VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner

Dealership Apologizes for Having customer arrested

20K views 79 replies 57 participants last post by  jepva 
#1 · (Edited)
Contract Law 101: Dealership apologizes for having customer arrested


Chesapeake Virginia, May 7 2012,

Man buys blue Chevrolet Traverse at Priority Chevrolet, takes
it back and trades it for the same car, a black Traverse with more equipment. The dealership
fails to pick up on the price difference. The contract is finalized and signed, reflecting the
lower price of the original blue car
.

Next.. the dealership then realizes its mistake and has the customer arrested for theft.

Police realize there is no case and drop the charges. Customer sues. Dealership apologizes.

More to follow. :eek:


According to the lawsuits, Sawyer test-drove a blue Chevrolet Traverse on May 7 but ultimately decided to buy a black one. He traded in his 2008 Saturn Vue, signed a promissory note and left in his new SUV.

The next morning, Sawyer returned and asked to exchange the black Traverse for the blue one.

The lawsuit claims Wib Davenport, a sales manager, agreed to the trade without discussing how much more the blue Traverse would cost. (Dealership vice president, Stacy) Cummings disputed that, saying Davenport told Sawyer it would cost about $5,500 more than the black one and that Sawyer orally agreed to the higher price.

Regardless, the final contract Sawyer signed did not reflect the higher price, which Cummings said should have been in the area of $39,000. He blamed a clerical error.

"We definitely made a mistake there. There is no doubt about it," said (Dealership owner, Dennis) Ellmer.

After signing the contract - which listed a sale price of about $34,000 - Sawyer immediately left the dealership and returned with a cashier's check covering what he owed after dealer incentives and his trade-in.

A week later, Sawyer came back from a vacation to find numerous voicemails and a letter from the dealership, the suit said. In a phone conversation, Davenport explained they had made a mistake on the contract and sold the car for too little. He asked Sawyer to return to the dealership and sign a new contract.

The lawsuit claims Sawyer refused. Cummings said Sawyer initially agreed but never followed through.

When Sawyer did not return to the dealership, Priority staff continued their attempts to contact him via phone, text message and hand-delivered letters. They eventually contacted police.

On June 15, three Chesapeake police officers arrested Sawyer in his front yard and took him before a magistrate judge. He was released on bond after about four hours at the Chesapeake jail, the suit said.

Commonwealth's Attorney Nancy Parr said her office dropped all charges Aug. 23 after speaking with representatives of the dealership and determining there was insufficient evidence to pursue the case.

In an interview Tuesday, Ellmer and Cummings said their staff never reported the SUV stolen and never asked for Sawyer to be arrested. They said they called police only for help locating the SUV while they pursued the civil action.

After speaking with police Wednesday, however, Ellmer said he'd learned one of his managers, Brad Anderson, had indeed said the SUV was stolen.

Kelly O'Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the Chesapeake Police Department, said the officer told Anderson in advance he was going to secure a warrant for Sawyer's arrest.
 
#2 · (Edited)
That's hilarious, you go in and ask for new a new contract, they tell you to go **** yourself, they **** up on your behalf and they say you stole their vehicle, priceless...

I have no idea why people hate buying cars, or dealing with sales people.
 
#3 ·
My question is, on what evidence and grounds did the police have to arrest this individual? Personally, I would work through this with the dealership just because it is the right thing to do morally, despite the fact he's probably not legally obligated. I would be less inclined to help though after they dealership got the police involved.
 
#9 ·
In an interview Tuesday, Ellmer and Cummings said their staff never reported the SUV stolen and never asked for Sawyer to be arrested. They said they called police only for help locating the SUV while they pursued the civil action.

After speaking with police Wednesday, however, Ellmer said he'd learned one of his managers, Brad Anderson, had indeed said the SUV was stolen.
Is 'Making False Statements to Police' a crime in Virginia?

Dealerships love to play the numbers game, it is fitting that the ineptitude of several employees (if they had actually been checking the contract before getting the customer to sign someone would have caught the mistake) cost them thousands.
 
#27 ·
Totally. But I do wonder if there is more to this story. Did the dealer try to reason with the customer before calling the cops? Mistakes do happen. Not defending them though, this whole ordeal should never even have involved cops...
 
#57 · (Edited)
This. What the hell did the dealership show the police (and subsequently the judge that signed the warrant) that made it look like fraud? Either they lied, or this guy has a lawsuit against the police department too. Even if the dealership is legally in the right, it's still a civil matter.
 
#30 ·
If they screwed some little old lady for an EXTRA $5,500 the dealership would be laughing all the way to the bank. Funny how they get their panties in a wad when they are on the loosing end.

