I was one of the ones that felt the same and noted such. Based on the info provided, as well as what was indicated prior, I stand by my feeling that the repair offer originally offered was fair and returning the car was not. Furthermore, going through the state BBB + AG was a bit overkill based on this, as OP drove the car off the lot to begin with without a WE OWE, admittedly knowing the damage was there.
Thanks for the info. There’s always 2 sides to every story.
As others have posted, I’m pleased to see some follow-up and the other side of the story. Really appreciate you sharing, @danedad007.
I think this thread says more about Alfa build quality over the dealership selling the cars.
This is an interesting point. Very possible the bumper was replaced at the factory and the person who did it never put two new pins in.
This was a lot to do over two pins in the bumper.
I have my opinions on that with my own Stelvio but it has nothing to do with the dealer whatsoever and I would never pin it on them.
Looks like LH’s favorite soap opera has come to an end 
Here are pictures of an $86K 4C spider. This has been in our showroom since we got it.
How do you feel about the overall quality of the expensive stock you inventory? Do you feel as if you need to offer strong discounts or services to offer an inticing product for buyers to come to you versus the competition?
That scratch is Italian. Scratched with “Passione.” But in all seriousness, it is really frustrating to have a very expensive car be so poorly put-together. I had a 2013 Camaro and the build quality was poor but I was paying 285/mo for it. I expected some good ol American panel gap issues and the interior to feel like it was held together with chewing gum. Not an excuse, but at least GM improved somewhat with time. But for a $65k+ car, this is a joke. Everyone knew Fiat/Alfa’s biggest obstacle in returning to the US market was reliability and overcoming the bad taste they left in everyone’s mouth the last time they were here. I really hope they value feedback from their dealer network because this type of shoddy workmanship is unacceptable.
I feel like the overall quality is good. I guess the simple answer to your question is yes, we offer strong discounts to make our vehicles competitive in their segments vs the competition. Ultimately, we want to see the brand grow and know the only way to do it is to get them on the road.
Elon Musk:
And the full story is told, exactly as I suspected it was. A person desiring to get something for nothing while disclosing only half the story and playing the victim card. Meanwhile the dealer legitimately goes much further than one would reasonably expect to make him happy, only to find out that the person wanting something for nothing actually really wanted a totally unreasonable A LOT of something for nothing. I would have seen this from a mile away and told him to go pound sand, but big props to Auto Express for going above and beyond to try to make a customer happy.
Be reasonable and fair and empathetic in your dealings, both personally and professionally, or you will lose all respect and wind up with what you deserve - nothing. From the original post, the OP was neither fair nor reasonable in his request and I have no idea why so many bought his BS story: “I have demanded that the dealer either (1) substitute this damaged Stelvio with an identical substitute car, without any previous damage; or (2) void the transaction, give me back my trade and take the Stelvio back.“
It takes a really special person to turn a car dealership into the sympathetic party. OP did something real hard. Kudos!
If I’m ever on the market for an Alfa, Auto Express of Erie PA will be the first one that I call.
Forgive the ignorance but why wouldn’t this be covered by Alfa and/or the dealer? After all, a comes in to take delivery of a new car only to discover that the body is non-conforming. The sales person concedes that its non-conforming and INDUCED the Buyer to take the car anyway, representing to the buyer that the seller will undertake whatever is necessary for it to conform.
Whether its a PDR or other repair is irrelevant. Neither were experts in what type of repair was needed but both agreed that a repair was necessary. This may not have risen to the level of fraud but a condition subsequent was created.
After the customer came back to the dealer, the dealer refused to remedy the damage and refused rescission citing the 950 miles driven. Well, the dealer knew full well where the Buyer lives and that he will be driving the car back. Its irrelevant that the miles were driven and the dealer isn’t entitled to recoupment on wear and tear because the dealer failed to honor a condition subsequent in the contract.
Aside from the contract, we have an issue of unjust enrichment: the buyer will not be out of pocket on a repair that the dealer should have undertaken. The dealer was unjustly enriched by avoiding having to make the repair and breaching a condition subsequent.
We also have a promissory estoppel issue depending on what facts you wish to accept: The dealer basically told the buyer to go back home (drive the 950 miles) send over an estimate and they’ll “make it right.” The buyer relied on that promise and now is out money because the promise was broken. This is all assuming Tony can support his damage claim.
Think the biggest thing is they offered to fix the car but customer only wanted a new car or dealer to pay to send back his trade. An extreme ask compared to the $150 repair to make it right.
I don’t think you followed the thread.
The dealer did everything they could to make the customer right in this situation and has even provided further evidence to show that the customers car was not the only product that arrived from factory to have panel gap issues and misalignment as seen in their AR 4C. The customer took the car to multiple body shops and all said the same thing… two pins were missing creating the misalignment. No body shop, however, would say whether or not it was from an accident or what originally caused it. This suggests to me that there simply wasn’t enough evidence to deduce if it was damage from an accident or not, thus I do not believe the customer was intentionally lied to.
The customers request to be given a new unit for a remedy that would have cost about 150 dollars total to deal with was unreasonable. Even more unreasonable was the request to return the vehicle, undo the contract, and be given the trade back. Both those options are kind of unprecedented for the situation.
We need to remember that Auto Express is a business with their own interests to look after. It is exceptionally expensive and costly to buy back an 86k dollar car just because the customer feels as if they’ve been wronged somehow.
The customer noticed the issue at delivery of the vehicle and they should have denied if they weren’t going to be satisfied with simply fixing the bumper. I honestly don’t know what OP was expecting could happen. At the end of the day, they signed a contract.
How entitled do you have to be to feel as if a contract has no bearing to you?
It’s a lease, he should have just taken the 150 to get the pins in and turned the Stelvio in at the end of the lease and literally lost nothing in the long run. It was going to cost him nothing to do this.
Both sides have made their points known. OP hasn’t been back in a couple weeks, but if he needs to add anything, he can PM me to reopen.
