, they should ask me to provide documentation that the things are really mine?


Not at all like what happened here, but don't let that stop you.

MycroftHolmes: And you are really saying 'Let's go down to the station until we can get this all sorted out' is wholly inappropiate?


The information we have is that he was arrested and detained. If you want to go off that script, you'll be the one that has to provide the citation.
 
2012-10-03 10:33:50 AM  

imtheonlylp: ...but I also hope karma steps in on behalf of the customer and deals him a little dishonesty later in life as well.


Because signing a contract someone else wrote for a product they provided and priced is so incredibly dishonest, right?

I wouldn't buy a car from you. You sound like a cheat.
 
2012-10-03 10:37:19 AM  

The Muthaship: MycroftHolmes: So, you are saying that if call the police and tell them I saw a guy driving away from my house with my stuff, before they go detain him to sort things out, they should ask me to provide documentation that the things are really mine?

Not at all like what happened here, but don't let that stop you.

MycroftHolmes: And you are really saying 'Let's go down to the station until we can get this all sorted out' is wholly inappropiate?

The information we have is that he was arrested and detained. If you want to go off that script, you'll be the one that has to provide the citation.


To your first point, the standard you established was

"Cop to dealer: Let me see any documentation you have on this vehicle before I go and deprive a citizen of his freedom."

So, you are in fact saying that the standard should be that property ownership must clearly be established before the police should act. Which is the same standard I used in my example to point out how ridiculous this is. You do get that application of law should be consistent and standardized, right, not just on the whim of whoever.

to the second point, i will concede that he was arrested. In light of the facts that the police knew at the time, I don't think this was unreasonable.
 
2012-10-03 10:37:31 AM  
Civil suit seems rather high, but he should demand all the people at the dealership involved be arrested and charged for trumping up charges against him. Last I checked making false statements to police, not to mention trying to steal/defraud the man of the car, is a crime.

Let them know what it feels like to be arrested.
 
2012-10-03 10:39:35 AM  

MycroftHolmes: The Muthaship: MycroftHolmes: a) please point out the part where it says that he was arrested
b) please provide citation that he had the paperwork with him
c) please provide a citation that indicates he was held for a significant amount of time after the paperwork was provided and vetted

Are you completely stupid, or just trying to get a rise out of liam76?

a) The headline tells you he was arrested. The article says he was held for 4 hours.
b) Even if he didn't have his paperwork on him, he was in a place that had copies as required by law.
c) He was taken into custody, and held for 4 hours for no reason whatsoever. It doesn't really matter if that is significant in your opinion. But, you can bet your ass is was in his.

a) headlines are often incorrect, i was going by the body of the article, which very carefully avoids the word arrest
b) I did not get the impression that he was picked up from the car dealership. Can you provide your source that indicates that he was at the dealership when he was picked up?
c) he was taken into custody to clarify an accusation of a crime. Are you proposing that if someone is accused of a crime by people who indicate clearly that he was the perpetrator, that he should not be detained just because he denies committing the crime?

So, while the detention is not a small thing, I see no indication of wrongdoing on the part of the police.


FTFA "Sawyer was taken into custody by police, but the Commonwealth dropped the charges after finding insufficient evidence to pursue the case"

Taken into custody means arrested, the police have zero power to hold you, much less transport you to the police station, without arresting you. That is basic criminal law knowledge. Furthermore, "Commonwealth dropped the charges" again reiterates the fact that he was farking arrested. Charges would have been brought by the dealership saying the car was stolen, relayed to the police who arrested him and moved his person and then forwarded the arresting charges to the prosecutor's office. The prosecutor gets the case after the police have done all their work and send the case to them, the prosecutor doesn't go and build their own case. FYI, in all cities at least, prosecutor offices have a person in the police station processing all arrest and making the necessary files and listing the charges for which they were brought.

Now since you're a fark troll and will say "the article didn't say he was arrested" here's another source and states he was given bond (hint you have to be arrested to get that too): LinkNew article gives so many more details,such as he was a registered nurse and that the mangers again repeatedly told their bosses and others the SUV was stolen and kept to that line until confronted. In fact, according to the new article, the manager KNEW the guy was about to be arrested and kept his rat-face mouth shut.

