mazda dealership misrepresentation--legality issue
May-2nd-2003, 06:18 PM
#46
Protege Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 12
Originally posted by Mach 1
I guess it depends on your own general auto knowledge as to weather or not the saleman appears to know a lot or not. I suppose there are some good ones out there. it doesnt matter who you buy the car from, as long as you get a fair price.
I guess it depends on your own general auto knowledge as to weather or not the saleman appears to know a lot or not. I suppose there are some good ones out there. it doesnt matter who you buy the car from, as long as you get a fair price.
Infact the guy i baught my lancer from refuses to be with any other company he is strongly behind mitsubishi and dsm for that matter very knowledgable in the subject he refuses to buy any other car infact when he found out i baught my mazda he called me a trader LOL oh well. I don't think ive ever really had a bad experience at the dealership infact most of the time i become friends with the saleman and return to show them mods and things i have done etc..
I dont know if i will return with the mazda after hearing so many things about it making my warenty not valid, but with mitsu anytime i showed them a mod i did they were strongly behind it and said it did not make my warrenty invalid. So i dunno if i'll show the salesman at mazda anything i have done.
May-2nd-2003, 06:32 PM
#49
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: GA
Posts: 460
I was referring to going back to the dealer to show them your "mods", whatever they might be. Most people tend to stay as far away from car dealers as possible, but you go back to show them your car, so I would consider outside the norm, thats all......
May-2nd-2003, 06:42 PM
#50
Protege Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 12
only went back becuz i am friends with the guy 
he asked me to stop buy and show him what i had done. He took some pictures that are hanging in his office of my car, he has made numerous sales of showing the pictures alone.
he asked me to stop buy and show him what i had done. He took some pictures that are hanging in his office of my car, he has made numerous sales of showing the pictures alone.
May-2nd-2003, 07:02 PM
#51
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 188
If you buy the Protege tell them you want the list price of the Racing Harts to work with.
Factory rims cost almost double the cost of most aftermarket rims, so i'm sure the Racing Harts through Mazda are atleast $300 a peace!
If so you should have around $ 1200.00 to work with just for rims and thats alot!!!
Factory rims cost almost double the cost of most aftermarket rims, so i'm sure the Racing Harts through Mazda are atleast $300 a peace!
If so you should have around $ 1200.00 to work with just for rims and thats alot!!!
May-2nd-2003, 09:11 PM
#54
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas
Posts: 118
I'm curious to see the sales contract..
And notes written on a napkin don't count.
I agree that the salesman is probably going to lose his job over this, but I get the feeling that the buyer is trying to milk this for more than it's worth. Did they take something from him? No. I'm waiting for this to go to court, and **** off Mazda North America even more about warranty work, contract lawsuits, etc. Damn fool should have bought the Nissan and got the salesman to agree to a 350Z engine in the contract.
Hell.. I'm calling a lawyer to sue MS since they don't mention in their instructions that if you do decide to format your HD when installing XP over a corporate install of ME, you need discs to show that you had ME, and your restore discs don't count. Hell.. I'm gonna get a Protege DX out of the deal from Gates, and I'm gonna get some MS Harts on it..
Muahahahhahahaaa...
Actually.. the more I think about it, I bet the contract specifies a DX, and MS Hart wheels. Bet it doesn't include verbiage directly stating install on said vehicle, so you know what.. Give him the DX, give him the wheels.. Let him figure out how to fix it.
And notes written on a napkin don't count.
I agree that the salesman is probably going to lose his job over this, but I get the feeling that the buyer is trying to milk this for more than it's worth. Did they take something from him? No. I'm waiting for this to go to court, and **** off Mazda North America even more about warranty work, contract lawsuits, etc. Damn fool should have bought the Nissan and got the salesman to agree to a 350Z engine in the contract.
Hell.. I'm calling a lawyer to sue MS since they don't mention in their instructions that if you do decide to format your HD when installing XP over a corporate install of ME, you need discs to show that you had ME, and your restore discs don't count. Hell.. I'm gonna get a Protege DX out of the deal from Gates, and I'm gonna get some MS Harts on it..
Muahahahhahahaaa...
Actually.. the more I think about it, I bet the contract specifies a DX, and MS Hart wheels. Bet it doesn't include verbiage directly stating install on said vehicle, so you know what.. Give him the DX, give him the wheels.. Let him figure out how to fix it.
