Rodan

Th new owner is CONSIDERING filing a lawsuit? I think this is a no brainer.

ruexp67

CONSIDERING == Code word for "Actively interviewing various lawfirms."

JonBoy

He has the keys and a bill of sale and sales contract. I'd be charging them with theft, for starters. Additionally, I'd just walk into the lot and drive it away.

Gymkata

Idiots! There is a Bill Heard Chevy where I live too and they have been on the news before .

QUIKAG

Bill Heard dealerships probably have the worst reputation in the auto industry.

NEODYMIUM

The law that Bill Heard references in his statement is interesting. If true, the buyer may not be able to do anything. It makes me think this dealer knows the law and likes to skate on the border of illegal practices to make money.

JonBoy

The law only applies if the buyer KNEW that they were selling under their cost. The buyer had no way of knowing their cost, so they can't claim he KNEW he was getting way too good of a deal.

NEODYMIUM

^I don't think that is what the law states. I'm searching for it right now, I'm interested to know

umop-apisdn

The reason they're so willing to pony up $500 to say "sorry" is only because it's a hell of a lot less than 10K. It's the dealership's fault they made the "mistake", they should suck it up and move on. Dealerships screw people over on a daily basis, one deal isn't going to kill their bottom line.

I'm no lawyer, but I think it was a bad move for Bill Heard to take the truck back themselves. Since they provided the precident in their statement, they should have used the courts to uphold a decision. I wonder what the self help laws are in the state of TN.

Slamnasty

Ya, he should be able to do that, but now they know what he looks like, and even if he brought the receipt for the vehicle with him and tried to walk on and drive it away, I'm guessing A) they'd try to stop him and rip the contract from his hand and shred it, or B) they'd sic the cops on him and he'd have less of a case to make to authorities because he would have trundled onto privately-owned property to "steal" what was not considered his by the owners of that property.

This buyer is in the right without. There's no way he could've known their cost. IMO I don't care if what Bill Heard did *MIGHT* have an icicle's chance in hell of being "legal"; Nothing like this should ever be even arguable in court. They signed the contract through THEIR employee, and the buying party agreed and paid his part, case closed. If Bill Heard doesn't like it, they can fire the salesman and take one in the @ss for not paying attention, or rather for not screwing people over the normal way...

I don't, as a car buyer, get to Mulligan and bring a car back to a dealership if I decide 2 days after I buy it that I don't want it, and expect to get my money and/or trade-in back.

I'm interested to know if this has happened to anyone in Phoenix...