[wd40]

Originally Posted by Faster12

Some of you guys have responded like complete a$$holes! It's a very simple issue. I sincerely believe the OP didn't and possibly wouldn't have known the difference between employee pricing and supplier pricing. One point no one has made here is whether the dealership isn't being dishonest. Could there have actually been no mistake and now the dealership is trying to scheme a little extra cash? I've yet to see anyone prejudge the dealership the way some of you have done the OP. While I am not an a attorney, I am a paraprofessional and I specifically work in the realm of contracts. I cannot provide legal advice but my understanding is just as someone pointed out in CA Code, if a contract is misconstrued it is on the writer of said contract, not the reader, to bear the burden. Furthermore, if said discrepancy did exist, the dealer knowingly and willingly will all opportunity and resources available agreed to said offer. The Dealer should have known the difference in pricing, the dealer should have confirmed the difference in pricing. This is not about the OP doing the right thing. This is about poor business practices where dealerships are trying to turn profits every 50 mins instead of ensuring that things are done right. Oversights in contracts are NOT a small matter. That is why they are written, negotiated, rewritten, and reviewed BEFORE execution. So for those saying the OP needs to do the right thing....please take your self-righteousness and shove it. This man did what exactly what he was supposed to do and to boot he dropped $20k down. If the dealership cannot survive because of this sale then it is only more indicative of a systemic issue with their processes, NOT their clientele. Just my .02.....but what do I know?

Amen. I've seen this countless times. Dealer makes a deal, customer signs on the dotted line, dealer calls back after the deal is done and says oops, we could not get you that interest rate or whatever and it will cost you XXX more. I've seen this scenario numerous times. A guy I was acquainted with bought a truck, dealer pulled this scenario-he kept the truck for a couple of weeks, racked up the miles and turned it in. Dropped it off and sad no thank you.

[trident]

1. you are not eligible for employee pricing.
2, The dealer can and will not title the car in violation of the terms of the agreement.
3. The dealer can advertise employee pricing prices, but the dealer is selling at the same discount as what an employee would get.
4. To ask an individual to give you the authorization code can cause the employee loss of privilege and up to termination.
5. The agreement states clearly that the PARTICIPANT understands the rules and will abide by them.
6. A person eligible for supplier pricing may give an authorization code to friends and family, This you would be eligible.
7. In my opinion, if you want the title or the bank wants the title since you financed, you will have to pay the difference.

[DFW1LE]

Originally Posted by Faster12

While I am not an a attorney, I am a paraprofessional and I specifically work in the realm of contracts. I cannot provide legal advice but my understanding is just as someone pointed out in CA Code, if a contract is misconstrued it is on the writer of said contract, not the reader, to bear the burden.

I am not an attorney either, but worked in the contracts area most of my career. It seems to me, before this deal was captured and printed out on the dealers form agreement it was likely reviewed by a sales and finance manager. The dealer claiming an error days after you signed and took delivery seems rather weak to me, and as stated above, the onus on how a contract is interpreted is on the drafter of the agreement, not the party who signed the dealers paperwork. In any event, getting some input from an attorney may be worth a consultation given some other clauses that may be in the contract, and I would guess, the attorney will tell you how this should settle from a legal perspective or whether a compromise is warranted. That said, disputes can have both a legal element to them, but also an equity element, and from my perspective, the equity element is debatable.

Edit: Changed the last couple of words above after rereading OP.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by trident

1. you are not eligible for employee pricing.
2, The dealer can and will not title the car in violation of the terms of the agreement.
3. The dealer can advertise employee pricing prices, but the dealer is selling at the same discount as what an employee would get.
4. To ask an individual to give you the authorizatibon code can cause the employee loss of privilege and up to termination.
5. The agreement states clearly that the PARTICIPANT understands the rules and will abide by them.
6. A person eligible for supplier pricing may give an authorization code to friends and family, This you would be eligible.
7. In my opinion, if you want the title or the bank wants the title since you financed, you will have to pay the difference.

The contract he signed says nothing about an employee pricing discount, nor did he ever claim to be eligible for it.

[Infern0]

It's a done deal. In my opinion, they will be required to get you to agree to any additional change in terms, like was quoted from one of the statues posted a couple pages back. That's why they haven't submitted the paperwork. They'd be reliant upon a new signature. You have your copy already, right? You tell them their options, not the other way around.

[kwav8r]

IF the dealer cannot prove the OP misrepresented himself then there is no legal leg for the dealer to stand on. The dealer wrote the contract and by their own agency it was approved before being signed by both parties. Once signed it is a valid contract.

To the OP, get in contact with a contract attorney and ask for a free consultation and go from there. You wouldn't consult the lot of us for medical advice, why listen to any of us when it comes to legal advice???

[pwells18]

Originally Posted by kwav8r

IF the dealer cannot prove the OP misrepresented himself then there is no legal leg for the dealer to stand on. The dealer wrote the contract and by their own agency it was approved before being signed by both parties. Once signed it is a valid contract.