Last edited by TurboTodd; May-2nd-2003 at 09:14 PM.
May-7th-2003, 03:33 PM
#55
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 78
Sorry I haven't been in for awhile to update, i've been very busy, and i'm hearing a few different sides to the responses. First off, I am NOT trying to "milk" anything, lol, i just want what i payed for, the whole way they reacted to realizing my wheels don't fit on my car is BS and no where near what i call "service," it's more like, "lets give this kid some bait and hope he catches, cuz boy did we **** up." i got the letter i wrote, i'm finding out a lot of good info regarding sales contract, to the person that said it will not hold up in court, Yes, it will hold up in court, it's a legally binding document and the dealership is trying to get out the easiest way and still make a profit from their HUGE mistake..........
here it is, fun reading
May 1, 2003
To: Santa Maria Nissan/Mazda/Lincoln/Mercury; Chuck Adams—Sales Manager
CC: Mazda North American Operations; SM Mazda General Manager; Better Business Bureau; Chamber of Commerce; California State Attorney General; District Attorneys Office of Consumer Affairs
From: Ian Ardoin
RE: ’03 Protégé w/ MSP Wheels Sales Contract VIN# JM1BJ225831140032
The sales manager, Chuck, is familiar with my situation and is the person whom I have been attempting negotiations with. To all whom it may concern, I will restate my issues with this sale in detail.
On March 13th 2003 I received a phone call from your sales associate Shawn Densford, in regards to a special he had on the Nissan SE-R Spec V which he had me on a list as an interested customer and possible buyer for that vehicle. I was no longer in the market to purchase a new vehicle but decided to meet with him the next day to see what the deal was all about. After talking it over I decided that, yes, I was interested in purchasing that car and we negotiated a price. The fact that the car was not on the lot and would have to be ordered did not appeal to me at the time. While sitting in his office I could see a nice looking car on the lot through his window and inquired about the vehicle. Shawn offered his knowledge about it and I grew interested.
We took the Mazda Protégé for a test drive and with the MazdaSpeed accessories already installed on the vehicle, it looked like a vehicle I may be interested in. The price was slightly cheaper than the Spec V, but there were a lot of amenities on the Spec V that were not on the Protégé which I didn’t want to give up, such as power windows/door locks, upgraded sound system, keyless entry, moon roof, 6spd transmission, 175hp, and the list goes on. I liked the car but I didn’t like it enough to buy it for the price offered, I needed some more convincing to purchase the Protégé over the Spec V. While looking through the accessories pamphlet I noticed the MSP 17” Racing Harts and loved the styling. Shawn offered to put those wheels on the Protégé as part of the purchase for the same price and also stated that the wheels were $1400 for the set of four with no tires if purchased separately. That was the deciding factor in purchasing this vehicle.
Shawn, the salesman, made a promise to me, the buyer, that those wheels would be installed on the vehicle I was purchasing, and that is what I relied on to make the purchase, with that promise stated orally and then written into the sales contract an express warranty was created. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act passed in 1975 provides remedies for a breach of express warranties of this type. The wheels in question cannot be installed on the vehicle because they are 5 lug wheels and the vehicle is 4 lug. The dealership did not inform me of this until April 29th 2003, two hours after I had been waiting for the wheels to be installed. Not informing me that the vehicle I purchased is 4 lug and the wheels purchased to be installed on this vehicle is 5 lug is considered “deceptive conduct” by the Federal Trade Commission and by not installing the wheels on the vehicle is in breach of the contract.
I would be more than willing to compromise but at this point the service I have received at this dealership has been less than satisfactory. For example, Shawn stated that the wheels were ordered and would be shipped within 5 days and that I would receive a phone call from him, I never received any phone call and had to call myself several times to find out when they came in, which was two weeks later, approximately 9 days after they were promised to be in. Shawn was also to negotiate getting tires for the wheels, he never called when he said he would, never returned my calls, and the operator even informed me that “many of his customers complain that he never returns their phone calls.” After waiting 4 weeks for a response I did not wish to wait any longer and ordered the tires myself on April 24th 2003 and received them on April 28th 2003 when I then made an appointment with the dealership to have them installed at 1pm on April 29th 2003 at which time Shawn had informed me in person that he could not have gotten tires for the wheels. I ended up waiting over 6 weeks to find out that the wheels I bought with the vehicle could not be installed on the vehicle.
