ThrottleJunkie

Alright while digging through my paperwork I discovered a couple of other issues.

In the Odometer Disclosure Statement, the dealer's name is on it as is the mileage, but the box that certifies that the reading is accurate is not checked. This is an issue because there's two options here:

1. "I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge the odometer reading reflects the amount of mileage in excess of it's mechanical limits."

2. "I hereby certify that the odometer reading is NOT the actual mileage.
WARNING - ODOMETER DISCREPENCY

Neither of the boxes are checked, which also is a mis-representation of the car.

Secondly, The transferor (the dealer) did not sign this document. There is no signature anywhere from anyone on the staff. Only computer printed characters.


Also, I looked at the Purchase Contract.

At the bottom it has a Contractual Disclosure Statement. It reads "The information you see on the window form for this vehicle is part of this contract. Information on the window form overrides any contrary provisions in the contract of sale."

So really, if the information on that form overrides everything, then everything is really nothing. The car had no window sticker and I was never provided a window sticker.


I'm sorry if I'm getting way too deep into this, but it's a big investment. I want to make sure things are done right.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, I remember exactly what his words were. I asked him why they're selling the car for so cheap so he went to talk to his boss. He came back and said "You're getting one hell of a deal and I'll tell you why." He then proceeded to speak of the buyback title and how it was a fluke and continued on to say "man you are getting a hell of a deal." He made this car sound way too good to be true.

ThrottleJunkie

I understand your point but it goes much deeper than "a common problem with S197s"

The car was deemed a lemon. In the warranty papers it clearly states "This vehicle was sold as new. It was returned to the manufacturer or its agent in exchange for a replacement vehicle or refund as a result of the following defect(s) or condition(s):"

Then it states, in the nonconformity box, "Start/battery won't hold charge"

It might have just been a common problem but that problem made this car a lemon. Whole game changes.


One more thing then I'm getting some sleep.

When I went for the initial test drive the salesman misunderstood me and brought down a New Edge GT. No problem. He went to get the S197 and told me the battery was dead and they would have to jump it. You can chalk that up to the weak charging system if it weren't for one thing. The owner of that dealership said he drove it daily for a while after the repairs to make sure everything worked. That means he drove it everyday for 5,000+ miles, but the battery was dead when it went onto their lot.

Things just don't add up. So much shady **** going on.

EricM

Just because you thought that doesn't mean they misrepresented the car. Did they give you a piece of paper with this on it:

WARNING: THIS VEHICLE PREVIOUSLY WAS SOLD AS NEW. IT WAS RETURNED TO THE
MANUFACTURER OR ITS AGENT IN EXCHANGE FOR A REPLACEMENT VEHICLE OR REFUND
AS A RESULT OF THE FOLLOWING DEFECT(S) OR CONDITION(S):
1..........

If so, they followed the law. Your title should also say something like BUYBACK on it.

Regardless of the ad, the mileage was not misrepresented at the time of sale. You saw the miles when you test drove it, and you didn't walk away.

Salesmen are full of crap. But you went ahead and bought the car after hearing this.

I don't think they're taking the car back. But the dead battery issue is very common on these Mustangs. I think the only thing different on yours is that previous owner pushed it and pushed it until the dealer and Ford got sick of him and lemoned the car. If you get a fresh battery (it's probably dead from sitting on the lot and going through multiple drain and recharge cycles) and drive it regularly I doubt you'll have any problems.

MADSCOTSMAN

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say your probably don't have a leagl leg to stand on. You had the opportunity to walk away from the purchase when the mileage was "mis-represented", you also had the opportunity to walk away when you were told the car was a "buy-back". You chose to purchase this car after the dealership informed you of it's history, and after you saw the discrepency in the miles. The only thing the dealership owes you is a repair of the vehicle under the warranty IMO. Sorry... You can't agree to purchase vehicle with known issues, then cry wolf when those issues return and expect a new car.

GidyupGo

I don't think there is a limitation time if a dealer misrepresented issues such as mileage.

Boozshey

Call an attorney...

But im telling you dude, they aren't going to beable to do anything. Especially a month later and 1500 miles later.

buster

ummm. I think you are in trouble. You void the warranty if you reflash the computer. YOu say you had a charging system problem and yo reflashed the computer? It sounds to me like you are stuck with the car in the condition its now in. Lemon laws are to protect the consumer. A certain number of problems and they are forced to buy the car back. You should have investigated this.. I wouldn't have touched that car with a 10 ft pole

GidyupGo

I do agree with your 10 foot pole scenerio. To try to explain his troubles away with "it's the bad battery thing and it is common with our cars" is just being stupid. Not you but others who have said this. Ford isn't going to do a buy back because of a bad battery.

ThrottleJunkie

But what bothers me is the way in which they represented the car.

They made the buyback seem like a total fluke. They even mocked the original owner. He said how dumb it was for Ford to buy that car back because it was perfectly fine all along, he just never drove it.

He also made the warranty seem like they were adding it in by their own will to sweeten the deal. In reality, that car was required to have that warranty and that's how I found out it was a lemon in the first place.

They were so confident in this "fluke" that they hardly spent any time talking about it. I didn't realize there's a difference between a buyback and a lemon. Had I heard the word lemon at any point in time I would have walked away immediately.

Car salesmen have a reputation of being shady people. This can be used against them. I have a feeling that the law sides with consumers on issues like this simply because of the reputation of the people selling the vehicles.

ThrottleJunkie

Exactly. The buyback was because of a weak charging system, not a ****ty battery.