IS-SV

Thanks, so it's up to Lexus corporate for final approval (to warranty it as CPO).

calvin2376

iTrader: (2)

Lexus corporate merely processes the paperwork, they don't do their own inspection or anything. So if the dealer performs the inspection and pays for the warranty and the car meets the criteria, Lexus corporate will issue the warranty. So yes, they actually issue the warranty, but do not verify the car's condition or anything like that.

WHITE93GT

Like that would never hurt your credit, LOL. Sounds good but that's the worst possible thing you could do.

Now I will go back to reading the rest of this interesting thread.

is250cpo

iTrader: (1)

yeah i rather not have to deal with a lawyer unless its its absolutely necessary.
For now i have documented everything, every call, un-returned voice mail, un-returned email, when they called back, what they said, in case it is needed later on.
I still have some hope that Lexus corporate will come through, and with the fact that the GM from rockville confirmed himself that thrre was in an accident can only help my case.

I never cleared up the issue with the second the dealer, the way rockville explained it to me today was that the windshield wiper fluid mechanism could have been damaged from the accident and in that case, lexus of queens was right in the fact that they would not have been reimbursed by lexus corporate for fixing it since it wasn't a defect on the part but rather of the accident and since they were not the selling dealer, they would not want to eat the cost.
I'll tackle the bigger problem of getting this issue resolved first and see what car i have that point.

calvin2376

iTrader: (2)

Best of luck to you, I hope everything works out for you, and of course keep us updated. I'm quite emotionally invested in this saga by now haha.

Keppie

I would give until next Tuesday before getting an attorney involved. This is stupid.

IS-SV

It's been a couple of weeks, hopefully we will hear something positive...

is250cpo

iTrader: (1)

Update!
l the eastern customer service office from lexus (the ones handling the case)has scheduled their own technician to inspect my car at lexus of queens. That dealer was the one that notified me of the accident.
This will hopefully nip both problems in the bud, the car should show that its been in an accident based on the Lexus of queens service rep, and its also confirmed by lexus of rockville's gm. . My appointment is set for next Tuesday and the Lexus representative said that they would notify me within the week after the inspection on tuesday.

chikoo

Very good. Good to hear Lexus is looking into it.
If the finding is correct, then this sale would be null and void for making a sale of an improperly represented auto.

calvin2376

iTrader: (2)

This may or may not be the case:

Misrepresentation is a tort, or a civil wrong. This means that a misrepresentation can create civil liability if it results in a pecuniary loss. For example, assume that a real estate speculator owns swampland but advertises it as valuable commercially zoned land. This is a misrepresentation. If someone buys the land relying on the speculator's statement that it is commercially valuable, the buyer may sue the speculator for monetary losses resulting from the purchase.

To create liability for the maker of the statement, a misrepresentation must be relied on by the listener or reader. Also, the speaker must know that the listener is relying on the factual correctness of the statement. Finally, the listener's reliance on the statement must have been reasonable and justified, and the misrepresentation must have resulted in a pecuniary loss to the listener.

A misrepresentation need not be intentionally false to create liability. A statement made with conscious ignorance or a reckless disregard for the truth can create liability. Nondisclosure of material or important facts by a fiduciary or an expert, such as a doctor, lawyer, or accountant, can result in liability. If the speaker is engaged in the business of selling products, any statement, no matter how innocent, may create liability if the statement concerns the character or quality of a product and the statement is not true. In such a case, the statement must be one of fact. This does not include so-called puffing, or the glowing opinions of a seller in the course of a sales pitch (such statements as "you'll love this car," or "it's a great deal").

A misrepresentation in a contract can give a party the right to rescind the contract. A Rescission of a contract returns the parties to the positions they held before the contract was made. A party can rescind a contract for misrepresentation only if the statement was material, or critical, to the agreement

So the fact that the dealership didn't know the car was in an accident doesn't necessarily absolve them of liability IF they represented the car as never having been in an accident. If instead during the purchase process they merely presented the Carfax and explained that nothing in the car history indicated it had been in an accident, then they wouldn't necessarily have been explicitly stating it had never been in an accident, only that no information indicated such.

