Service contact unauthorized

[Laidback4life]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Virginia

I bought a car yesterday from a reputable dealership of which I've dealt with before. Fortunately, I looked over my contract today and found out that the dealership charged me 1,799 for a service contract I did not agree too. My previous transaction 8 months ago did not yield this issue. Tomorrow, I will call the dealership and visit to pick up my vehicle. It is at this time I will be requesting them to revise the contract because they charged me for something I did not agree too or was informed of. We have a maintenance plan with a 2 year warranty, but that is another charge and line item. We have a signed paper that says we have no other warranty. What recourse do I have?

 

[justalayman]

Fortunately, I looked over my contract today and found out that the dealership charged me 1,799 for a service contract I did not agree too.

well, actually you did agree to it. You showed that when you signed the contract.

You do realize you are supposed to read the contract before signing it, right?

I would definitely question them about what appears to be a redundant addition. If they won't budge on it, you are kind of stuck though.

 

[swalsh411]

Most service contracts I've seen allow you to get a pro-rated refund. If this does, then you will get most of your money back. If not, well then you learned a valuable lesson to actually read things before signing them and it only cost you $1,799.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Since you have not yet accepted the vehicle, you can use any imperfection in the vehicle to refuse delivery under the perfect tender rule.

After they agree to modify the contract, you can agree to accept the imperfect vehicle.

 

[Zigner]

Since you have not yet accepted the vehicle, you can use any imperfection in the vehicle to refuse delivery under the perfect tender rule.

After they agree to modify the contract, you can agree to accept the imperfect vehicle.

What a stretch.

The fact is that so long as the vehicle is in the same condition as they agreed to buy it, then your suggestion won't work.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

What a stretch.

The fact is that so long as the vehicle is in the same condition as they agreed to buy it, then your suggestion won't work.

Oh, so Virginia removed the Perfect Tender Rule when they adopted the UCC.

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Zigner]

Oh, so Virginia removed the Perfect Tender Rule when they adopted the UCC.

Thanks for the heads up.

The rule would apply if the vehicle is different when tendered than it was when they contracted. Since the vehicle won't be different, it won't apply.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

The rule would apply if the vehicle is different when tendered than it was when they contracted. Since the vehicle won't be different, it won't apply.

It appears you do not understand the Perfect Tender Rule.

 

[Zigner]

It appears you do not understand the Perfect Tender Rule.

Sure I do - but it appears that you don't understand the meaning of the word "perfect" (in this context.)

The buyer and the seller made a contract based on the vehicle as it was presented. So, let's say there was a dent in the driver's door. The buyer saw it and negotiated and entered in to the contract with knowledge that the dent was present. The dent would be an "imperfection", but the buyer can't come back later and refuse delivery because of the dent.

Or are you saying something different?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Sure I do - but it appears that you don't understand the meaning of the word "perfect" (in this context.)

The buyer and the seller made a contract based on the vehicle as it was presented. So, let's say there was a dent in the driver's door. The buyer saw it and negotiated and entered in to the contract with knowledge that the dent was present. The dent would be an "imperfection", but the buyer can't come back later and refuse delivery because of the dent.

Or are you saying something different?

If the terms of the contract call for the dealer to deliver a car with a dent in the door, then the buyer cannot reject based on the dent.

If the contract does not describe the vehicle as having a dent in the door, buyer can reject.

Generally, a buyer is being a real jerk by invoking the rule when buying a used car, but when a dishonest seller slips a clause into a contract hoping the buyer won't notice, and then tries to hold the buyer to the terms of the contract, the buyer (IMHO) is fully justified in also being a jerk.

 

[Zigner]

If the terms of the contract call for the dealer to deliver a car with a dent in the door, then the buyer cannot reject based on the dent.

If the contract does not describe the vehicle as having a dent in the door, buyer can reject.

This isn't going to get the buyer out of the purchase. The buyer's just going to not have a car, but have a payment.

Generally, a buyer is being a real jerk by invoking the rule when buying a used car, but when a dishonest seller slips a clause into a contract hoping the buyer won't notice, and then tries to hold the buyer to the terms of the contract, the buyer (IMHO) is fully justified in also being a jerk.

That's if you believe that it wasn't discussed and the buyer just misunderstood...

 

[You Are Guilty]

If the terms of the contract call for the dealer to deliver a car with a dent in the door, then the buyer cannot reject based on the dent.

If the contract does not describe the vehicle as having a dent in the door, buyer can reject.

That raises an interesting point. What is "perfect" tender in an as-is sale?

 

[tranquility]

"As-Is" wouldn't modify the perfect tender rule in the least. Say we buy an "as-is" vehicle and, on inspection, everything seems OK. When we go to pick it up the next day, the engine and tires are gone and all the interior of the vehicle is stripped. The dealer hands over the keys and....must the buyer accept? Of course not, perfect tender was not made.

As to the level of difference, it seems there is a split on the courts. Some want substantial compliance while others allow for rejection if there is even a trivial defect. Virginia? (I only find dicta on the matter with a quick search.)

But, wouldn't the use of the OP matter too? If a car is tendered to me that is dirty or has a dent, I'm not going to worry because it is going to happen once I get a hold of the vehicle anyway. I don't much care. If my neighbor got the car though, I guarantee that he would have inspected every dent before signing the contract and would KNOW and be able to prove an additional dent was on the vehicle and could bring in any number of witnesses to state such matters really matter to him.

Here, I don't think there is a perfect tender problem. It is enough of a legal issue to have the dealership worry a little if brought up. I don't think it would be anywhere near enough of an issue to give up all the income from the additional purchased warranty. I do think I'd hire Stevef to help me with issue spotting if I really wanted to play hardball though.

 

[justalayman]

"As-Is" wouldn't modify the perfect tender rule in the least. .

I disagree:

§ 2-601. Buyer's Rights on Improper Delivery.

Subject to the provisions of this Article on breach in installment contracts (Section 2-612) and unless otherwise agreed under the sections on contractual limitations of remedy (Sections 2-718 and 2-719), if the goods or the tender of delivery fail in any respect to conform to the contract, the buyer may

(a) reject the whole; or
(b) accept the whole; or
(c) accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest.

If the contract states "as is" then "as is" includes the dent in the door, the crack in the windshield or any other issue that was present when the buyer inspected and accepted the vehicle.
after all, that is what an as is sale is. It doesn't refer to just the mechanical functions or anything else. The entire vehicle is as is.

Say we buy an "as-is" vehicle and, on inspection, everything seems OK. When we go to pick it up the next day, the engine and tires are gone and all the interior of the vehicle is stripped. The dealer hands over the keys and....must the buyer accept? Of course not, perfect tender was not made.

then the car wouldn't be as is, as in the same condition as when the buyer inspected the vehicle, right? You are describing exactly what zigner was speaking of.

But, wouldn't the use of the OP matter too? If a car is tendered to me that is dirty or has a dent, I'm not going to worry because it is going to happen once I get a hold of the vehicle anyway. I don't much care. If my neighbor got the car though, I guarantee that he would have inspected every dent before signing the contract and would KNOW and be able to prove an additional dent was on the vehicle and could bring in any number of witnesses to state such matters really matter to him.

the duty to inspect is on the buyer. If he fails or refuses and misses something, that is on them. and what you are going to use it for is meaningless unless the seller implied a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

 

[You Are Guilty]

That is what I was (Socratically) getting at - it is an issue of proof. I have never seen a contract, new or used, which specifies where the dents are or how many paint defects exist or which radio preset buttons stick. Assuming the tires and engine is still there when our OP goes to get the car, how then, does our pissed off buyer reject the car for an alleged non-perfect tender?