How is this the dealer's fault? Unless they allowed another customer to jump you on the list, at best all they can do is give you a good faith estimate as to when they THINK your car MIGHT be available. Do you think your dealer controls Toyota's production schedule or Toyota's allotment of Prii to them? Good luck with that lawsuit.
many times the buyers order that you sign states it is not a binding contract. it says that on all 5 of the buyers order i have to get a prius.
Have you ever sued someone before? Not worth the money and aggravation in my opinion. The better option is to get even...without committing a crime of course. I hope to God I never have to sue anybody again...after 6 years of meetings and phone calls and checks written out to my attorney, I recovered $50 more than I spent on the suit.
If nastiness is your thing, I should introduce the two of you; you can both go around insulting people.
You know what, there is no defense for the way this guy was treated by stringing him along and keeping the carrot out in front by 6 weeks, etc. Finally, the smart nice person comment is entirely unprofessional and something I would at least forward along to the owner of the dealership. Of course I would have pulled my deposit on the spot and shopped elsewhere. I do not care what kind of car it is, I would buy it where my business was appreciated.
That line about building you one reminds me of a 911 call I heard about a woman complaining about her "out of control" 12-year-old daughter. She's yelling at the 911 operator to get someone to help with her daughter, and the operator says [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9WiX-Bu5GA&search=Dispatchers]"OK. Do you want us to come over to shoot her?" [/ame] Frikin hilarious. I'm not sure what is illegal about them not being able to provide you with a car in the specified time frame by the way. If they truly thought they could provide you with a Prius in that time, and they showed good faith, then you won't get any money. Unless you prove they knew they couldn't get you one in that time, maybe you'll get your money. But I doubt it.
Didn't watch the video, but as to the last part: Breach of contract. Good faith doesn't matter. A specific promise is made by one party, another party agrees to the promise and acts upon it, then the first party can't perform. Except for very specific exceptions (and a big demand for the product isn't force majeure) the contract has been breached. That's the whole point to contract law (in this case Sec. 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code). Under current law, the non-breaching party has the right to try to cover--to find the item somewhere else, so long as the price is within reason. And the first party is obligated to cover the additional cost. Good faith only applies if the first party promises to TRY to perform. If a retailer promises to try to sell a manufacturer's goods but customers aren't attracted by them, then a good faith attempt to sell gets the retailer off the hook (keeping the goods boxed in the stock room wouldn't count). The dealer didn't promise to try to get a car; they made specific representations about its availability, asserting that the transaction would--WOULD--be completed in a specific time period. They didn't barely miss performance; it stretched from the original month/month and a half up to 4 to 5 months or more, all the while telling me things were right on track. I relied upon the initial promise, nine weeks back now, and didn't go elsewhere. Multiple people at the dealership promised me 4-6 weeks when I signed; seven weeks later, the sales manager scoffed and said no one would have promised 6-8. An outright lie.
