Screw toenails, I'm ripping someone's friggin foot off!!!

Me dealer told me that Toyota doesn't honor the warranty on a Canadian delivery in the US when the car was simply bought there and transported to the US. It will if the owner is vacationing in the US, etc. but be prepared to show a Canada drivers license and registration.

 

Hedwig has a really good point here. If you had still had six months or a year to wait, refunding your deposit might have been an honest admission that supply was not what had been expected and they could not get a car in a reasonable time.

But refunding your deposit when you are first on the list means they really know they have given you a contract and they are trying to weasel out of it.

Visit them in person, tell the dealership manager that you have a contract with them and you will settle for nothing less than the next salsa #9 at MSRP, or you will sue them.

Then, if they don't sell you the next salsa #9 that comes in, at MSRP, buy one from that place in Colorado, and sue this dealership in small-claims court for the expenses you incurred in the trip to CO and back. In small-claims court you don't need a lawyer. And presumably you can get to CO, get the car, and drive it back, for less than the upper limit on small-claims suits.

And don't settle for anything less than the package and color you want, because in a year you won't be happy with anything else.

 

Manny, I have to say I've enjoyed reading your trials and tribulations about your l o n g road to getting the car of your dreams until this week with the crappy news from your dealership. You've got the patience of Job with a great sense of humor. I will be lighting a candle for you tonight and counting my toes every morning and night until you get your well deserved Prius. Best, and I do mean best, of luck to you.

 

Like the rest of us on this board, I can't believe how poorly you were treated by your former dealership. Hopefully this new dealership will come through and you'll finally get the car you've been patiently waiting for. I don't want to jinx you by wishing you luck, so "break a leg."

Bob
(also waiting for a Salsa 9 since January)

 

Manny's experience is probably the reason most dealerships don't cash your deposit cheque. It would make the deal binding in the eye of the law. Maybe all the people on wait lists should tell their dealer to cash the cheque and give me an invoice with what you have on order, minus the serial number till they have it. But include a description and model A, B, 1 thru 9 what ever.They would have a judge cast an evil eye on them backing out.

 

Manny, I'm at the top of the list at a couple dealerships here. If a Red comes up for me, I'll be happy to offer it your way.

Sucks, man, sucks.

 

From what I have read (I tried to real the thread in its entirety, I apologize if my comments just repeat what has already been written), it appears that the Texas dealer has a contract to deliver the Prius. The Uniform Commercial Code (the "UCC") has been adopted by all states (cept LA) and the email should suffice as a "memorandum" for "goods (the prius)...with value....greater than $500.00.

You should check if the dealer is trying to get "value adjustments" for new purchases...that is, trying to sell the Prius he promised to sell you to others at a premium.

It seems to me (I'm an attorney in Pennsylvania who is also licensed to practice law in Massachusetts) that you have a number of remedies available:

1. Specific Performance - a court order to have him sell you the car for the promised price;

2. Cover damages - advise dealer that you are going into the "market place" to buy the exact same car and that you are going to sue him for any extra cost (cost over your contract)

the relevant UCC section as adopted in Pennsylvania are:

§ 2201. Formal requirements; statute of frauds


(a) GENERAL RULE. --Except as otherwise provided in this section a contract for the sale of goods for the price of $ 500 or more is not enforceable by way of action or defense unless there is some writing sufficient to indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought or by his authorized agent or broker. A writing is not insufficient because it omits or incorrectly states a term agreed upon but the contract is not enforceable under this subsection beyond the quantity of goods shown in such writing.

***

© ENFORCEABILITY OF CONTRACTS NOT SATISFYING GENERAL REQUIREMENTS. --A contract which does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (a) but which is valid in other respects is enforceable:

(1) if the goods are to be specially manufactured for the buyer and are
not suitable for sale to others in the ordinary course of the business
of the seller and the seller, before notice of repudiation is received
and under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the goods are
for the buyer, has made either a substantial beginning of their
manufacture or commitments for their procurement;

(2) if the party against whom enforcement is sought admits in his
pleading, testimony or otherwise in court that a contract for sale was
made, but the contract is not enforceable under this provision beyond
the quantity of goods admitted; or

(3) with respect to goods for which payment has been made and accepted
or which have been received and accepted (section 2606).

