2007 Honda s2000 blown engine STOCK
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 1
From: Renton, WA
Originally Posted by SheDrivesIt,Mar 19 2010, 12:46 PM
Come on. He only owned the car for 3 days. Driven under 100 miles. One could reasonably expect that a car purchased from a dealer that was supposedly serviced and inspected (for which the dealer has supposedly provided documentation) that it would not be low on oil. If the car was low on oil, I would not necessarily EXPECT that the owner would have checked the oil level yet.
To the OP mark this one up as a life lesson. Learn from it and hopefully you come out smarter.
. Do you really want to be THAT guy??
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,875
Likes: 5
From: Santa Clartia, Ca
Why is everyone bashing the OP? First of all feel bad for him.. imagine how excited you guys were when you bought your s2000 and what if 3 days later it died, and the dealer excepts no responsibility. you would be mad as well!!
People are willing to pay much more at a dealer because they are supposed to offer piece of mind that they are buying a proven safe and reliable car. If you buy a car from ANY dealer the fluid should be in their normal ranges. I dont blame him for not checking his oil yet. For that motor to fully seize up means that there must have been some long time abuse or something other than his 3 days driving for that to happen.
"As is" doesnt fully mean that as soon as you sign the paperwork the dealer has nothing to do with the car. It doesnt work that way. Threaten to take them to court, I am sure they dont want other potential car buyers knowing that they in court for a car purchased 3 days ago. maybe they will give in and fix the car. Its worth a shot.....
People are willing to pay much more at a dealer because they are supposed to offer piece of mind that they are buying a proven safe and reliable car. If you buy a car from ANY dealer the fluid should be in their normal ranges. I dont blame him for not checking his oil yet. For that motor to fully seize up means that there must have been some long time abuse or something other than his 3 days driving for that to happen.
"As is" doesnt fully mean that as soon as you sign the paperwork the dealer has nothing to do with the car. It doesnt work that way. Threaten to take them to court, I am sure they dont want other potential car buyers knowing that they in court for a car purchased 3 days ago. maybe they will give in and fix the car. Its worth a shot.....
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8,595
Likes: 54
From: Temple City
^
yes it does work that way.
if the car has damage, then the buyer assumes the damage, regardless of who caused it. it doesn't sound like the dealer ever represented the car as having no damage. (a 110 point inspection does not mean the car doesn't have damage.)
the dealer is not responsible for prior damage, nor damage that they caused prior to the sale. in order to blame the dealer, you would have to prove that the dealer represented the car as having no damage - and this may not be possible.
yes it does work that way.
if the car has damage, then the buyer assumes the damage, regardless of who caused it. it doesn't sound like the dealer ever represented the car as having no damage. (a 110 point inspection does not mean the car doesn't have damage.)
the dealer is not responsible for prior damage, nor damage that they caused prior to the sale. in order to blame the dealer, you would have to prove that the dealer represented the car as having no damage - and this may not be possible.
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,875
Likes: 5
From: Santa Clartia, Ca
Originally Posted by jyeung528,Mar 20 2010, 03:29 PM
^
yes it does work that way.
if the car has damage, then the buyer assumes the damage, regardless of who caused it. it doesn't sound like the dealer ever represented the car as having no damage. (a 110 point inspection does not mean the car doesn't have damage.)
the dealer is not responsible for prior damage, nor damage that they caused prior to the sale. in order to blame the dealer, you would have to prove that the dealer represented the car as having no damage - and this may not be possible.
yes it does work that way.
if the car has damage, then the buyer assumes the damage, regardless of who caused it. it doesn't sound like the dealer ever represented the car as having no damage. (a 110 point inspection does not mean the car doesn't have damage.)
the dealer is not responsible for prior damage, nor damage that they caused prior to the sale. in order to blame the dealer, you would have to prove that the dealer represented the car as having no damage - and this may not be possible.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8,595
Likes: 54
From: Temple City
and, i don't believe a dealership is obligated to disclose information regarding a used car's condition. i highly doubt that.
so they don't have to give up info, they just can't MISrepresent info.
so they don't have to give up info, they just can't MISrepresent info.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8,595
Likes: 54
From: Temple City
and i don't think negligence has anything to do with it.
they can probably negligently damage the car...and then sell it "as-is", which means you buy it with all the damage regardless of how the damage got onto the car.
as long as they do not MISrepresent the car's condition.
they can probably negligently damage the car...and then sell it "as-is", which means you buy it with all the damage regardless of how the damage got onto the car.
as long as they do not MISrepresent the car's condition.