Do you have any farking idea what kind of mess and trouble he will have keeping his license with a felony arrest ? The charges were 'dropped due to lack of evidence' so he was never cleared and will always have this problem since the arrest will challenge his moral character for the license. He will battle that forever, the 2million he is asking for isn't really that high given the facts.

//linked story has the complaint too, good reading and the dealership is f*cked.
 
2012-10-03 10:43:02 AM  

TheYeti: imtheonlylp: Well-played. My thoughts exactly. I do hope the dealership gets some sort of punishment for calling the cops on the customer, but I also hope karma steps in on behalf of the customer and deals him a little dishonesty later in life as well.

Yes, won't someone think of the poor oppressed car dealerships? Always getting screwed by their customers.

I'm sure that if the mistake had gone the other way the dealership would have gone out of their way to rectify the situation ASAP. Sorry, sir, you've paid over MSRP! Here's the difference and a little something for your trouble!

No one got screwed. They negotiated a deal and tried to back out of it.


Why don't people think the same thing about grocery stores, or restaurants for that matter? You know $3.99 isn't the ACTUAL cost of a gallon of milk, nor is $3.59 the actual cost of a gallon of gas. Yet, we all still pay it and don't call the grocery stores/gas stations crooks/thieves. Amirite?
 
2012-10-03 10:49:42 AM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: imtheonlylp: ...but I also hope karma steps in on behalf of the customer and deals him a little dishonesty later in life as well.

Because signing a contract someone else wrote for a product they provided and priced is so incredibly dishonest, right?

I wouldn't buy a car from you. You sound like a cheat.


Didn't say that signing a contract was dishonest, but knowing that you are getting something that you are not paying for based on a mistake is. If you go to the gas station, pay for a $1 drink with a $10 bill and the cashier gave you $99 back, mistaking your $10 for a $100, then would the cashier be the dishonest one, or would you consider that a mistake? If you do not return it, pointing out the cashier's mistake, then is that honesty at work?
 
2012-10-03 10:52:57 AM  

imtheonlylp: Vegan Meat Popsicle: imtheonlylp: ...but I also hope karma steps in on behalf of the customer and deals him a little dishonesty later in life as well.

Because signing a contract someone else wrote for a product they provided and priced is so incredibly dishonest, right?

I wouldn't buy a car from you. You sound like a cheat.

Didn't say that signing a contract was dishonest, but knowing that you are getting something that you are not paying for based on a mistake is. If you go to the gas station, pay for a $1 drink with a $10 bill and the cashier gave you $99 back, mistaking your $10 for a $100, then would the cashier be the dishonest one, or would you consider that a mistake? If you do not return it, pointing out the cashier's mistake, then is that honesty at work?


Read the newly linked article above, that's not what happened. Seems the mistake was the dealership in the original paperwork and given that they made another mistake taking the check it seems the people there are extremely sloppy and will pay for it this time.
 
2012-10-03 10:56:52 AM  

mauricecano: MycroftHolmes: The Muthaship: MycroftHolmes: a) please point out the part where it says that he was arrested
b) please provide citation that he had the paperwork with him
c) please provide a citation that indicates he was held for a significant amount of time after the paperwork was provided and vetted

Are you completely stupid, or just trying to get a rise out of liam76?

a) The headline tells you he was arrested. The article says he was held for 4 hours.
b) Even if he didn't have his paperwork on him, he was in a place that had copies as required by law.
c) He was taken into custody, and held for 4 hours for no reason whatsoever. It doesn't really matter if that is significant in your opinion. But, you can bet your ass is was in his.

a) headlines are often incorrect, i was going by the body of the article, which very carefully avoids the word arrest
b) I did not get the impression that he was picked up from the car dealership. Can you provide your source that indicates that he was at the dealership when he was picked up?
c) he was taken into custody to clarify an accusation of a crime. Are you proposing that if someone is accused of a crime by people who indicate clearly that he was the perpetrator, that he should not be detained just because he denies committing the crime?

So, while the detention is not a small thing, I see no indication of wrongdoing on the part of the police.

FTFA "Sawyer was taken into custody by police, but the Commonwealth dropped the charges after finding insufficient evidence to pursue the case"

Taken into custody means arrested, the police have zero power to hold you, much less transport you to the police station, without arresting you. That is basic criminal law knowledge. Furthermore, "Commonwealth dropped the charges" again reiterates the fact that he was farking arrested. Charges would have been brought by the dealership saying the car was stolen, relayed to the police who arrested him and moved his person and then forwar ...


