nopushover
Junior Member
What is the name of your state?from Nova Scotia, Canada
Now I know this question refers to a situation in Canada, but in general terms of legal precedent, what general opinions might you pass on the following:
A local car dealership of a major car company leases a car. The person to operate the car is in bankrupcy. To get the lease, a family member co-signer is brought into the lease. That family member, is a quite elderly parent ( in 80's, who naturally wants to help out a sibling ), a World War Two, D-Day veteran, pensioner living on very limited means ( under the poverty line in income) and a good longtime past customer of the major car company whose dealership is in question..... .
The sibling, jobless at that time, and being 50 ish with health issues.., not a good prospect of getting a job of any kind of good pay anytime soon, is recently divorced, and is living on very limited means including a very!! small disability pension, and is faced with substantial ongoing bills, partly in association with being a single parent now, having rent costs, and because the sibling's also an insulin dependant diabetic ( having to buy costly insulin on a regular basis) who on a few occassions has had severe and life threatening diabetic attacks, which at times have required hospitalization.
Point A is that with due diligence, the car dealership and it's agent should NEVER have permitted the lease to be transacted, giving the financial state of th two parties involved, as well in consideration of the age of the parent. On this point is the car dealership liable for disreputable business practices, or some other point of law.
Now, the above is not even the primary focus of this matter of the dealership, but it is a key factor in the rest of what unfolds.
The inevitable happens, after a year and a half, two, the sibling begins to fall behind in their overall bill situation, and not only that their disability pension re another health matter has in meantime been slated to be discontinued. The sibling's forced for one to move in with the elderly parent, and to let go of the car a few months after this. Meantime, the sibling's travelling out of country for long periods of time in connection to a serious love interest. While the sibling's away, it's decided by the rest of the family the car must be returned, and the lease terminated.
After some verbal negotiation with the car dealership agent, an agreement is reached. At least a verbal committment on behalf the car dealership agent - he's told the family that when we return the car back to the dealership, the dealership will take pains to release it out (have someone take it over), and as well, and this is the key point, we are assured that's the end of the matter -that no further action that will be taken with regards this matter. We shall expect to hear no more ot it. They will assume reponsibilty getting what they can for the vehicle, and let things lie at that. Lie indeed !! What I would consider is a verbal contract, on whose validilty and trust we agreed to retrun the car and end the lease.
Now the particular car dealership is undergoing a huge new construction phase re construction of a pretty substantial building on their lot, so I figure they assuming loads of costs, muliple millions. Their concern therefore I figure is not on their long term customers, their business practices, their corporate reliability, virtue, good standing, or customer relations, but rather instead focused on getting brand new cars on and off the lot as quickly in turnover as possible. A practice, I would contend leads to a lack of due diligence with respect to financial and lease agreement financing transactions. An atttitude summed up as such: We don't care if you can be reasonably be expected to able to afford the car or loan, we just want to move cars off the lot, and get commissions and financing payback fees, ..., pay off our construction costs.
But that's NOT our problem, a verbal committment was made to us, upon which we acted in good faith.
What happens is that we find upon a few calls in to them over time, there doesn't appear to be much "push" being made in releasing the vehicle, a laxical at best attitude, nothing made apparent that any real effort is being done. After a relatively short time, a couple, maybe three or so months, they instead sent it off to auction, where's it sold for pidlings.
So lo and behold..., a while later, the matter's been transferred from them to the financing company associated with the major car company involved. So we start getting harrassed by that company.., an harassment that includes calls to nearby neighbours, as well as nasty and threatening attitudes of the representatives ( the elderly parent has for one a heart condition, and had to have a triple bypass operation a handfill of years before so naturally we don't like anybody getting him riled !! ). Family members relate to them the financial situation of the parent and sibling, how they cannot afford to make payments, and as well pass along how the dealership had said the matter had been settled way back when we had very first returned the car. We even mention that, and why that, the lease should NEVER have been granted in the first place. To no effect, and the situation continues to this very time.
So guestion TWO would be would the car dealership subject to lawsuit for fraud, or breach of a verbal contract? Indeed. perhaps even for an harrassment campaign that could have resulted in personal injury ( given the parent's age and health condition ).
Even if there's is no legal recourse, I find it a moral atrosity that a past loyal consumer, an elderly D-Day veteran Pensioner with a heart condition, who fought for the right for such and such a car dealership and parent car company making huge profits, to exist in a free society, could be treated in such shoddy, dispectful, misleading, frauduent, mean spirited, ungrateful way by a supposedly major "reputable" company. Have they no regard to their own reputation, or any concern as to their customers?? Any shred of decency?
