40 replies to this topic

[pickypg]

rippleman, on 06 October 2012 - 13:57, said:

I would also say with great certainty that because of this: "Sawyer immediately left the dealership and returned with a cashier's check" that he KNEW EXACTLY what he was doing since when you go through the dealership financing

As opposed to what alternative? When I bought my car, I wrote the check immediately after signing the contract (they surprisingly didn't need a cashier's check). Was he supposed to linger, or joy ride without paying? It makes perfect sense that he would go and get the check for the appropriate amount once finalizing the contract.

He very well might be an opportunist, but everything about the story shows that the dealership lied about some pretty big things, including telling the police that the car was stolen. What's one more thing? I don't know anyone that trusts a car dealership, who widely known for the bait and switch.

[+Majesticmerc]

Simon-, on 06 October 2012 - 13:41, said:

OK so he is trying to screw them by orally accepting a higher price for a new colour, he gets away with it by not returning calls to follow up in writing, eventually he is allowed to keep the more expensive car without paying extra, and now he is suing them for 2.2 million dollars for 4 hours of his time. The dealership was trying to do him a customer service by letting him have the car before getting the paperwork together for the change of mind.

If someone had me falsely arrested because they were butthurt about screwing up, you'd be damn right I'd be taking them to court. They screwed up, and they screwed up big. IANAL but a contract works both ways. If the dealer suddenly asks that the customer return to the dealership and ask him to sign a modified contract, he's well within his rights to simply refuse the new terms, and the dealer has to deal with their mistake. To have someone falsely imprisoned for no reason other than to scare them into signing a less favourable contract is basically illegal, and I'd have no problem taking them to court to (a) make them pay for wasting police (and my) time, and (b) make an example of them to show that this kind of BS is not okay.

[jakem1]

I'd sue the dealership and I'd also look into suing the police for wrongful arrest. It seems bizarre that they would arrest him without even double checking the ownership of the car.

[Simon-]

Majesticmerc, on 07 October 2012 - 00:01, said:

If someone had me falsely arrested because they were butthurt about screwing up, you'd be damn right I'd be taking them to court. They screwed up, and they screwed up big. IANAL but a contract works both ways. If the dealer suddenly asks that the customer return to the dealership and ask him to sign a modified contract, he's well within his rights to simply refuse the new terms, and the dealer has to deal with their mistake. To have someone falsely imprisoned for no reason other than to scare them into signing a less favourable contract is basically illegal, and I'd have no problem taking them to court to (a) make them pay for wasting police (and my) time, and (b) make an example of them to show that this kind of BS is not okay.

I agree about his rights and suing for a false police report. But $2.2 million, really?

Future job prospects? No effect, he was not found guilty of anything and chargesnwere dropped.

If anything I would think that it WOULD be theft, because he has a signed written legal contract for Car A, but he has taken Car B which he has not and refuses to sign for. Either sign for Car B or return it to get Car A back or Car B is stolen.

[+Majesticmerc]

Simon-, on 07 October 2012 - 00:28, said:

I agree about his rights and suing for a false police report. But $2.2 million, really?

Future job prospects? No effect, he was not found guilty of anything and chargesnwere dropped.

If anything I would think that it WOULD be theft, because he has a signed written legal contract for Car A, but he has taken Car B which he has not and refuses to sign for. Either sign for Car B or return it to get Car A back or Car B is stolen.

2.2 million is perhaps a bit excessive, final settlement will likely be much less.

It does suggest in the article that the contract he signed was for the correct car, they just put the price for the wrong car on there.

---

On a slightly related note. When I last upgraded my phone, I went to the T-Mobile store to collect, and expected to pay £50 for the handset (the contract didn't cover the full price of the phone). The guy prints out all the paperwork and asks me to sign the contract, and I do so, noting that he had put the "One off charge" as £0. As soon as I'd signed the contract, the manager comes over and notices the mistake, but at that point I'd signed the contract, and legally robbed them for £50 so there was sweet FA they could do about it .

[theyarecomingforyou]

A lawsuit is understandable given the circumstances. Is what he went through worth $2.2m in damages? No, barely a fraction of that. And if the company offers reasonable compensation then the lawsuit should be dropped altogether. Lawsuits should seek to redress an injustice, not skew it in the opposite direction.

Both sides come out looking like scumbags. It's a pretty sick culture.

[Ghostdraconi]

Having read this I had two thoughts,

1: While 2.2 Million seems a bit too much, any company that would have someone falsely arrested needs to be taken to the cleaners. Let a just decide how much the guy should get (I'd probably give him the Jeep for free).

2: Why the [bleep] does it cost $5,600 for a different colour, I think whoever decided that is the real crook here.

[pickypg]

Ghostdraconi, on 07 October 2012 - 01:21, said:

2: Why the [bleep] does it cost $5,600 for a different colour, I think whoever decided that is the real crook here.

There are most likely other features beyond color.

[briangw]

FrancoisC, on 06 October 2012 - 21:23, said:

Embarassing? 100% correct

Worth a 2.2 millions lawsuit, or just a lawsuit for that matter? Absolutely not.

He spent a couple of hours there, not a week/month/whatever.

Except you forget he signed a contract that was drawn up by the dealership that they both signed and the dealership had the nerve to arrest him? That sounds like a wrongful arrest type of lawsuit there.

[Simon-]

A man falsely imprisoned for 22 years on rape and murder charges only gets $2 million.

[+Majesticmerc]

Simon-, on 07 October 2012 - 03:36, said:

A man falsely imprisoned for 22 years on rape and murder charges only gets $2 million.

See now, THAT, is injustice.

[firey]

wow, looks to me like the guy is just trying to make a quick buck. 2.2 million? *Sigh*, I can understand that going to Jail could hurt your rep, but it will be dismissed, and removed from your record. I hope that if the guy does win, he blows it all on crap and is left with nothing but a bunch of poor decisions.

[Reverend Spam]

Simon-, on 07 October 2012 - 00:28, said:

Future job prospects? No effect, he was not found guilty of anything and chargesnwere dropped.

If it wasn't highly publicized, I would agree that it wouldn't matter... But look, now it's Google-able... So any future employer that wants to hire him can Google him and find the same story, and think the same things others have said here (that he stole it, he went in with the intention of scamming them, etc) and use that to discriminate against him.

I see both sides of the issue, but in the end, I'd have to agree that what this guy is doing SHOULD be considered completely on the up-and-up, unless evidence against him surfaces, which I doubt it will.

[Simon-]

Reverend Spam, on 07 October 2012 - 13:49, said:

If it wasn't highly publicized, I would agree that it wouldn't matter... But look, now it's Google-able... So any future employer that wants to hire him can Google him and find the same story, and think the same things others have said here (that he stole it, he went in with the intention of scamming them, etc) and use that to discriminate against him.

Well that's his own fault for demanding 2.2M dollars. If he would have sued for a reasonable amount then all Google would show was that he was WRONGLY arrested. He can't blame the dealer for him being unreasonable.

[Relativity_17]

The guy hasn't gone through two million dollars' worth of grief. For his troubles, I think he should get the car's cost written off by the dealership, along with an apology AND file charges against the individual at the dealership who is responsible for filing a false police report.

And yeah, the folks at the dealership were being little *****es about the whole thing, but I imagine the negative publicity is going to hit them a lot harder than the price of the car.