[eddiejb]

I guess I need to know what the best way of handling my current situation is. I bought my M6 back in 2007 from chicago motor cars. It was presented to me as a clear title vehicle and showed up as such on both autocheck and carfax. A member on this board was offering to use his unlimited autocheck account to run VINs for people so I had him run my VIN to see if anything would show up just for ****s and giggles. Well, it turns out when my car was titled to me when I bought it in December, it was titled as a WATER DAMAGED vehicle. The dealership did not represent it as such to me during the sale. They claimed it had a clear title. Is it possible this is just a mistake on autocheck's part or is something fishy going on here with the dealership? should I get ready to lawyer up?


here's the autocheck, see the "FULL HISTORY" section. Also, if anyone can run free carfax reports I wouldn't mind getting one of those as well.

Welcome to AutoCheck

 

[Matty]

financed or purchased outright ?

 

[eddiejb]

financed

 

[Matty]

call the bank tell them the situation because tech the bank owns the car and 90 percent of banks don't finance Unibody Damage and if you didn't sign any forms showing you it has water damage your in good shape bring it back no questions asked ....

 

[eddiejb]

What happens to the money I put down and/or the payments I've already made to the bank?

 

[Matty]

should be refunded ,the dealer has to buy back the car and what you paid deposit taxes has to be refunded due to the fact that information wasn't disclosed ,how long have you had the car ? it would fall under the guidelines of the lemon law .surprised when you took the car for service or even usual inspection you didnt see anything ...

 

[eddiejb]

I bought the car in Dec 2009 so when I checked carfax and autocheck before I bought it, it had no mention of water damage. Then when they titled it to me, they sent in a water damage title i guess? I haven't seen any issues at all is wondering if its maybe just been improperly titled.

 

[Matty]

maybe an error but i will look into it anyway .check dealer service during the time period ....im sure Chicago motorcars wouldn't sell a car like that due to there high line inventory ,but i enjoyed helping out any questions feel free ....

 

[eddiejb]

Just spoke with the dealer. They assured me it is not a water damaged vehicle and something must be wrong on autocheck's part. Their head of the finance department assured me the report will be fixed to accurately reflect the condition of the vehicle.

 

[eddiejb]

Does anyone have access to carfax report?

 

[M6Cabrio]

Does anyone have access to carfax report?

make the dealer run it to prove to you that is the case....

 

[eddiejb]

Yeah, after he makes some calls he's going to call me back. The guy I spoke with was on his way into the office for the day. He said he will run the autocheck and then make the appropriate phone calls to get the process underway to get it changed. We'll see how this goes...He said BMW would not have serviced the car for me if it was truly a water damaged vehicle and I've brought the car to the dealer for service 3 or 4 times already.

 

[David Ajax III]

The stealership is not relieved of liability, even if they did not know it was a water-damaged (and hence worthless) vehicle. My guess is that they either knew or should have known about this. That's all that matters. You are entitled to a 100% refund of all monies, and they should be grateful to you for not suing for damages beyond that refund. An ethical stealership will step up to the plate.

 

[eddiejb]

Update:
Just got off the phone with the dealer. They said that it is a mistake in their paperwork when they submitted the title information. The secretary who filled out the paperwork checked the flood box accidentally. They are going to reconcile this issue with the Illinois DMV and have a non-flood/rebuilt title issued to me within 24hours. Fingers crossed. They faxed me all the paperwork as well as the car fax and said they will do the same once the issue has been reconciled. They are taking this very seriously it seems because they know I basically hold all the cards.

 

[eddiejb]

also, they sent me a copy of the previous title from the previous owner in minnesota which is a clean title.

 

[David Ajax III]

They should also compose a formal letter, signed by the owner of the stealership, stating that this was an error, and certifying that the vehicle is not a flood salvage. This gives you an added layer of protection.

 

[M6Cabrio]

just make sure they don't screw you....with something like this I would make them replace the car with a similar one just to be on the safe side.

I can see 2 years down the road when they are out of business and you want to sell it and get nothing for it....I have seen "more odd" things happen....

 

[eddiejb]

well I'd rather not turn in my car, I'm really happy with it and pretty attached. I spoke with a lawyer and he said if they do get it correct with the DMV the previous title will be nullified and will just not exist anymore so there should be no record of it ever (aside from this forum) and no issues. Getting the letter is a good idea though. The dealer is really taking the steps necessary to make me feel ok. Again I know that's legally their obligation but I also am going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now. If its not fully corrected and still shows up as a blip on the title, I'll get a lawyer involved.

 

[eddiejb]

here's basically the law that holds the dealer liable:
Implied Warranty of Merchantability

• Whenever the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of the kind sold (including food and drink), a warranty that the goods shall be "merchantable" is implied in every sale.
• To meet the test of "merchantable," the goods must at least:
  
  

  • pass without objection in the trade; and
  • be fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; and
    
    

    • run of even kind, quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved; and
    • are adequately contained, packaged and labeled; and
    • conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label.
  • Other implied warranties may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.
  • These implied warranties can be excluded or modified pursuant to 810 ILCS 5/2-316.
  • Note that in consumer fraud cases, you may also have a breach of the implied warranty of merchantability. For example, a vehicle sold with an odometer roll- back would not "pass without objection in the trade" and would thus be unmerchantable.

 

[eddiejb]

so apparently this isn't just a civil issue, its also criminal title fraud (although its the opposite way you'd normally do it). I'm heading to breckenridge tomorrow until Tuesday for vacation. I guess if the issue isn't resolved at that point I'll lawyer up and make a trip out to the dealership. Maybe just drop the car off there and tell them I'm not leaving without a brand new car because I can no longer trust them.