In any case, there's my rant and cause. What are the legal paremeters of recourse, ideed cause for a possible civil lawsuit ( as the finance company meantime appears just about now on their side of the fence to serve papers on the matter, threatening to mess up the credit ratings of the parties concerned, while stressing the parent further ).
my Regards:
nopushover
Now I know this question refers to a situation in Canada, but in general terms of legal precedent, what general opinions might you pass on the following:
A local car dealership of a major car company leases a car. The person to operate the car is in bankrupcy. To get the lease, a family member co-signer is brought into the lease. That family member, is a quite elderly parent ( in 80's, who naturally wants to help out a sibling ), a World War Two, D-Day veteran, pensioner living on very limited means ( under the poverty line in income) and a good longtime past customer of the major car company whose dealership is in question..... .
The sibling, jobless at that time, and being 50 ish with health issues.., not a good prospect of getting a job of any kind of good pay anytime soon, is recently divorced, and is living on very limited means including a very!! small disability pension, and is faced with substantial ongoing bills, partly in association with being a single parent now, having rent costs, and because the sibling's also an insulin dependant diabetic ( having to buy costly insulin on a regular basis) who on a few occassions has had severe and life threatening diabetic attacks, which at times have required hospitalization.
Point A is that with due diligence, the car dealership and it's agent should NEVER have permitted the lease to be transacted, giving the financial state of th two parties involved, as well in consideration of the age of the parent. On this point is the car dealership liable for disreputable business practices, or some other point of law.
Now, the above is not even the primary focus of this matter of the dealership, but it is a key factor in the rest of what unfolds.
The inevitable happens, after a year and a half, two, the sibling begins to fall behind in their overall bill situation, and not only that their disability pension re another health matter has in meantime been slated to be discontinued. The sibling's forced for one to move in with the elderly parent, and to let go of the car a few months after this. Meantime, the sibling's travelling out of country for long periods of time in connection to a serious love interest. While the sibling's away, it's decided by the rest of the family the car must be returned, and the lease terminated.
After some verbal negotiation with the car dealership agent, an agreement is reached. At least a verbal committment on behalf the car dealership agent - he's told the family that when we return the car back to the dealership, the dealership will take pains to release it out (have someone take it over), and as well, and this is the key point, we are assured that's the end of the matter -that no further action that will be taken with regards this matter. We shall expect to hear no more ot it. They will assume reponsibilty getting what they can for the vehicle, and let things lie at that. Lie indeed !! What I would consider is a verbal contract, on whose validilty and trust we agreed to retrun the car and end the lease.
Now the particular car dealership is undergoing a huge new construction phase re construction of a pretty substantial building on their lot, so I figure they assuming loads of costs, muliple millions. Their concern therefore I figure is not on their long term customers, their business practices, their corporate reliability, virtue, good standing, or customer relations, but rather instead focused on getting brand new cars on and off the lot as quickly in turnover as possible. A practice, I would contend leads to a lack of due diligence with respect to financial and lease agreement financing transactions. An atttitude summed up as such: We don't care if you can be reasonably be expected to able to afford the car or loan, we just want to move cars off the lot, and get commissions and financing payback fees, ..., pay off our construction costs.
But that's NOT our problem, a verbal committment was made to us, upon which we acted in good faith.
What happens is that we find upon a few calls in to them over time, there doesn't appear to be much "push" being made in releasing the vehicle, a laxical at best attitude, nothing made apparent that any real effort is being done. After a relatively short time, a couple, maybe three or so months, they instead sent it off to auction, where's it sold for pidlings.
So lo and behold..., a while later, the matter's been transferred from them to the financing company associated with the major car company involved. So we start getting harrassed by that company.., an harassment that includes calls to nearby neighbours, as well as nasty and threatening attitudes of the representatives ( the elderly parent has for one a heart condition, and had to have a triple bypass operation a handfill of years before so naturally we don't like anybody getting him riled !! ). Family members relate to them the financial situation of the parent and sibling, how they cannot afford to make payments, and as well pass along how the dealership had said the matter had been settled way back when we had very first returned the car. We even mention that, and why that, the lease should NEVER have been granted in the first place. To no effect, and the situation continues to this very time.
So guestion TWO would be would the car dealership subject to lawsuit for fraud, or breach of a verbal contract? Indeed. perhaps even for an harrassment campaign that could have resulted in personal injury ( given the parent's age and health condition ).
Even if there's is no legal recourse, I find it a moral atrosity that a past loyal consumer, an elderly D-Day veteran Pensioner with a heart condition, who fought for the right for such and such a car dealership and parent car company making huge profits, to exist in a free society, could be treated in such shoddy, dispectful, misleading, frauduent, mean spirited, ungrateful way by a supposedly major "reputable" company. Have they no regard to their own reputation, or any concern as to their customers?? Any shred of decency?
In any case, there's my rant and cause. What are the legal paremeters of recourse, ideed cause for a possible civil lawsuit ( as the finance company meantime appears just about now on their side of the fence to serve papers on the matter, threatening to mess up the credit ratings of the parties concerned, while stressing the parent further ).
my Regards:
nopushover
