Originally Posted by Sharkonwheels
Matter of fact, I think the OP was mentioned in the Jalopnik article as saying that they contacted attorneys, and legal/court fees would not be included, and that they could not afford to pay for an attorney themselves.
Seriously... Think about this logically.
Why would a dealer, ANY dealer, want to intentionally do something like that? I mean seriously... Doing this intentionally could literally END them!
if they WERE going in that direction, they would have just waved them away, and left them to deal with the insurance companies. They didn't. They've tried - yeah, that other 2012 was a misfire, but i seriously doubt it was intentional. I doubt he'd want to be fanning the flames at that point.
"The rest of the story" is what we're missing. I feel for the OP - man, I LOVE my cars, whether leased or bought. I treat them better than I treat myself. I hand wash, hand dry, only use Mother's products, teat the leather, treat the plastic, etc... So I definitely sympathize.
In the end, I think the dealer was listening to the WRONG people, who should be canned on-the-spot, and got REALLY bad advice. They should've NOT left/closed the first time the Hoopers came in, until they agreed on something. Where we are now, it probably would've cost them less to go ahead and order a new ZL1, but that wouldn't correct what was being harped about: first year, limited production, etc... So I wonder....
Is there REALLY any pleasing the Hoopers at this point?
Not being an ass... just asking...
Or are they trying to force getting their way in the court of public opinion?
|