More in-depth article is a great find. Well-played.
 
2012-10-03 10:57:49 AM  

MycroftHolmes: i will concede that he was arrested. In light of the facts that the police knew at the time, I don't think this was unreasonable.


In that case, we're done. And, I hope you aren't a cop.
 
2012-10-03 10:59:02 AM  
The newly-found article pretty makes this a moot argument. Dealership will suck it in court.
 
2012-10-03 11:00:00 AM  

MycroftHolmes: a) headlines are often incorrect, i was going by the body of the article, which very carefully avoids the word arrest
b) I did not get the impression that he was picked up from the car dealership. Can you provide your source that indicates that he was at the dealership when he was picked up?
c) he was taken into custody to clarify an accusation of a crime. Are you proposing that if someone is accused of a crime by people who indicate clearly that he was the perpetrator, that he should not be detained just because he denies committing the crime?


a) So you were going by the assumption that the headline was wrong with no proof?

b) He was likely arrested at (or near) the dealership, or in his car. Everytime I have bought a car I have proof that I own it (even if it is temporary paperwork from the dealer). I think the assumption he had paperwork is a lot more reasonable than your assumptuion that the headline is a lie.

c) No he was arrested. Everybody is fien for him being detained for the five minutes it takes to look at his paperwork, they have a problem with him being arrested for four hours because the cops are too stupid to listen to him.
 
2012-10-03 11:19:24 AM  
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.

Early in my legal career I had a client in this situation. The dealer made the same threat, to have her arrested for a felony.

I told him I was begging him to carry out his threat. I was just starting out, and didn't dream I could have a case that would buy me a house outright until that moment.

Needless to say he was bluffing. No house for me.
 
2012-10-03 11:30:57 AM  
I find it hard to fault the police in this case - while I agree that they likely could have done more investigation prior to an arrest, the bottom like comes from the article that Tomley linked - the dealership never transferred the legal title of the vehicle to the customer. If the dealer presented the legal title to the vehicle to the police and said, "That guy stole it!", and the guy has the vehicle and can't show legal title, unless the customer could show the signed paperwork I can understand why the police might arrest him. There's not enough information in any of the articles that I've seen to indicate the police acted wrongly here.

The dealer, on the other hand, needs to be held both criminally and civilly accountable for this. There was certainly no theft in this case, they were well aware of it (as evidence: they not only signed the contract that they wrote, but they also accepted payment in accordance with it). Whomever made the report of theft needs to face charges for the false statement. From a civil perspective, by failing to transfer the legal title to the vehicle after the contract was fulfilled the dealer was certainly in breach of contract. They need to be held liable for that breach, plus the difficulties caused by the false report, plus additional costs incurred by the customer (alternate vehicle, legal fees, defamation). This is a big deal - if the dealer was convinced that the contract should be nullified, there are appropriate legal steps they can take (filing a civil suit would have been a good start). The dealer's actual conduct was completely unreasonable.

That said, the customer has lost a lot of sympathy (maybe even credibility) by filing suit for millions of dollars. There is no way that the dealer's actions caused damages on that level, nor do the statutes for punitive damages allow for amounts of that magnitude.

/This legal opinion brought to you by a graduate of the Judge Judy school of contract law
//Not valid legal opinion in actual courts of law
 
2012-10-03 12:47:59 PM  

jayhawk88: Loaded Six String: 2.2 million dollars in damages? Come the fark on. 4 hours in jail doesn't justify that kind of punitive damages unless he was grossly mistreated, in which case it would be primarily directed at the police anyways. This kind of litigious action just seems like an unethical money grab to me. There should be caps for this sort of thing, instead of aiming for the moon and working down $1,000 at a time from there.

Actually, to me $2.2 mil is fair. Go drive around your town and pay attention to how many of the dealerships have either completely renovated or built entirely new buildings within the past 5 years. The big dealerships are making money hand over fist, and the point of punitive damages is that the person/company should feel punished by the amount.


The dealers actually don't have a say in what the building looks like, it's the manufacturer that dictates this. For example, I manage a small Mazda dealership in Canada. We sold about 130 vehicles last year, new and used combined. The owner lost money on operations last year (first time in 23 years), but Mazda Canada has now sent him a letter stating that they will pull his franchise if he doesn't spend about $250 000 to renovate the dealership in accordance with their imaging program. And the building is only 9 years old.

