Based on my read, client paid exactly what was advertised, just the allocation they have a problem with.
Actually $13 less than advertised. I could be wrong however.
1 Like
So it’s okay for a broker to advertise a broker fee that it not accurate, as long as the total amount is correct? I would assume that that is an explicit violation of LH rules.
4 Likes
I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but unfortunately, the broker fees listed on here (not agreeing to it) are rarely correct.
Do you think all of these “no fee” deals are doing this for charity?
At the EOD OP paid exactly what they agreed to. If I were in the brokers position I would have dealer recontract the deal at $313 higher than what was originally done, but that’s just my position
2 Likes
Then that is a problem that @littleviolette and @michael need to be aware of.
IMHO, that would’ve been an ethically “more correct” position, even if it cost the OP more.
At any rate, I have nothing further to contribute to this conversation.
1 Like
It sounds like OP got exactly what he bargained for. I do not see the issue. This post seems to prove the reports that those that get the best deals give the worst reviews. Why running a Groupon can destroy your Yelp ratings | Rakesh Agrawal's blog
5 Likes
$1299 and above in certain places.
$999-1099 Doc
$400 electronic filing (after TTL fees)
1 Like
I’ll help you, it’s in the title:
Broker Fee Discrepancies
Broker fees or “No fee” should be disclosed. They charged him extra $300.
5 Likes
I think the issue amounts more to a violation of marketplace advertising guidelines, which state that brokers must disclose fees “on every post.” In this case the post advertised incorrect fees. I would think fair resolution would be to correct the posting to advertise the fees actually charged.
14 Likes
So then all of these no fee deals have to go away? Lets go!
2 Likes
I worked with @Omegaautogroup on a deal last year and something similar happened. $799 broker fee plus $1000 upfront payment on a Kia Niro directly to Seth via venmo. No acknowledgement of the $1000 at the dealership, but all the numbers more or less synced up with the deal we agreed so I didn’t make a fuss about it. I just chalked it up to either Seth making another $1000 or he’s “handshaking” the sales manager behind closed doors to make this deal happen. Would I prefer complete transparency, absolutely, but this is the car business after all so I’m not too surprised if some questionable things are happening.
11 Likes
I’ll also add that this whole website is built on the premise that the community shares deals with each other. When a newbie joins and starts asking questions about leases, and more specifically about discounts off MSRP, a common response is “check the marketplace for a baseline”. In this case, if all brokers are behaving in the manner described by the OP (which I personally don’t think is the case), that skews the information provided to the community. Is it a big deal? Maybe not. But this website is one of the best tools available to balance the scales of asymmetric information in favor of the consumer (in an industry where dealers have the upper hand), and the shenanigans described above detract from that spirit.
13 Likes
Consumer? Man that has been gone from the vocabulary of this website for a few years now. Back in 2017 or 2016 when I joined it was a true community. Now you got shady brokers, people that lie on their fees, brokers that send you 5 hours away, lie about anything to close a deal such as dealer can take your lease return, hold your deposit, etc etc. True you got consumers that try to go behind brokers back which is definitely wrong and it is despicable in my book. But hey i have seen despicability from both sides here, so it is what it is. Operate at your own risk, it is the wild west here with a fake facade of hey we better than dealers.
OP nothing will happen. Good post though.
1 Like
Great deal and people trippin’ over $300. Overall, Leasehackr has been incredibly inconsistent with their decisions. Just a cesspool of spoon feeders, crappy moderation and terrible brokers. Only a handful of good brokers and helpful users on this site. Even the PNDs are shady. If anything, I thought that would set standards for the community to comply with. But we still see raising up doc fees to offer “free shipping”. Showing lease cash as part of discounts , etc… so, the expectation is set from the top - down.
I personally don’t see the big fuss over $300, but to each their own. There are better sites and communities out there now.
3 Likes
The way he answered was untruthful. It just so happens that I called him on each claim, so he tried one excuse after another, which is just offensive.
Exactly.
No, if the $300.00 is itemized as being applied towards the car, it should be applied towards the car. It clearly states “Upfront Payment on 2024 Hyundai Ioniq 5 SEL.” That $300.00 would’ve made the one-pay at the dealership $953.94 instead of $1,253.94. If a deal that I broker for a client with a fee ends up being better than expected, that should be a win for the client. The broker shouldn’t be pocketing the difference.
It may not be the case in other states, but in CA, the broker must disclose to the client if they are receiving compensation from the selling dealership. That way, the consumer can be assured that there’s no conflict of interest. If you take a fee from the client, you work for the client. If you take a fee from the dealership, the dealership is your client.
That’s pretty egregious. I’m surprised you didn’t say anything about it. He pocketed the $1000.
1 Like
So you wouldn’t mind a contract being sent to you that is $315 higher than you originally signed, in which case it would go into the dealers pocket.
As that would match exactly what you agreed to.
3 Likes
That’s a false dichotomy, but solely between those two options, sure. If the payment is supposed to go towards the car, it should be applied towards the car. First and foremost, that’s the law. Whether or not the dealership has agreed to a lower selling price is a secondary consideration. If your bread is being buttered by the client, not the dealership, shouldn’t the goal be to get the best deal for your client?
In this case, it looks like Omega pre-negotiated the selling price with the dealer, ran the numbers and said “Wow that’s really low; I’ve got room to skim off the top here.” I’m surprised you’re comfortable with this practice. Do you post deals in the same fashion? In the financial world, we would call this “fraud.” “Mild fraud” or “misrepresentation” perhaps, but fraud nonetheless, especially since it sounds like they’ve engaged in this exact practice for a while.
2 Likes
OP sounds like a real lawyer unlike the 800 fakes ones the ABA just picked up.
21 Likes
It is not, its a very simple question.
If the dealer sent you a new contract, with a $315 higher selling price to reflect exactly what you agreed to would that be ok?
Anything other than yes shows that you want to negotiate after the fact for a lower price. That is fine. Do I think it is in poor taste? Yes, but just an opinion.
I never said it was right or I do it. Just my .02.
1 Like
This just keeps getting better! 
3 Likes
4 Likes