Bought a used car and it has an issue, need advise.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by 81MC

...Boxsters are pretty femme.

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

you want femme I had a Miata before the Merc

If these two cars that are geared towards people who like RWD, great handling, manual transmissions, an overall analog experience, and are popular with actual racing schools...are femme...them hell, we need more women designing our cars.

Never mind the fact that I can't remember the last time I saw a woman driving either.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by nik-

VW Beetle -> Audi TT -> Porsche Boxter

Sorry, but the Beetle has no place in that lineup. Just because they share some historical styling cues doesn't mean they are at all similar.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Sorry, but the Beetle has no place in that lineup. Just because they share some historical styling cues doesn't mean they are at all similar.

Fancy Beetle owner spotted.

[Table 5]

It's not about being fancy. There's nothing wrong with owning any of those, I just don't see the link. The current Beetle is basically a Golf.

[DuffMan]

Can't believe there are people on this site not driving huge pickups with Hemi's

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Table 5

If these two cars that are geared towards people who like RWD, great handling, manual transmissions, an overall analog experience, and are popular with actual racing schools...are femme...them hell, we need more women designing our cars.

Never mind the fact that I can't remember the last time I saw a woman driving either.

the Miata was a great drive, best gearbox I have ever used

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Oh, it does, does it? What law is that?

There are plenty of cases on this, I've read most of them at one point or other, and I can't make categorical statements like you just did. Do you think if you were the dealer and walked into Court and said what you just posted it'd be persuasive?

Why people are willing to act so certain about subjects they don't have the first clue about is beyond me.

Do you have any of the case name so I could look them up? It would probably be interesting reading. There have been a few higher profile Alberta "lemon" cases on social media and it seems like there is a lot of power in the dealer's hands.

[you&me]

The problem nearly every buyer forgets when looking at used cars is that while the car depreciates, the parts and labour costs do not.

Whether you need to replace a part on a 6 month old, or 6 year old car, the part is the same, the cost of the part is the same and the cost of labour is the same. When the car is under warranty it's not as obvious (mostly because you're not paying for it) but it's something that a lot of consumers completely overlook...

For example, AFC's SL500 - That was a $130,000 car when it was new and the price for parts is commensurate to the price when new... So just because the value of the car is now ~1/5 of the new price, the same discount is not applied to parts and labour... You're still paying to service a $130k car.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Table 5

It's not about being fancy. There's nothing wrong with owning any of those, I just don't see the link. The current Beetle is basically a Golf.

Obviously was kidding. It was different when the 912 and Bettle were both running 1600cc engines.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Table 5

It's not about being fancy. There's nothing wrong with owning any of those, I just don't see the link. The current Beetle is basically a Golf.

target market

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Do you have any of the case name so I could look them up? It would probably be interesting reading. There have been a few higher profile Alberta "lemon" cases on social media and it seems like there is a lot of power in the dealer's hands.

The principle comes from a British case called Crowther v. Shannon Motors, [1975] All ER 139. There have been a bunch of Canadian cases in various factual situations, for example Paskiman v. Meadow Ford Sales Ltd., [1983] SJ No 133 (Sask. Q.B.) or Green v Holiday Chevrolet Oldsmobile Ltd (1975), 55 DLR (3d) 637 (Man CA), or Neilsen v. Maclin Motors Ltd. (1976) 71 D.L.R. (3d) 744. There are dozens.

That isn't to say he would win his lawsuit, because there are cases that go the other way, too, and almost all of them are very fact-specific. No one is going to provide him legal advice on his specific case via an internet forum, least of all me. But to suggest that you have to show that the dealer had pre-existing knowledge of defects is not consistent with the law or the Sale of Goods Act. A misrepresentation doesn't have to be fraudulent or even negligent to result in a rescission. So you guys need to be far less certain that you know how this will all turn out unless you have a really good reason for it.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'd consider taking it to a MB specialist for a second opinion.

My parent's neighbour is the owner/mechanic at HD Motors in Inglewood, who specialize in MB.

https://hd-motors-ltd.business.site/...edium=referral

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

This isn't something his personal vehicle insurance would cover.

Yes, I was leaning towards this as well.

But I was also curious to know if others felt that asking insurance how to approach the issue, even if they aren't covering, is a viable route.

I occasionally ask my insurance broker random specific questions like this at times and he either points me in the right direction, or asks around internally and gives me enough information to be pointed in the right direction.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by you&me

The problem nearly every buyer forgets when looking at used cars is that while the car depreciates, the parts and labour costs do not.