Yes, some dealers are making money hand over fist, but not all them. Even if all the dealerships look new.
 
2012-10-03 01:29:13 PM  
I had a dealership pull this same shiat on me way back in 1994, but without the arresting. They pretty much blew up my phone, then the sales manager and the business manager started showing up at the house demanding I either sign the new contract they brought or hand over the keys to the pickup. They threatened to call the cops, but never actually followed through with that part.
It took a strongly worded letter from a local attorney that used some legalese to say "Sucks to be you, Fitzpatrick Chevrolet of Storm Lake, IA. Leave this guy alone now"

/End CSB
 
2012-10-03 02:42:26 PM  
There should be some criminal charges against the car salesman, but for civil damages, 4 hours doesn't equal 2 million. They should just give him the car for free. There are times when punitive damages might well be appropriate for punishment but still be inappropriate windfalls for plaintiffs. Excessive punitive damages should be put into a general victims compensation fund to help people who get screwed by people without fat wallets.
 
2012-10-03 03:04:35 PM  

HoratioGates: There should be some criminal charges against the car salesman, but for civil damages, 4 hours doesn't equal 2 million. They should just give him the car for free. There are times when punitive damages might well be appropriate for punishment but still be inappropriate windfalls for plaintiffs. Excessive punitive damages should be put into a general victims compensation fund to help people who get screwed by people without fat wallets.


Just a quick FYI for all of the people downplaying the whole 4 hours thing: That arrest is on his record.....forever.

If there ever was a time for excessive punitive damages, maliciously filing a false report is it.
 
2012-10-03 03:10:33 PM  

phrawgh: Cal Worthington and his orange jumpsuit.


there's a name i have not seen in a coons age.
 
2012-10-03 04:17:50 PM  

Maneck: If this guy wins the lawsuit, it would be a travesty. He acted like a dick and took advantage of someone who made an honest error while trying to help him.


Yep. You will never meet a more selfless and trustworthy bunch than car salesmen. I don't know how somebody could with themselves after pulling one over on such a good and honest person. I don't want to live on this planet any more.
 
2012-10-03 04:52:09 PM  

eKonk: I find it hard to fault the police in this case


according to the article tomley linked, police declined to comment on what lead to the arrest and won't release the investigation report, even flaunting that it's exempt from freedom of information disclosure. that report must be damaging, especially if they got an arrest warrant.

i hope there's a follow up story where he sues to have his arrest expunged from his record after his suit with the dealer is settled. he should be able to see a copy of the report and might lead to a gross negligence suit.
 
2012-10-03 04:56:30 PM  

imtheonlylp: The newly-found article pretty makes this a moot argument. Dealership will suck it in court.


and then the police department when he sues to have his arrest expunged and gets to see the "investigative report" that lead to his arrest.
 
2012-10-03 06:43:23 PM  
MycroftHolmes

a) please point out the part where it says that he was arrested

If you're sitting in jail, you've been arrested.
FTA:
A Virginia man spent four hours in jail..

b) please provide citation that he had the paperwork with him

Dear dumbass it is innocent till proven guilty. They had no proof or reason to believe he stole the car. Do you carry a receipt for your shoes with you? No? You're saying you wouldn't mind being strip searched and thrown in jail till you PROVED you owned said shoes, right?

c) please provide a citation that indicates he was held for a significant amount of time after the paperwork was provided and vetted

FTA:
A Virginia man spent four hours in jail..

In jail 4 hours is significant. It is FAR past reasonable amount of time allowed for an investigatory detention. At best they had Reasonable articulable suspicion to stop the guy. Past that. They had nothing.
 
2012-10-04 03:29:07 PM  
Dennis Ellmer, the president of the dealership, last week acknowledged his staffers erred, first when they undersold the car and then when they reported Sawyer to the authorities.
"I owe Mr. Sawyer a big apology," Ellmer told the Virginian-Pilot last week.


ERROR???
no, they committed a felony by falsely accusing someone of grand theft auto. They should be charged!
And you? well you are going to settle for a TON of cash.

DIAF asshole
 
Displayed 28 of 128 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report