I wonder if they will make aggressive attempts at hindering any warranty/repair claims for his car in the future.
 
#32 ·
I wonder if they will make aggressive attempts at hindering any warranty/repair claims for his car in the future.
Illegal, of course (though we do know it's possible). But, if I were in his shoes, I'd jump for joy and gladly take my car elsewhere :D

Totally. But I do wonder if there is more to this story. Did the dealer try to reason with the customer before calling the cops? Mistakes do happen. Not defending them though, this whole ordeal should never even have involved cops...
They did try to contact him multiple times... he ust never responded, as he has a right to do.
 
#31 ·
I bet there is more to the story than innocent customer arrested by evil dealership.Did the buyer not notice the 5k in content difference?
Surely he knew the higher content vehicle wouldn't be the exact same price.
Otoh, the dealer should have reviewed the sales contract.


Didn't we have somebody in TCL that bought a car and later found out the contract was for a different vehicle than what they took home?
 
#58 ·
Surely he knew the higher content vehicle wouldn't be the exact same price.
You're kidding right? I've seen people tell me they own a so-and-so car, and then I look and it's something else. They don't even know what they bought, they just know what color it is and that it has cool wheels. We're talking about a buyer who returned the car on the basis of the color. I don't think that buyer knows diddly about trim levels or dealer margins.
 
#38 ·
In having signed paperwork for my house and my car in the last couple months BOTH documents have clauses in them stating clerical errors may be corrected up to 10 days after the signing. I believe this is a NJ law. So if the price was wrong they can change it if it was an error. (They can't just up prices or change warranties etc...) They have to have proof an error was made. Such as another document you signed with the correct amount. Just a thought as to what might explain this. Don't know what the laws or contracts clauses were.
 
#39 · (Edited)
I was just going to make this exact comment. Dealership always has me sign a form that states that if there is an error in the paperwork, I agree that it can be fixed within a certain period of time. Otherwise, dealership can sue for reformation:

"Reformation is generally permitted when either the parties made a mutual mistake or one party made a unilateral mistake and the other engaged in fraud or inequitable conduct." Boyles Bros. Drilling Co. v. Orion Indus., Ltd., supra.
The dealership made a 'unilateral mistake' in the contract... and the OP knew it.

Unfortunately, the dealership did something very bad by reporting the car as stolen and having the customer falsely arrested. My guess is that they both leave everything as is customer agrees not to sue for the false accusation and the dealership does not sue for the $$$.
 
#46 ·
FV-QR

unreal...
 
#49 ·
Although the police were never involved, I did have a similar dispute years ago with a Ford dealership that resulted in my bringing the new car back to them.

I go in late on a Saturday afternoon circa 1996 wanting to trade my year old Ford pickup (stupid mistake on my part) for a new Mustang GT. They tell me they can accurately estimate the payoff of my current vehicle based on the payment and time elapsed so they put that figure into the paperwork. We come to an agreement on sales price, trade-in value, fees, etc and I go to the finance guy. They offer what I know is too high of a rate so I say I want to go to my own bank on Monday.
Dealer tells me to take the Mustang home even though I kind of didn't want too until everything was squared away but did anyway. Monday I contact the bank, loan is arranged and dealer will be funded on Tuesday. Get a call from dealer Tuesday telling me all's well so come in and pick up my copies of all paperwork.
On Thursday, FIVE days after we wrote up the deal, and two days after it was funded, I get a call from the sales manager saying the payoff for my car was $175 more than they had estimated and they wanted me to bring in a check for that amount. I told him no, he continued to argue, so I told him I'd bring the car back. Got back to the dealer, saw him over in the corner office scowling, and my saleswoman took me out to the back lot in a golf cart to retrieve my truck. Some cars were going to have to be moved, so she left me there while she went back to get some porters and keys to help her. A few minutes later she came back and told me if I still wanted the Mustang, the manager had relented. End of story.
This was totally their mistake and their policies. They should have never sent me home in a new car unless they were 100% sure of everything. They also could have verified the payoff first thing Monday morning and brought it up then and changed the deal. Instead, they sat on for FIVE days and then wanted to quibble over $175 on a $20K+ car, stupid. I in no way felt morally obligated to pay that extra amount.
 
#53 ·
"The lawsuits seek $2.2 million in damages, plus attorney fees."

GTFO :rolleyes:
 
#68 ·
i know this is not exactly same situation guys,
but if dealers have no problems marking up certain vehicles
and im sure this Chevy dealer sells plenty of "PROTECTION PACKAGES" to females shopping alone :laugh::laugh: , so if dealer can add on $thousands to the price out of thin air,
im ok if they loose few $K every once in a while.
it was their mistake, they should eat it.

 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top