This would be a bit complicated from a legal perspective, so hopefully you can get it taken care of with Lexus and it doesn't have to come to that.

Fraud would be even more difficult to prove, since the dealership's claiming they didn't know of the accident (which is likely true):

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

98023IS250

FYI. My g/f has a situation where she purchased a CPO 07 Forester from a dealer. When she took it into a different Dealership for warranty work, they could not find the Vin # on record. So she took it back to her original Dealer and they were puzzled as well. In the end, the Manager found out this car was brought in from Guam and they wound up having to put the Vin # into Subaru's data base. He agreed to change the car with same payments, similar car and transfer the CPO warranty over. She wound up with an 08 with similar mileage.

The Dealer can give you the same car but newer in age if they want. If they want yoy out of pocket to fix their screw up, they are crazy... Keep fighting them.

is250cpo

iTrader: (1)

Thanks Calvin,
I actually did consult a lemon law lawyer about this and he said pretty much what you posted. He said the case would be a 50/50, but the fact that Lexus of queens advisor did say that with the mandatory 161 point inspection they are required to perform to certify a vehicle, the would have definetly discovered that the car was in an accident, would help my case, but still its 50/50.

Thats why im also hoping that lexus corp can resolve this and i dont need to go through a lawyer!

calvin2376

iTrader: (2)

Very interesting. This seems more clear-cut than the OP's case though, as I don't think one could possibly argue with the fact that any dealer selling a vehicle in the U.S. (especially a certified one) is inherently representing the vehicle as one with a valid VIN and one that is legally allowed to be in the U.S. In the OP's case, it could be argued the dealer was only representing that they had no knowledge of an accident in the car's history, NOT that they were representing the car as guaranteed accident-free.

chikoo

Not so fast.

It would be 50/50 if it was non-CPO vehicle.
The fact that the vehicle was sold as CPO which requires due diligence and not mere reliance on a carfax, and now they themselves are refusing to work on it because it was in an accident says something. This is more like 75/25, not 50/50.

This is true as long as they do not end up proving that the car was in an accident after the Sale. So watch out what you speak.

calvin2376

iTrader: (2)

This is false. You're correct that CPO'ing a car requires due diligence. In fact, the exact due diligence it requires is found here: http://www.lexus.com/cpo/pdf/CPO_161_Checklist.pdf

You'll see right at the top a check box for "Complete CARFAX history report", then next to that you'll see "Meets standards" and "Does not meet standards". This is the only reference in the whole inspection to anything regarding car or accident history.

That's because a Lexus that has been in an accident can still be CPO. The only restrictions are that 1) if the car is a salvage title car, it cannot be CPO and 2) if during the inspection they uncover evidence of flooding or frame damage, it cannot be CPO. Otherwise, any Lexus that meets the CPO requirements (last 6 model years, under 70k miles) can be CPO'd, even if it's been in an accident.

The dealership performing the inspection in this case provided a CARFAX history report, which was clean. Therefore the dealership can legitimately check "Meets standards", because 1) there is no salvage title and 2) there is no evidence of flooding or frame damage.

Even if the original dealership that inspected the car had discovered evidence of an accident, as long as there was no existing or frame damage and everything was repaired and replaced to Lexus spec, the car can still be CPO. The only issue would have arisen if the dealership found out about this accident but did not disclose it to the buyer.

Therefore, the mere fact that it was CPO has no bearing on this, no matter how much anyone would like it to.

There is of course the possibility that the damage from the accident DID in fact cause some kind of damage that would cause the car to fail CPO inspection. Only in that case would the original selling dealership be liable, since they conducted an incorrect inspection.

Also, the original dealership that CPO'd the car is not refusing to work on it, it's the second dealership. The second dealership's concern is not that a car that's been in an accident can't be CPO, but that if they do a repair and send a non-Lexus part back to Lexus for reimbursement under the warranty they won't get reimbursed. They simply don't want to take the risk; it's not because the car can't be CPO.