There is some phenomenal read if you have the time.
I bet you think about my situation every night. Good for you. Lol.
1 Like
LF owns your car, they will own the title and they will own your license plates. So I think, like others said, insist on them dealing with the dealer. The dealer has to clear their own mess and I think they are really out of the equation.
I’d also tell LF that the dealer wants you to sign a backdated contract to replace (?) the valid/funded one you have with LF. I highly doubt they will say it’s OK to sign.
2 Likes
LOL at the bad legal advice
-
your credit score most likely dropped 50 pts because your are currently leasing an expensive car. It represents more monthly dept without more monthly income.
-
contracts have errors sometimes. You can fix the contract and argue about the fix, but you don’t just get to hand them the car and walk away. There is most likely an arbitration agreement that would require both parties to sit down in front of an arbiter to figure out how to fix things.
-
if you hand them the keys and walk away they will send your debt to collections for the full amount. Don’t do this.
-
it sounds like you’re mostly trying to get out of this deal and not interested in a fair solution.
-
mistakes happen
Back dating a contract is not a big deal especially since that’s when the deal occurred. Not sure why they’re putting June instead of July?
We need more info but I have a very strong suspicion we’re not getting the whole story here
Good luck
1 Like
Someone saying “LOL at the bad legal advice” and then posting this… oh, the irony.
5 Likes
Tell this dealership to suck it.
2 Likes
This is good advice. Work with LF. Most likely to resolve the problem quickly and with minimal costs.
A lawyer is also good advice but you could easily spend several thousand dollars on fees. Knowing your rights is only the first step, if dealership doesn’t cooperate it just ends up being too expensive to pursue legal option. If I was the dealership I would try to bleed you dry. Don’t give in until LF makes me or we get to a point where I need to hire my own lawyer.
This is terrible advice for a rapidly depreciating asset. She can’t be forced to pay more than her contract states. Arbitration can’t say, actually we think fairness requires you to pay $X more. Arbitration is an action at law not equity. Now if deal isn’t funded that’s a different story but according to OP that isn’t the case.
I didn’t say arbitration could make her pay more. But then again she could hire an attorney at $400/hr to tell her she can’t just walk away. She needs to post the contracts here for us to see details. I suspect she might be trying to use a couple dollars per month tax difference as an excuse to walk. Doesn’t work that way
It does work that way (normally). The dealership and LF can honor the lease as written, all parties can agree to modify the lease or you can maybe unwind the deal (facts are not clear here). Almost always, one party to the agreement cannot be forced to pay more since the other side made a mistake. Sure there are exceptions, like if OP gave dealership wrong zip code or some other issue that was outside of their control. But you can’t agree to a contract, then come back and say actually we made a mistake, we don’t want to void rather why don’t you just pay more.
This is basic contract law. Absent strong evidence to the contrary, the written document prevails.
2 Likes
Credit scores don’t care how much a car costs.
1 Like
They care about debt to income. A lease is a monthly debt
2 Likes
Income isn’t a factor in credit scoring.
6 Likes
I’m guessing they’re backdating it as the deal has already been punched.
They’d have to unwind the deal and sell it again, for the “current” date to be posted.
Actually you’re right! Ha I just learned something
2 Likes
First, arbitrators typically have equitable powers, but that power should be addressed by the arbitration clause. Second, boilerplate contracts like a lease also typically provide for the winning party to recover their attorneys fees and costs in an action. Where there is no such clause, there’s usually a consumer protection statute that will allow for it nonetheless. Third, an attorney for this type of work shouldn’t be $400/hr…probably more like $250-300, and that’s for LA not Colorado. Fourth, an actual attorney needs to look at this because the facts will dictate whether the contract is void vs voidable, whether there was a unilateral or mutual mistake (different results), and everything else. Notwithstanding the above, @Ursus makes a good point about LF and that’s an avenue I would pursue if I were in your shoes
1 Like
This paragraph doesn’t really make sense. Arbitration agreements may or may not contain cost shifting provisions. But as a private buyer I would absolutely not want a two way cost shifting provision. Imagine losing and having to pay for both sides lawyers as well as the arbitors fee. I don’t know how auto sales arbitration normally works but the risk of owning 20k or 30k or more in costs and fees would be a pretty chilling deterrent to arbitration.
Then your point about consumer protection laws containing attorney’s cost provision is no longer correct. It used to be the case but now the FAA dictates that arbitration agreements are almost always binding and state consumer protection laws don’t apply
And who is “us”? People who don’t even have a layman’s understanding of the law?
2 Likes
I can see how my comments could be ambiguous. Let me clarify. Yes fee shifting is a deterrent to legal action, court or otherwise. But it can also be used as a sword by someone who articulates to the opposing party how and why the opponent will lose and that upon such loss, the opponent is going to have to pay for the winners atty fees and costs. It is a powerful tool to use against someone before resorting to legal action. Eg, an atty letter saying what you’re doing violates xyz and if we need to go to court or arbitration let’s do it because you will end up bleeding out your own atty fees and costs, paying for mine, and owing me damages. The opponent will realize it isn’t worth the risk…happens all the time.
About the consumer protection statutes comment…the consumer protection statutes are a cause of action themselves. You can assert them in arbitration. They say that winning consumer = loser pays for winner’s atty fees and costs. They exist in every state that I’ve operated in (21), and at the federal level. Look at CA’s 17200 17500 for example. Pretty much any unfair or deceptive business acts are covered. Consumer protection stuff is low hanging fruit and even billboard attys will know it (at least I hope!)
2 Likes
Yes in the sense that a more expensive car will have a higher total cost over the lease term, which shows up as additional debt on your report
No, no, no. The cost of your lease has nothing to do with your credit score.
1 Like