13 Pa.C.S. § 2201

and

§ 2610. Anticipatory repudiation


When either party repudiates the contract with respect to a performance not yet due the loss of which will substantially impair the value of the contract to the other, the aggrieved party may:

(1) for a commercially reasonable time await performance by the
repudiating party; or

(2) resort to any remedy for breach (section 2703 or 2711), even though
he has notified the repudiating party that he would await performance
by the latter and has urged retraction; and

(3) in either case suspend his own performance or proceed in accordance
with the provisions of this division on the right of the seller to
identify goods to the contract notwithstanding breach or to salvage
unfinished goods (section 2704).

13 Pa.C.S. § 2610

§ 2711. Remedies of buyer in general; security interest of buyer in rejected goods


(a) CANCELLATION AND ADDITIONAL REMEDIES. --Where the seller fails to make delivery or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance then with respect to any goods involved, and with respect to the whole if the breach goes to the whole contract (section 2612 (relating to "installment contract"; breach) ), the buyer may cancel and whether or not he has done so may in addition to recovering so much of the price as has been paid:

(1) "cover" and have damages under section 2712 (relating to "cover";
procurement by buyer of substitute goods) as to all the goods affected
whether or not they have been identified to the contract; or

(2) recover damages for nondelivery as provided in this division
(section 2713 (relating to damages of buyer for nondelivery or
repudiation) ).

(B) ADDITIONAL REMEDIES FOR NONDELIVERY OR REPUDIATION. --Where the seller fails to deliver or repudiates the buyer may also:

(1) if the goods have been identified recover them as provided in this
division (section 2502 (relating to right of buyer to goods upon
insolvency of seller) ); or

(2) in a proper case obtain specific performance or replevy the goods
as provided in this division (section 2716).

13 Pa.C.S. § 2711

and

as well as other remedies under the UCC

You may also wish to check the Texas consumer fraud statute..


If you have any question, contact me at [email protected] (a Disposable Email Address I just created)

 

Texas has indeed adopted the new standard UCC Act. I agree it is quite likely Manny has an enforceable contract under Texas law, although it would obviously require a careful analysis of his actual contract and surrounding facts and circumstances. In addition, Texas has a consumer protection statute known as the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which can result in triple damages if it is found to be applicable.

As with any legal dispute though, the question is whether the benefits of pursuing legal action outweigh the costs, which include not just direct legal costs (some of which might be on a contingency), but the time and trouble involved, and even psychological cost. It may be that a single letter from an attorney would be enough to bring the dealer back in line. The legal cost to the dealer just to respond could quickly wipe out any profit on the car (of course they probably have someone on retainer for just this purpose). The direct or indirect costs to Manny could quickly sour him on the car.

I've been following Manny's saga for a long time and despite all the jokes, he may just be too sweet to bother with a dispute over this! Personally, I would have switched dealers or at least gotten on another list a long time ago. If Manny can solve his problem quickly and easily by obtaining a car from another dealer, he should go for it.

 

Unbelievable. No wonder that when Manny will get his Prius he'll be EXTREMELY happy. Any color, any package (maybe?).

If car hed been sold over MSRP, then MSRP is MISpriced. Why to create this commi-like corrupt opportunities for distribution and a lot of unhappy customers?

In this situation dealers are motivated to exagerrate situation to push people to pay more. I don't buy their story about 2 year wait.

What about another car?

 

Re: Lectricar. That kicks serious butt, putting that much info out there to help Manny (and everyone else) out.

 

He should see an attorney as soon as possible. I'm sure that the Texas consumer law provides for damages and attorney fees for inappropriate dealer conduct such as Manny described.

 

Canadian and American Pricing

I have been very vocal about my opposition to Toyota Canada's pricing and I remain opposed to it, but reading this kind of posting causes me to reflect.

Throughout Canada Toyota has implemented "Access Pricing". Toyota Canada establishes MSRP for each model. Dealerships collectively determine what they believe to be a fair price ("Access price") for each model. This price varies with demand, but cannot exceed the MSRP. All dealerships in the area then sell at the same price. Competition is based on convenience of location, service, etc.

I still don't like the idea of this fixed pricing amongst competing independent dealerships. But I sure wouldn't like the idea of paying MSRP+ for a car either.

 

And.. I know someone...

Who can special order one for you, NAV and all!