40 Days After Lease - Dealer Demands $1300+ Payment

Hopefully this is ur last VW lease…

1 Like

I appreciate the input, but if you had read any of this thread you would know it wasn’t a lease return, it was a trade in.

I’ve said it about 5 times already!

1 Like

LOL! I actually love the car which is annoying… :slight_smile:

It’s not. that’s what we are saying. If the payoff changed due to a delay on their part or some other reason that doesn’t involve you then you are not liable and it is not your problem. KD6 is right though, the answer is going to come from VW credit. You need to find out the amount that the dealer paid off. If it’s $1,300 higher then what is written on your contract then you need to understand why it changed so you can determine if it happened due to some delay by the dealer (on them) or if the amount you had was incorrect (on you).

Noted. This is correct. Your accounts are in good standing and your credit will be fine with VW. However, that does not minimize your liability if the amount of payoff on the contract was not correct (because no one verified it prior to consummating the deal). In which case the dealer will have the choice to let it go and take the hit or sue you in small claims court for the amount (or any negotiated portion thereof). Does your contract state anywhere that if the payoff is higher you owe or vice versa, etc? Should be on trade docs or on contract near the payoff.

No, not really. There is no cooling of period in the state of California. That is, the options wouldn’t be: 1. give the car back, 2. dealer eats the difference. The options would be 1. write me a check for $1,300, 2. we can write the difference into the payment, 3. I’ll see you in court. The car sale is a done deal.

However, I still can’t figure why they waited 40 days to demand payment.

I don’t think this is the case. Unless went months without making a payment (and the interest accrued that much - nearly impossible) then the amount would not change by $1,300.

I just had a thought. I wonder if the dealership fat fingered the amount on the contract and no one in finance verified after typing the contract? It was only identified when the dealer didn’t receive title (maybe weeks later

  • after making the wrong payoff) and then sent a check in for the difference. It may also explain why they took so long to notify OP.

More evidence to suggest a fat finger!

This is for lease returns, not for trade-ins. Plus, he would never get a dealership employee to provide him documentation that would help his position.

Not his choice. But he should try and not pay it if he can get away with it. Also, if it was a fat finger deal they way I am speculating, then he shouldn’t pay for any of it!!! I hope he kept copies of his payoff quote (if there was one).

Maybe. The only way I would put it as a trade instead of a lease return is if there was some equity in the deal or if the car was in rough shape and I didn’t want to deal with the customer having a bunch of wear and tear charges after the fact. However, that would not be on OP and the dealer would not have any leg to even request payment (they wouldn’t do that). The only scenario here is that the actual payoff was more than what was listed on the contract. Vehicle value has nothing to do with it.

OP, see what VW says and update. I would also talk to the dealer and get their side. This is my theory. I think they fat fingered it on the contract and didn’t get the title when they sent the wrong payoff amount. A few weeks later, they check on the title, notice it has not arrived, business office calls to find out why (in the mean time OP gets a $10 late fee and notifies dealer), dealer realizes mistake, sends remaining portion of payoff (and gets title) then goes after OP. Ask VW if they got a payoff in one lump sum or as separate payments.


$1,300 could be 2 payments they made after taking the car plus change in payoff.

Yes I know, just trying to understand why they did it that way instead of a return, especially with only one payment left. My theory being they thought they were better off buying the car out because maybe they thought it was worth more but they made a mistake and are now trying to make you pay for it. They thought there might be equity but then found out after the fact there wasnt and are trying to hide what they did by having you pay.

Yea but OP said he only had one payment left. Also, late payments don’t increase the payoff by the amount of the payment only money factor (that is you can’t be charged twice for the same depreciation).

I am stretching here but what about force placed insurance? That amount wouldn’t be included in a payoff, I think.

I finally spoke with VW Credit, who were somewhat helpful. They seemed to be just as confused as I was about what happened, but essentially said that I need to take it up with the dealer directly, because the contract is between us. They confirmed the late pay-off date, but could not confirm the amount, only stating that the dealer took the “Option A Buyout”.

VW Corporate was pretty interested in the story though! I’ve lodged a formal complaint against the dealer. They have assigned a Regional Manager to the case who will be handling correspondence with Timmons.


Since you’re a nosey-Nancy, the car was traded in because it was over-mileage. It was a better choice to take the hit and roll it into the new lease, than to return the car and pay the fees.


Ok son, you present this story and you get people talking then you call someone nosey because there is a detail in there that might help explain what is going on. Are you serious?

1 Like

Okay, this helps. I am working on memory here but when you trade a car in this close to maturity the dealer has to go on the VW maturity website to get a payoff (the price for which they can buy the car from VW) and this “payoff” is different from the payoff as calculated on your contract - it is a dealer only payoff which is probably why VW would not give you the amount. When using this site, the dealer is offered an option A or an option B payout. The amounts are different and the difference is due to how the car is treated with the customer (as a lease return where they are still responsible for wear, tear, and mileage or as a “trade in” where the dealer buys the car for that amount and customer walks away clean).

OP, first you need to know if option A is the walk away clean option or not. If not, you would still be on hook for wear and tear as well as mileage. I doubt the dealer would be dumb enough to not give you the walk away clean option but then again these dudes are not rocket scientists. I would confirm.

The problem now is I am a bit muddy about how OP is affected. I would say its on the dealer as this process involves intricacies he was not aware of and dealer should have accounted for when making his deal. I think it still matters how much the payoff is compared to what they actually paid but you can say you are not responsible as dealer had all freedom to make the choice on payoff amount and did not properly disclose to OP what was going on (i.e. that it was not a straight payoff) and that the amount is not the same as or close to the conventional payoff amount. Also, since they waited so long ot pay it off the opton A paoff amount may have changed.

OP, is the payoff on your contract close to the amount of the residual on you Passat plus one payment? You probably don’t have the info being a month later…

Also, keep in mind that based on the amount of miles over and the condition of the car, it is possible that you still made out like a bandit ot having to pay those amounts but I would still push it off on the dealer as they were in the drivers seat on how it was handled and sounds like it was not appropriately disclosed.

1 Like

Payoff on the GTI is already up to $60K!

If there are two separate payoff values, why would the dealer payoff be $1,300 higher than the customer payoff? If anything I would expect the customer payoff to be higher since he needs to pay sales tax on the payoff where the dealer is not required to pay any sales tax…

A customer payoff doesn’t have to include tax unless the customer is keeping the car. If the trade in is a leased VW to a VW dealer, the dealer should have the same (or maybe lower) payoff than the customer.

I’ve been promised a return call from VW Corporate by end of business today. I will update when I have more information!

Contact VW to see what the actual payoff made was. That will give you the truth of it. Make sure it didn’t include sales tax as dealers are not suppose to pay sales tax. (They could have paid it by accident and that is what this whole issue is about SPECULATION)

He did and VW didn’t tell him. Would’ve been easy if they did.


Well, it’s not certain that the dealer payoff is higher than the customer payoff. We don’t know what they paid off because VW wouldn’t say. It sounds like the payoff they actually made was $1,300 higher than the payoff that was listed on the contract (or at least that should be the case because otherwise the dealer shouldn’t have even asked for the money). Also, as KD6 said, there is no tax on a trade in.

As a side note, the “payoff” that the dealer has through the maturity portal is not really a “payoff” it is a purchase price offer for the dealer. It takes into account current mileage on the car, etc. So it is not supposed to be reflective of the actual customer payoff per the terms of the contract (which in this case should have been residual plus one payment per the OP).

So what happened?