Something to check when you buy your new RX8
08-04-2009, 04:08 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something to check when you buy your new RX8
At least in California, the dealers will charge you $1.75 for each tire that is on or in the car for a total fee of $8.75. Go ahead and look and you will see it on every sales document.
So whats the big deal? Well if you divide the $8.75 by 5, you get $1.75 for each tire.
Except that on most RX8's there is only 4 tires so the contract is legally null and void since it is incorrect. Most dealers do not realize that on these cars, there is no spare tire. They also screw this up in a Miata MX-5
So whats the big deal? Well if you divide the $8.75 by 5, you get $1.75 for each tire.
Except that on most RX8's there is only 4 tires so the contract is legally null and void since it is incorrect. Most dealers do not realize that on these cars, there is no spare tire. They also screw this up in a Miata MX-5
08-04-2009, 07:20 PM
#7
The Slow and the Serious
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Communistwealth of Virginia
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-04-2009, 08:58 PM
#8
went back to srsly broke
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Flushing, NY
Posts: 2,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think his intent is that incorrect information on the contract can void it. To what purpose, I've no idea, as I'd assume having a void contract is bad for you.
08-06-2009, 05:04 PM
#13
It's a Cavalier
Yah, but what I don't appreciate is that I pay that disposal fee again when I buy my first set of new tires. Double tax.
I could have gotten a double cheeseburger happy meal (so I get the toy) and super size it with a vanilla cone and have money for gas.
I could have gotten a double cheeseburger happy meal (so I get the toy) and super size it with a vanilla cone and have money for gas.
08-06-2009, 06:24 PM
#15
As an example. If you bet someone 1 million dollars that Justin Timberlake would expose Janet Jackson's boob on national TV during prime time (The highest rated event actually - the Superbowl) and even had it all written as a legal document and had your unsuspecting victim sign it and date it with witnesses it still wouldn't hold up. The courts would define this as an unreasonable bet with the loser having no intentions (at the time of signing or accepting the contract) to ever pay.
The same thing applies. It is unreasonable to assume that you are going to get out of a contract for a vehicle with MSRP around $30,000.00 for $1.75. The best you could do is get the $1.75 back - you can't even get out of your driveway for a $1.75 in gas.
08-07-2009, 07:23 AM
#17
The contract is not legally null or void. There is a limit to how far you can take what is written vs. what is implied. Not to mention that typo's or clerical errors do not hold up in a court of law.
As an example. If you bet someone 1 million dollars that Justin Timberlake would expose Janet Jackson's boob on national TV during prime time (The highest rated event actually - the Superbowl) and even had it all written as a legal document and had your unsuspecting victim sign it and date it with witnesses it still wouldn't hold up. The courts would define this as an unreasonable bet with the loser having no intentions (at the time of signing or accepting the contract) to ever pay.
The same thing applies. It is unreasonable to assume that you are going to get out of a contract for a vehicle with MSRP around $30,000.00 for $1.75. The best you could do is get the $1.75 back - you can't even get out of your driveway for a $1.75 in gas.
As an example. If you bet someone 1 million dollars that Justin Timberlake would expose Janet Jackson's boob on national TV during prime time (The highest rated event actually - the Superbowl) and even had it all written as a legal document and had your unsuspecting victim sign it and date it with witnesses it still wouldn't hold up. The courts would define this as an unreasonable bet with the loser having no intentions (at the time of signing or accepting the contract) to ever pay.
The same thing applies. It is unreasonable to assume that you are going to get out of a contract for a vehicle with MSRP around $30,000.00 for $1.75. The best you could do is get the $1.75 back - you can't even get out of your driveway for a $1.75 in gas.
We're on a land that some dumb lady can sue McDonalds for serving hot coffee thats "too hot" for her mouth.
yea it sounds stupid but, a judge might not think that way !
I wouldn't be surprise if the whole contract is void like that.
08-07-2009, 07:58 AM
#19
Speed is all you FN NEED
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Atlanta, Georgia-USA
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, i'd be inclined to go with Are-ex-eight...the McDonalds thing was more of a punitive issue....I think the coffe was kept well above like 200 some odd degrees, and it spilled, causing 3rd degree burns. In that instance, there is a "reasonableness" issue...which..and i'm sure i'm going to get flamed for saying it, is a bit excessive for the temp to be that high on a cup of coffee, resulting in a liability issue attaching to the whole situation. Also, there are specific legal requirements "leagalees" for a "contract" for such a high monetary amount...and illegal contracts are unenforceable.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sifu
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
3
08-30-2015 10:51 PM
