Buyer Beware user LTuned

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by imprezza

My bad on not getting anything signed, in hindsight it was a newbie buying mistake. I have his contact info and have logged a formal complaint against him with Toyota. He holds a high position at corporate so his antics are sure to catch up to him. He decided to give back half my money which is still not ALL my money. next step is to call the cops and lawyer up.

So let me ask:

What proof will you provide to the cops and a lawyer that you have agreed to pay a $500 deposit?

Was it a verbal agreement or a written one via text or voice mail?

What makes your story more believable than the seller's version of the story?

I don't want to take sides but I just think both buyer and seller in this situation are idiots for not covering their own asses from a bad situation.

I don't care if it's the first time buying something or the 100th time buying the same thing... if you want to win a case in court, you build a case by providing EVIDENCE. So far it's just all words and no evidence.

-alex

[KR-S]

OP: Do you have any screenshots of texts, e-mails, and/or any other forms of communication exchanged with the seller? That might help somewhat.

[imprezza]

good news, seller called me this morning and agreed to give me the rest of my deposit back. It has now been transferred. Thank you to everyone for your help in this matter, I'm certain it was your responses that made him see the light, again thank you all

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by imprezza

good news, seller called me this morning and agreed to give me the rest of my deposit back. It has now been transferred. Thank you to everyone for your help in this matter, I'm certain it was your responses that made him see the light, again thank you all

Then do us all a favor and edit the title of this thread, and update the first post with relevant information.

I still don't see how it is 100% the fault of the seller nor do I see how our "responses" made him see the light.

-alex

[imprezza]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Then do us all a favor and edit the title of this thread, and update the first post with relevant information.

I still don't see how it is 100% the fault of the seller nor do I see how our "responses" made him see the light.

-alex

I had a PM from a member who knew some big wigs at local dealers who they inquired with.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by imprezza

I had a PM from a member who knew some big wigs at local dealers who they inquired with.

So... your word vs his.

I understand.

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by imprezza

I had a PM from a member who knew some big wigs at local dealers who they inquired with.

This still is mostly your fault honestly, you didn't background check the car, you didn't get anything in writing, and you went into it headstrong.

[super-86]

Sounded like OP had second thoughts and wanted to find a way out

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by super-86

Sounded like OP had second thoughts and wanted to find a way out

Which is why I care so much about a car sale up in Canada.

People in general need to understand that in order to claim legal protection, they need things in writing or proof that a breach of contract or crime/fraud was committed.

Otherwise, it's just one person's word versus the other, and it makes the rest of us providing valuable advice look dumb by taking sides without all the facts.

It's great that OP could get his money back. It's also great that he can type clearly. What I question is whether the facts are true or not...

-alex

[hypebrz]

If the deposit was given in order for the seller to turn away two other potential buyers, at the OP's request (seller stated he never asked for the deposit) and the seller DID in fact turn them away for OP, then OP backs out, then that deposit SHOULD be non-refundable just because he did what was asked, and refused two buyers that probably could've been legit. I wouldn't have been nice enough to refund your money OP, that was all on you.

[fumanchu1]

Originally Posted by hypebrz

If the deposit was given in order for the seller to turn away two other potential buyers, at the OP's request (seller stated he never asked for the deposit) and the seller DID in fact turn them away for OP, then OP backs out, then that deposit SHOULD be non-refundable just because he did what was asked, and refused two buyers that probably could've been legit. I wouldn't have been nice enough to refund your money OP, that was all on you.

True, just like the seller should properly disclose the fact the vehicle was in an accident (which he still doesn't on his kijiji ad btw). Both people are partially at fault but I put more of the blame towards the seller (who demonstrated shady practices, failure to disclose, etc.) than on the buyer who failed to do his due diligence (and may or may not have given us all the info). One thing is sure, the seller did not disclose the accidents off the bat and that shows bad faith from the get go (by that std alone I'd have backed out)

[Joyride86]

Originally Posted by fumanchu1

True, just like the seller should properly disclose the fact the vehicle was in an accident (which he still doesn't on his kijiji ad btw). Both people are partially at fault but I put more of the blame towards the seller (who demonstrated shady practices, failure to disclose, etc.) than on the buyer who failed to do his due diligence (and may or may not have given us all the info). One thing is sure, the seller did not disclose the accidents off the bat and that shows bad faith from the get go (by that std alone I'd have backed out)

I was in the market to purchase a s2000 before the FR-S where I scheduled a time to see the car from a private seller. We talked over email and text and I really wanted the car. I request a vin to do some additional research just before our meeting and found out that it had been in an accident that had frame damage. I confronted the seller who did not disclose any of this and his reply was that it was because it was lowered. I told him respectfully that I was no longer interested. At this point, trust was completely out the window.

The lack of disclosure led me to believe that he was trying to get more than what the car was worth. I don't know if this was the case here, but there are certainly signs of it since the ad didn't specify any of this.