MaximumOvadrive

Letting you all in on something that worked for me, hopefully for others as well (cause I KNOW we would all love to get over on those blood-suckers called car dealers)...

With our current Maxima (96 GLE, had a 90 GXE), I decided to shop the net for used vehicle listings (autotrader.com, cars.com, msncarpoint.com), making sure to do all the applicable resale evaluations courtesy of kellybluebook.com and most significantly nada.com. I also invested my $20 at carfax.com to run unlimited VINs to get a more acurate picture of vehicle histories.

Once I had narrowed things down to 5 or 6 vehicles, at various regional dealerships, I went and looked and test drove each of them.

But the MOST important thing I did, and I would STRESS to each of you considering net shopping was to PRINT OUT each of the respective ads, as not only are they bargaining tools, in my case, it proved to be the most significant savings tool I EVER had when shopping for a car.

You ask how is this? I will tell you. Those posting these internet ads OFTEN make errors/ommissions/typos...which are OFTEN to your advantage. Once caught, they are corrected/removed from the web, and will never be capitalized upon....unless you have that print out. I got a 1996 Maxima GLE, with just under 38K on it for $13,100, when the NADA resale evaluation at that time was $17,400 ONLY due to a typo/flip-flop of pricing when posting that week's vehicles and the fact that I had that ad in hand and insisted upon taking the vehicle at said offering!

Keep an eye out for like "bargains" folks! They won't like you (would'nt give me floor mats or a second fob), but the with the $4,300 I saved, who gives a.....bleep. LOL

tifosiv122

iTrader: (2)

Legally they did NOT have to sell you the car at that price. All these websites have a disclaimer that there is no resposibility for Typo's. You'd have to prove that it was a bait and switch tactic to pressure them into selling the car at that price.

If you really got that car at the price you say, congratulations, but it most likely will never happen again.

Erik

chinaonnitrous1

iTrader: (12)

SOrry to spam..but TIFOSIV122..if you could AIM me..at CHINAONNITROUS1..id really appreciate it..its about your angel eyes and a lil project on my 2k2.

MaximumOvadrive

Yes, I really got it at that price, so thanks for the congrats.

Would venture to say that since NJ is a very debtor and consumer friendly state, more than likely the burden of proof; should they have refused me and I had to contact the applicable State agencies, would NOT have been on me but the dealership. One would have likely recovered the difference between the book value and the advertised price on the lost purchase (injunctive relief/monetary penalties/ consumer restitution or any combination thereof.)

In this "new" world order of consumer fraud protections and e-business we should revisit the fact that the FTC defines a sales practice as "deceptive" if it is "likely to mislead consumers and affects consumers' behavior or decisions about buying a product", and as unfair "if the injury it causes is substantial, not outweighed by other benefits to the consumer, and not reasonably avoidable". So a "bait-and-switch" can certainly be construed to involve refusing to sell an item at an advertised price.

There are some recent examples that illustrate how easy it can be to trigger complaints, one immediately standing out...Buy.com recently settled a class-action civil suit brought by consumers claiming unfair and deceptive trade practices with respect to a single pricing error. Buy.com mistakenly offered a $588 computer monitor for $164.50. Although the price was posted on the internet for only 48 hours over a weekend before it was corrected, word of the bargain price quickly spread to eventually affect approximately 7000 consumers.

In an effort to satisfy customers, Buy.com filled some orders by shipping 143 units they had on hand, but then refused to honor the remaining orders at the lower price. Such actions led to allegations of unfair and deceptive trade practices, including bait-and-switch. To make matters worse, Buy.com allegedly gave mixed messages to its customers regarding the nature of the error and whether or not the orders would be honored. Eventually, Buy.com settled the class-action suit, without admitting wrongdoing, for $575,000, a rather steep price to pay for a single pricing error.

I also understand that civil penalties of up to $7,500 can be levied for each violation of the Consumer Fraud Act. When the smoke would have cleared, while I would have certainly been left without a car/starting my search all over again while the nasty scenario played out, it would not have been worth the bad publicity and $4,300 loss this major Nissan dealer would have incurred to have refused to sell me the vehicle. I can only assume this is why they sold me the car at the price advertised.

And yes, while this is a rarity, it WILL happen again somewhere/time in these beautiful United States, of this I assure you. Might not be a Maxima, and certainly not that dealership again (LOL, heads rolled on that one I am sure), but just wished folks to be aware so they can take advantage of such situations should they arise.

BTW, nice meeting you!