It’s not just this case either but previous issues on service in regards to this dealership with my other vehicle as well.
I would like to re-iterate that I would have never purchased the vehicle had I known those wheels could not be installed on the vehicle, you did not inform me that they could not be installed prior to signing the contract.
You, as the seller, sold me a Mazda Protégé with MSP wheels installed on the same vehicle and that is not what you are delivering to me, the buyer.
By breaking this contract with me I am seeking Arbitration from the American Arbitration Association and as stated on Side 1 Paragraph 12 of the Retail Installment Sale Contract I will be reporting your unfair and deceptive practices to the city attorney and the District Attorney Office of Consumer Affairs.
I will no longer be using the vehicle; it will remain in my driveway with the current mileage of 2787. Due to the breach in contract and other legal issues stated above, I would like for you to void the complete sales contract and return to me the tires I own which are on the wheels in your parts dep’t. The first payment I made of $350, and all payments from here on out that I make and the down payment of $500 I also ask to be returned, for I would have never made the purchase had I known all the facts about the vehicle upfront. As of today, May 1st 2003, my insurance is cancelled on this vehicle.
I would like for this situation to be resolved before arbitration is necessary and before further legal action must be taken in regards to your misrepresentation of the vehicle.
I wish we could both have avoided this situation, I in no way intended it to end this way, I simply wanted what we both agreed on in the contract and will not settle otherwise.
Thank you for your time & consideration,
Ian Ardoin
here it is, fun reading
May 1, 2003
To: Santa Maria Nissan/Mazda/Lincoln/Mercury; Chuck Adams—Sales Manager
CC: Mazda North American Operations; SM Mazda General Manager; Better Business Bureau; Chamber of Commerce; California State Attorney General; District Attorneys Office of Consumer Affairs
From: Ian Ardoin
RE: ’03 Protégé w/ MSP Wheels Sales Contract VIN# JM1BJ225831140032
The sales manager, Chuck, is familiar with my situation and is the person whom I have been attempting negotiations with. To all whom it may concern, I will restate my issues with this sale in detail.
On March 13th 2003 I received a phone call from your sales associate Shawn Densford, in regards to a special he had on the Nissan SE-R Spec V which he had me on a list as an interested customer and possible buyer for that vehicle. I was no longer in the market to purchase a new vehicle but decided to meet with him the next day to see what the deal was all about. After talking it over I decided that, yes, I was interested in purchasing that car and we negotiated a price. The fact that the car was not on the lot and would have to be ordered did not appeal to me at the time. While sitting in his office I could see a nice looking car on the lot through his window and inquired about the vehicle. Shawn offered his knowledge about it and I grew interested.
We took the Mazda Protégé for a test drive and with the MazdaSpeed accessories already installed on the vehicle, it looked like a vehicle I may be interested in. The price was slightly cheaper than the Spec V, but there were a lot of amenities on the Spec V that were not on the Protégé which I didn’t want to give up, such as power windows/door locks, upgraded sound system, keyless entry, moon roof, 6spd transmission, 175hp, and the list goes on. I liked the car but I didn’t like it enough to buy it for the price offered, I needed some more convincing to purchase the Protégé over the Spec V. While looking through the accessories pamphlet I noticed the MSP 17” Racing Harts and loved the styling. Shawn offered to put those wheels on the Protégé as part of the purchase for the same price and also stated that the wheels were $1400 for the set of four with no tires if purchased separately. That was the deciding factor in purchasing this vehicle.
Shawn, the salesman, made a promise to me, the buyer, that those wheels would be installed on the vehicle I was purchasing, and that is what I relied on to make the purchase, with that promise stated orally and then written into the sales contract an express warranty was created. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act passed in 1975 provides remedies for a breach of express warranties of this type. The wheels in question cannot be installed on the vehicle because they are 5 lug wheels and the vehicle is 4 lug. The dealership did not inform me of this until April 29th 2003, two hours after I had been waiting for the wheels to be installed. Not informing me that the vehicle I purchased is 4 lug and the wheels purchased to be installed on this vehicle is 5 lug is considered “deceptive conduct” by the Federal Trade Commission and by not installing the wheels on the vehicle is in breach of the contract.
