NO REFUND!

[1fast1]

In a sales contract, everything must be written down very clearly, black and white. Otherwise no contest, and the person who's left holding the money wins by default. In this case, the woman *should* have added a very clear clause stating that the 1k deposit must be returned if an independent inspection raises the suspicion of previous accident damage (not some vague rubbish like "unsatisfactory"). Both parties must sign-off on this clause. If this had been done, the legal advantage clearly goes to the buyer. As it stands, it becomes unclear under what circumstances the dealer can hold on to the deposit.

 

When my dad and I go down to buy a car, we always find issues with the sales agreement. One infamous clause (prevalent even in Authorised Dealer copperplate) is the line that gives the dealer full power and discretion in revising the price (upward, of course), AFTER the deal has been finalised. We always insist that this line be cancelled or amended and both we and the dealer rep signs off on it. We've had no issues with most ADs, but in one case, we had to bang table until the sales chief came down from his office and agreed to the amendment before this happened. But if they had refused, we would have told them to go fly a kite. Because, even though they may claim it's a "standard" clause and there's no cause for concern, no court of law is going to be sympathetic if you plead ignorance of what you were signing.

 

In another case, I had put down a 10k deposit on an Evo X SST with a PI (this was when the car had yet to make its debut - I wanted to be an early adopter). Luckily, we had insisted upon a clause that guaranteed full return of the deposit unless the car was delivered in a (actually very generous) timeframe. In the end, even though the PI had started off very optimistic about early delivery, he had to concede he couldn't meet the deadline, and returned the money. If he hadn't, I would've been fully prepared to engage a lawyer, because 10k is not pocket change.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Turboflat4

[Yaloryalor]

A lady fren had a spat with a second hand car dealer.

 

She went to a second hand car dealer, found the car she wanted. She and her fren asked the dealer...has this car ever engaged in an accident. The dealer said NO.

 

Being ignorant, she was asked to pay 1k deposit. Den she requested a car inspection at vicom. The report was ok but she was told that this car had a accident before.

 

She didnt like it becos she didnt want a car that was involved in a accident before and demanded a refund. She was rejected on the request. Dealer claimed the report from inspection centre was ok and therefore no refund. Her argued and demanded an explaination why he wasnt truthful on the "accident history" and coaxed her into the purchase.

 

Isnt this ugly and misleading.

 

What can she do now. Go CASE?

 

She should have black and white w the dealer to state that if the car was involved in an accident then should refund the deposite fully back to her.

 

Now I think either can ask the dealer to give some discounts (if she really like this car) else go the their management and make noise liao..

[Pcslim]

got witness also no use unless your friend wants to sue the dealer...

if this is the case, your friend must prepare to lose more than 1k...

end of day, no one will win, only the lawyers.

Verbal agreement can be valid in the eyes of law. but the legal tussle will be far too much to handle and cost much more than the $1k deposit. Not worth the effort.

[Snowbell]

misrepresentation!!she relied on the dealer's words and paid the deposit to her detriment.

[Amortifiedpenguin]

In a sales contract, everything must be written down very clearly, black and white. Otherwise no contest, and the person who's left holding the money wins by default. In this case, the woman *should* have added a very clear clause stating that the 1k deposit must be returned if an independent inspection raises the suspicion of previous accident damage (not some vague rubbish like "unsatisfactory"). Both parties must sign-off on this clause. If this had been done, the legal advantage clearly goes to the buyer. As it stands, it becomes unclear under what circumstances the dealer can hold on to the deposit.

 

When my dad and I go down to buy a car, we always find issues with the sales agreement. One infamous clause (prevalent even in Authorised Dealer copperplate) is the line that gives the dealer full power and discretion in revising the price (upward, of course), AFTER the deal has been finalised. We always insist that this line be cancelled or amended and both we and the dealer rep signs off on it. We've had no issues with most ADs, but in one case, we had to bang table until the sales chief came down from his office and agreed to the amendment before this happened. But if they had refused, we would have told them to go fly a kite. Because, even though they may claim it's a "standard" clause and there's no cause for concern, no court of law is going to be sympathetic if you plead ignorance of what you were signing.

 

In another case, I had put down a 10k deposit on an Evo X SST with a PI (this was when the car had yet to make its debut - I wanted to be an early adopter). Luckily, we had insisted upon a clause that guaranteed full return of the deposit unless the car was delivered in a (actually very generous) timeframe. In the end, even though the PI had started off very optimistic about early delivery, he had to concede he couldn't meet the deadline, and returned the money. If he hadn't, I would've been fully prepared to engage a lawyer, because 10k is not pocket change.

 

so did you manage to get your evo X eventually?