Yes I do have a ‘Notice of Transfer and Release of Liability’ form (Authorization for Payoff) which shows the original (correct) payoff price. Signed and dated the day I picked up the car
1 Like
Google it to see if it’s a popular scam. Sounds like a variation of a yo-yo scam
Thank you for the reply. This is exactly how I see it as well, but I wanted to make sure I’m not missing something here.
So you all good then. Email it to the dealer.
1 Like
Good! 
Thanks for your help, much appreciated
If they were quoted a payoff by VW and then VW changed the payoff, the issue is between the dealer and VW finance.
Personally, even though it wouldn’t be my responsibility nor concern, I’d call VW finance and ask them what the dealer paid and see how that compares to what is written in the sales contract. Just out of curiosity.
@Palestar - Did the dealer use the amount you gave them for the payoff and it turned out to be higher? You could be responsible for the difference if it’s not due to something the dealer did. Ask VW Credit how much was paid and if was a different amount, why?
It’s a moot point… the dealer is responsible for ensuring that they get the correct payoff. Palestar is responsible for making sure the lease is paid. Clearly, someone paid the lease balance down to $0 that wasn’t him, so he gets to walk away from it.
If the dealer agreed to X value for the car and the lease buyout was higher than that, then why pay the difference? Why not just saddle Palestar with the balance? That would have been his responsibility.
This happened to me a few month ago. Traded-in a VW lease and still getting bills from VW credits for two more billing cycles. Called VW credit and got an answer that there’s a different between “leasee payoff quote” and “dealer payoff quote”. VW credit claimed they won’t release the title to the dealer.
They have already received the dealer’s payoff check but was telling me they need the dealer to call them to close the case. I call the dealer and VW credit several times and it seems they have different understandings…and a week later I receive a $0 balance statement. I am pretty sure in the end, the dealer paid the amount quoted in the first place, no extra.
I probably won’t touch VW again…
Woo! Exciting, so much opinion flying around though and not too much fact 
One thing I want to clear up though, who provided the payoff used on the lease? Was it you or was it the dealer? Also, was it a VW official payoff or just a number written on a piece of paper?
That is not true. To the best of their ability they SHOULD verify the pay-off but they are not required to. Sometimes they are not able to, especially if you are close to lease maturity (because automated payoffs are not always available for leases close to term - someone has to call the lease term department to get a payoff and they may be closed). If your car was treated as a trade-in (and not a lease return where you/dealer agreed they should make the one remaining payment) then you also sign a little piece of paper that says “if the payoff is higher than what was used on the contract, you owe the difference. By the same token, if the payoff is lower, the dealer owes you the balance” (sometimes the bank gets paid the higher amount and the refund will come from the bank). The statement should be on your authorization for payoff or on the contract (or both). Can you post pictures of the payoff section of the contract or of the release of liability?
It is not a moot point, the dealer is not responsible for ensuring the payoff is correct. It is good practice but legally they are not “responsible.”
OP, one thing you want to make sure about is that the payoff used on the contract was valid on the day the contract was signed (and you signed that paper that says you will pay any difference). If you had an official payoff amount and the payoff amount changed because they waited to payoff, then you shouldn’t have to pay any difference for their negligence or delays. However, is the payoff was just given to them by you or an old payoff statement was used, you owe the balance. Sorry.
One more point, even though you have a statement from VW saying you owe $0 balance, you still owe the money to the dealer. The dealer pays off the loan so they can get the title and go on about their business (and not sit on a depreciating asset while you pay them the difference) and they expect, rightfully so, that you pay them what they paid on your behalf.
Note that the above is barring any shenanigans that they dealer may have done to deliberately deceive you.
2 Likes
Uhhh, what?
So far, you’re the only one I’ve ever met that would have taken the dealer’s side on this.
OP does NOT owe the Dealer anything. He’s satisfied his contractual obligations as VW Credit has received the full pay off for his previous lease. Does it really matter how they received that money? OP was obligated to ensure that his previous lease was paid off and it was. It’s in the sales contract. If the dealer makes a mistake and undervalues the trade after paying off the entire buyout and OP has already walked away with their current contract completely paid for, then they are under no additional legal obligation. Regardless of what really happened… the dealer is the one making the demand and accusation and burden of proof is absolutely on them.
You might say that it is “good will” for OP to pay the 1.3K to the dealer… If and ONLY IF the dealer did legitimately over pay on the car to VW Credit to get the title. If OP felt so entitled to pay them for their “honest” mistake, then the dealer would have to prove that it was indeed, a mistake.
I don’t really see any reason for him to pay the 1.3k as his previous lease terms were satisfied and he has satisfied the current sales contract to the T.