I would be more than willing to compromise but at this point the service I have received at this dealership has been less than satisfactory. For example, Shawn stated that the wheels were ordered and would be shipped within 5 days and that I would receive a phone call from him, I never received any phone call and had to call myself several times to find out when they came in, which was two weeks later, approximately 9 days after they were promised to be in. Shawn was also to negotiate getting tires for the wheels, he never called when he said he would, never returned my calls, and the operator even informed me that “many of his customers complain that he never returns their phone calls.” After waiting 4 weeks for a response I did not wish to wait any longer and ordered the tires myself on April 24th 2003 and received them on April 28th 2003 when I then made an appointment with the dealership to have them installed at 1pm on April 29th 2003 at which time Shawn had informed me in person that he could not have gotten tires for the wheels. I ended up waiting over 6 weeks to find out that the wheels I bought with the vehicle could not be installed on the vehicle.
It’s not just this case either but previous issues on service in regards to this dealership with my other vehicle as well.
I would like to re-iterate that I would have never purchased the vehicle had I known those wheels could not be installed on the vehicle, you did not inform me that they could not be installed prior to signing the contract.
You, as the seller, sold me a Mazda Protégé with MSP wheels installed on the same vehicle and that is not what you are delivering to me, the buyer.
By breaking this contract with me I am seeking Arbitration from the American Arbitration Association and as stated on Side 1 Paragraph 12 of the Retail Installment Sale Contract I will be reporting your unfair and deceptive practices to the city attorney and the District Attorney Office of Consumer Affairs.
I will no longer be using the vehicle; it will remain in my driveway with the current mileage of 2787. Due to the breach in contract and other legal issues stated above, I would like for you to void the complete sales contract and return to me the tires I own which are on the wheels in your parts dep’t. The first payment I made of $350, and all payments from here on out that I make and the down payment of $500 I also ask to be returned, for I would have never made the purchase had I known all the facts about the vehicle upfront. As of today, May 1st 2003, my insurance is cancelled on this vehicle.
I would like for this situation to be resolved before arbitration is necessary and before further legal action must be taken in regards to your misrepresentation of the vehicle.
I wish we could both have avoided this situation, I in no way intended it to end this way, I simply wanted what we both agreed on in the contract and will not settle otherwise.
Thank you for your time & consideration,
Ian Ardoin
May-7th-2003, 03:37 PM
#56
Protege Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 78
It sucks because i really love the car and every time i see it in the garage i want to drive it and almost break down and agree to a new set of wheels, but as u can see from the letter, there's no going back now!! lol
and also, they're asses at that dealership and this case is black and white, there's no way around the facts and they are just ignoring them and hope i go away......if they let it go all the way to court then their *** is mine 
and also, they're asses at that dealership and this case is black and white, there's no way around the facts and they are just ignoring them and hope i go away......if they let it go all the way to court then their *** is mine
May-7th-2003, 04:01 PM
#58
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas
Posts: 118
Originally posted by nai8o5
Not informing me that the vehicle I purchased is 4 lug and the wheels purchased to be installed on this vehicle is 5 lug is considered “deceptive conduct” by the Federal Trade Commission and by not installing the wheels on the vehicle is in breach of the contract.
Ian Ardoin
Not informing me that the vehicle I purchased is 4 lug and the wheels purchased to be installed on this vehicle is 5 lug is considered “deceptive conduct” by the Federal Trade Commission and by not installing the wheels on the vehicle is in breach of the contract.
Ian Ardoin
Did you know you were buying a 4-lug Protege? And the MSP wheels were 5-lug? And if so, what do you call that?
You're also setting yourself up by cancelling the insurance.
Let us know how this progresses.
May-7th-2003, 04:10 PM
#59
Cripple Fight!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,944
Originally posted by TurboTodd
Best of luck in your legal struggle, but I'm still curious-
Did you know you were buying a 4-lug Protege? And the MSP wheels were 5-lug? And if so, what do you call that?
You're also setting yourself up by cancelling the insurance.
Let us know how this progresses.
Best of luck in your legal struggle, but I'm still curious-
Did you know you were buying a 4-lug Protege? And the MSP wheels were 5-lug? And if so, what do you call that?
You're also setting yourself up by cancelling the insurance.
Let us know how this progresses.
May-7th-2003, 04:13 PM
#60
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: GA
Posts: 460
Just a suggestion, but delete all that crap about the Spec V and wanting that, not this, blah,blah,blah.... and get straight to the point of them agreeing to give you wheels and not delivering.
It will make for a much more professional letter.
good luck
It will make for a much more professional letter.
good luck