To the OP, get in contact with a contract attorney and ask for a free consultation and go from there. You wouldn't consult the lot of us for medical advice, why listen to any of us when it comes to legal advice???

-sorry...wrong...as i stated last night..the CDA clearly states, until the deal is bought..it is the dealers car..all the dealer has to say is thus-
sorry..we can't get the deal bought..but if you pay 2k more for the car..we can probably get it done..
the CDA is a legal document..and i HAVE had an att'y look at it..sadly.

who is wrong/right is moot..vis-a-vis who said what as it related to the discount...

[mlee]

First off I can't believe they didn't check that code right off. That was their biggest mistake.

Second the money is owed and it wasn't like a week went by and they discovered the error.
I see two options here... either pay the 2.4k or return the car and I don't think returning the car is right either because anywhere else you go will just be supplier price anyway. And that's IF you can get it. Some dealers, especially in your area, are not even offering supplier pricing on these cars.

My situation was the exact opposite. My dealer messed up and missed a $1,500 rebate available in March. I informed them 3 days later and they worked on it for a month until they cut me a check.

I guess my point is... I think you've got a good dealer and now biting yourself in the ass over this because I'm just guessing they are the best in your area and you could have kept a good relationship with them.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by mlee

First off I can't believe they didn't check that code right off. That was their biggest mistake.

Second the money is owed and it wasn't like a week went by and they discovered the error.
I see two options here... either pay the 2.4k or return the car and I don't think returning the car is right either because anywhere else you go will just be supplier price anyway. And that's IF you can get it. Some dealers, especially in your area, are not even offering supplier pricing on these cars.

My situation was the exact opposite. My dealer messed up and missed a $1,500 rebate available in March. I informed them 3 days later and they worked on it for a month until they cut me a check.

I guess my point is... I think you've got a good dealer and now biting yourself in the ass over this because I'm just guessing they are the best in your area and you could have kept a good relationship with them.

IF the contract makes no mention of an employee discount that he doesn't apply for, then he doesn't owe them anything. I think the dealers (in general) intentionally make the contracts somewhat vague and this time it bit them. This is just my opinion as I'm not qualified to offer legal advice.

[kwav8r]

Originally Posted by pwells18

-sorry...wrong...as i stated last night..the CDA clearly states, until the deal is bought..it is the dealers car..all the dealer has to say is thus-
sorry..we can't get the deal bought..but if you pay 2k more for the car..we can probably get it done..
the CDA is a legal document..and i HAVE had an att'y look at it..sadly.

who is wrong/right is moot..vis-a-vis who said what as it related to the discount...

Who is financing the loan? If it GM then yes, he has no leg to stand on. If it's another bank they simply refer to the purchase contract and it's a matter of when, not if, before the dealer gets their money.

Consumer protection laws in Florida aren't the same as California either. Hence, talk to a contract attorney in CA.

[JB'sZL1]

The question is simple: was there a breach or a material misrepresentation relied upon?

My understanding is no. If a clear title is hand, or, if GM is fully paid per the terms of the contract, the Z belongs to Quick.

I would advise against getting a code and submitting it to GM that you are not rightfully entitled to.

[01pewterz28]

The other way to look at this is how would he know what employee pricing is vs supplier if new never ask for employee. I know when I purchased my car on my paperwork it clearly listed what my pricing was. Not sure why his dealership did not. I went and checked my paperwork from my 2016 Traverse, 2014 Impala, and 2014 Malibu all list the same as below I just do not see how he is at fault in anyway and IMHO the dealership messed up and should reduce the selling price to equal what had agreed to. After all he sent them the Supplier code and that email/text 100% shows Supplier the dealership if they did in fact make a mistake it's on them.

I suggest talking to one of the sales people on this board "Off the record" and have them run the numbers with supplier and the rebates and see what they come up with.

My paperwork shows

MSRP
Supplier
Selling Price
Select market
Chevy Loyalty
Select Model

[Michigan1LTRS]

Originally Posted by mlee

First off I can't believe they didn't check that code right off. That was their biggest mistake.

Second the money is owed and it wasn't like a week went by and they discovered the error.
I see two options here... either pay the 2.4k or return the car and I don't think returning the car is right either because anywhere else you go will just be supplier price anyway. And that's IF you can get it. Some dealers, especially in your area, are not even offering supplier pricing on these cars.

He got a discount he should not have received.

[DFW1LE]

Many of these dealer standard form agreements are different, so the terms and conditions on your paper work need review. Further, did the dealer provide you with a signed Odometer Disclosure Statement and signed Application for Certificate of Title (naming the bank)?

The paperwork on my car purchase would not seem to give the dealer recourse in the case you describe, but mine was a cash purchase, so the form they would use for a financed purchase may be different. Also, my contract contained arbitration provisions which precludes any lawsuits, and the arbitration can be requested by either party. There are costs involved even with arbitration, but it would eliminate taking the dealer to small claims court which is generally not an expensive proposition in terms of court costs.