Let’s not begin to act like dealers are innocent victims here for a second, I’ve personally seen this trick employed before by a dealer to attempt to get more money out of a recent customer.
1 Like
You are WRONG Dealer is the one selling the new car and taking the old car back. It is their responsibility.
Edit: It is their LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY as this is a major component of a SALES AGREEMENT.
1 Like
I couldn’t agree more. As a matter of practice, I always create a lease amortization schedule in accordance with the terms of the lease agreement as required by the FRBB’s Regulation M. Below is a snapshot of a partial Excel lease amortization schedule for a Volvo V90 XC T5 …
If the lease goes full term, then the lease balance equates to the 30,742.40 residual value. However, if lease is terminated after 20 months, the lease balance is 40,501.73. The lessee would be obligated to pay this amount plus any other other contractual fees. That is the extent of the lessee’s legal obligation. If the fund provider charges the dealership an amount the exceeds the lessee’s legal obligation, then that’s the dealership’s problem. The lessee’s legal obligation is solely with the fund provider, not the dealership. End of story.
Just had this happen last week. I told them I’ll take my car back and I’ll go to another dealer that called me right after I signed with them and they said nvm we will just take the hit
1 Like
This might be easier for me to do since I understand contracts well, but I’d double check the agreement and then assuming it doesn’t allow them to do this (and it shouldn’t), I’d tell them that the only way I’ll pay it is when a court orders me to and that they have the signed agreement, so go to court and stop wasting time calling/emailing me.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I seem to have stirred up a hornet’s nest. First off, the way I understand it per the OP’s post (see below), the dealer did not “under value the trade.”
The value of the trade has nothing to do with it, what I believe the dealer is claiming is that the actual payoff was higher than what was provided for on the contract (which both parties agreed to by signature). I am not taking the dealer’s side, all I am saying is that the OP likely signed a contract that includes a statement that if the payoff is higher then what is on the contract (the agreed amount by both parties) that he would pay the difference. It is standard boiler plate contract language involving a trade.
You are sounding like a lawyer 
OP either signed a contract with a statement as I outlined above or he didn’t (he likely did). If he didn’t then you are right, he owes nothing. But if he did, then he agreed to it by signing the contract. Again, this has nothing to do with trade value or changing values, etc. It has to do with the amount they both agreed was the amount to be paid off per the contract. The OP should not pay one cent more than the actual payoff at the time he traded in the car (not the amount on the contract but the actual amount per VW). Whether that was the amount on the contract or it was a different amount, which is what the dealer is claiming, I think. I am not saying OP should “good will” anything…
I guess we would have to see the contract (which is why I asked). Where do you get that it is their “legal responsibility” are you an attorney? 
I am no attorney but I have read these types of contracts. I bet you the statement is somewhere on his paperwork that says he will pay any difference between actual payoff and payoff amount stipulated on the contract. That is what I am basing my input on.
I would agree with this statement 100%. However, I believe the dealer is contending is that the amount the OP was legally obligated to is not the amount that is on the contract, that the amount he is legally obligated to pay was $1,300 higher then what is on the contract, which they both signed.
I believe you. And this is still an approach that the OP can take. I would recommend he at least try but that does’t mean he doesn’t (or you didn’t) actually owe the money per the terms of the contract. Also, how much was the amount that the dealer decided to “take a hit” on for you? There would be a difference between a couple hundred bucks (if that’s the case) and the $1,300 that OP mentioned. Would be harder for OP to get the dealer to bite.
I agree. You signed the legal bound contract and if it did not claim the 1300 bucks and you have no other docs stating that you will have to provide more money if the trade-in/buy-off needed additional funds. The only problem is that they could send off to collections and might dink your credit. I would call a local lawyer about the matter (free first phone call) then call GM at VW dealership and explain you spoke with a lawyer in the matter and he suggested (what ever he suggested) and it might work and scare them away.
$1000 was the amount but I guess my sale was worth more to them
Wow. This is car business 101. If a dealer takes a payoff from a customer or anywhere other than the lender on the car, there is a provision as Irongunner mentioned:
The higher amount could be due to a lot of things- not paid off quickly enough by the dealer (their fault), an out of date amount from the customer (his fault), DMV or parking tickets, who knows. If @Palestar hides his head in the sand without checking this out with the lender to see who’s at fault, it could bite him.
Why not call VW Credit instead of get 10 opinions here, most of them incorrect? It’s your credit rating, not ours!
1 Like
I don’t know about other states but I have done 7 trade ins personally over the years and countless more for others I have worked for or helped… Never has a single FL dealer NOT CHECKED on getting a dealer pay off directly from the bank.
Reading other inputs on here, this seems like a VW issue where there is a disconnect between dealers and their corporate. I could be wrong but then its VW…