Whether you need to replace a part on a 6 month old, or 6 year old car, the part is the same, the cost of the part is the same and the cost of labour is the same. When the car is under warranty it's not as obvious (mostly because you're not paying for it) but it's something that a lot of consumers completely overlook...

For example, AFC's SL500 - That was a $130,000 car when it was new and the price for parts is commensurate to the price when new... So just because the value of the car is now ~1/5 of the new price, the same discount is not applied to parts and labour... You're still paying to service a $130k car.

I don't know about that. Exotics or super luxury, sure. But not mass produced. As the vehicle ages, more used parts flood the market. More parts also hit the market in an economy of scale assuming the vehicle will be using a specific styling/design for a minimum time period. Increased exposure to the vehicle increases aftermarket parts. Labour prices may or may not change, but over time I would assume it gets easier for them to swap parts due to familiarity and time spent goes down.

Case in point. I have a 2019 Honda Odyssey. Long story short, impact, I need a new rear light casing. Not all of the light casings for the back have aftermarket parts yet. The one that does have an aftermarket part, the price difference is only around 15-20% difference. In a few years though, I'm expecting more of these available at a pick & pull and the price difference for aftermarket to probably double.

[CaptainCrunch]

I find it hard to believe that a major leak like that would just explode out of nowhere, but good luck proving that a dealer ship would knowingly sell a car with that kind of defect.


I've only bought one used car that I didn't have an independent mechanic look at, and it was because I bought it from a good lot and the person I bought it from was a CalgaryPuck member.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Gundo

Hey CP,

Hopefully you can all help. So I bought a ‘13 used ML350 exactly 14 days ago. It sat in my garage the past 3 days moved it today and there was a oil pool under it.

I called the dealership I bought it from (wasn’t a Mercedes dealership we bought from) and brought it in. Just a call that it maybe the upper pan seal a job which requires approx 20 hours of labor. We have owned the SUV 14 days and out just over 500kms on it.

I didn’t get the extended warranty due to its $6000 price tag. And the dealership is already saying “you bought a used car with no warranty” and said they will help me out with the bill as in a 50/50 split which could still be upwards to $2000.

I don’t want to name the dealership but it was a reputable dealership in the Auto-mall and it’s being negotiated as to what’s going to happen at the moment but what if any sort of consumer laws do I have that could possibly be on my side I can get the help from if I need.

Any help would be appreciated.

I have dealt with similar circumstances before. Is there a chance you could still buy a power train warranty given how few km's you've put on? Although two weeks passing may not permit this to be an option..... Not only would this cover the current issue but the warranty would cover other potential issues down the road. Instead of getting the dealer to go 50/ 50 on this fix see if they will go 50/ 50 on a warranty that would cover this and you both win??? This is something we've done before.

The dealer should also feel obligated to help cover the cost. There's a good chance this was a known issue but the sales person did not disclose it or didn't even know about it. Vehicles can pass a safety inspection with leaks, drips etc... A leaking transfer case is not a safety related problem but is a mechanical concern, the same goes for leaking transmission or coolant lines. So this vhicle could've passed an AMVIC inspection but any mechanical deficiencies shold have been noted on the AMVIC.

There's nothing more frustrating then customers refusing warranty because of the cost then 2 months down the road wanting something fixed for free. No, sorry we offered you a warranty and you refused, knowing the risk, and now you have to live with the decision you've made. Not only that but so many people do not realize that the cost of the warranty is base on four things. The age of the vehicle, the km's on it, the cost and availability of parts and the type of coverage you choose. So in your case a $6000 warranty should give you a pretty good indication of cost of and frequency of repairs, perhaps this should've been a red flag fro you fr the start?

[Titan]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I find it hard to believe that a major leak like that would just explode out of nowhere, but good luck proving that a dealer ship would knowingly sell a car with that kind of defect.


I've only bought one used car that I didn't have an independent mechanic look at, and it was because I bought it from a good lot and the person I bought it from was a CalgaryPuck member.

Pylon? Miss him. Remember his barbie jeep? That was awesome.

[Ducay]

The number of armchair lawyers here telling OP to sue is exactly why you do not take legal advice from the internet.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Ducay

The number of armchair lawyers here telling OP to sue is exactly why you do not take legal advice from the internet.

That is textbook actionable slander!

[curves2000]

Was this used car a "certified pro-owned" car from the dealership? If so there should be some level of warranty. Have you been dealing with the management of the dealership or just the sales guy? Perhaps have this escalated and push HARD. Used cars are used cars but they should also be mechanically and safety sound when they are sold to you. This wasn't a winter beater you bought.

When all else fails, a couple of threats of going to the media and or going to the media might do the trick. Next up might be to get a lawyer involved.

Good luck