Used Car dealers Feeling The Heat Liao!

[Pms]

Ya lah direct buyer seller not covered under lemon law lah.

[Detach8]

Ayiah chicken and egg game. Once the second hand shops close down, and they stop taking in cars, the new car dealers will also be stuck. People need to sell their old car to buy a new car.

[Throttle2]

Ayiah chicken and egg game. Once the second hand shops close down, and they stop taking in cars, the new car dealers will also be stuck. People need to sell their old car to buy a new car.

 

Many new car dealers also operate secondhand car dealerships.

that allows them to take in cars and sell new ones.

 

When the buying stops, the killing will too (taken from WWF) heh heh

Edited March 29, 2013 by Throttle2

[Thaiyotakamli]

was asking from Volvo if i trade in my car for XC90 and how much they would take in my car, he say 80k, i was like Wad Da!

[Throttle2]

was asking from Volvo if i trade in my car for XC90 and how much they would take in my car, he say 80k, i was like Wad Da!

 

dont bother to ask, i told you already, scrap value only if you ask dealer.

 

 

[Thaiyotakamli]

dont bother to ask, i told you already, scrap value only if you ask dealer.

hais first quite interested with the car, but with the knn face when he said 80k, i quickly off to go. maybe i will sell it through consignment and take my time to sell

[Baojustice]

buyer-seller direct deal also covered by lemon law hor 6 months

my buddy sold his car direct and 2 months later gearbox up lorry

buyer call my buddy and my buddy fork out $3.5k to fix the gearbox ...

 

i find it fair. imagine you buy a car and 2 months gearbox malfunction ...

 

if i sell my car ... and mileage is > 60k ... i probably trade in even price is not the best just for peace of mind (dont wish to receive call 6 months later)

Yr buddy is too ignorant. Shld hv checked first, need not covered by lemon law but go n fork out $3.5. So in the end, suffered bigger loss after selling the car?

[TheRationalVoice]

Its financially prudent to incur $3.5k than to incur much more by being sued for a defective product under the Sale of Goods Act.

[Baojustice]

Try telling that to a used car dealer. They'll ask u go fly kite.....

[Hamburger]

Its financially prudent to incur $3.5k than to incur much more by being sued for a defective product under the Sale of Goods Act.

you buy car before?

 

once changed hand, problems are yours.

 

its a 2nd hand car after all.

[TheRationalVoice]

Try telling that to a used car dealer. They'll ask u go fly kite.....

 

 

What's this got to do with a dealer?

 

You made a comment on a transaction involving direct buyer and direct seller. You were dumb enough to state that someone was ignorant. I am telling you - it is you who is dumb and ignorant in not knowing the true costs of delivering a defective car even if the lemon law does not apply. It is cheaper to fix than to be sued under the Sale of Goods Act.

 

There is no need for me to tell dealers anything. Instead, I am telling you: you go fly a kite for writing something totally stupid.

 

Another dumb fk in this forum!

 

 

[Dark]

Its financially prudent to incur $3.5k than to incur much more by being sued for a defective product under the Sale of Goods Act.

 

Suing to recover 3.5k? Are you kidding?

[TheRationalVoice]

you buy car before?

 

once changed hand, problems are yours.

 

its a 2nd hand car after all.

 

You are absolutely wrong. Go acquaint yourself with the Sale of Goods Act before misrepresenting the rights of buyers.

[TheRationalVoice]

Suing to recover 3.5k? Are you kidding?

 

What the fk is wrong with you? I said "being sued". Read my post properly before you make a dumb comment.

[Dark]

What the fk is wrong with you? I said "being sued". Read my post properly before you make a dumb comment.

 

Referring to the suing party, the car buyer. I'm asking is it practical to sue for 3.5k?

 

No need to be so vulgar to defend a position.

[TheRationalVoice]

Referring to the suing party, the car buyer. I'm asking is it practical to sue for 3.5k?

 

No need to be so vulgar to defend a position.

 

If I am vulgar, its because the fools like you I have to deal with in this forum. And I am not defending a position - you have gotten things wrong.

 

Of course it is practical to sue for 3.5k. In fact the suit will be for more. The seller, the party sued, will end up having to pay more than $3.5k.

[Anshng]

was asking from Volvo if i trade in my car for XC90 and how much they would take in my car, he say 80k, i was like Wad Da!

 

what car you selling?

[Tedlhw]

MAS has 'no' interest to weed any buyer, financial prudence is just a nice cover story. There is a direction to cap inflation. We hv rose to be abt the most expensive city in Asia, beating Beijing & Tokyo & all the way to Sydney, so paiseh lah. Lower income ppl also buay tahan liao and quite unhappy.

 

Wah finally someone who knows what this is all about...

Its not to make inflation lower, but the make headline inflation lower.