Bait and Switch

[cyjeff]

Does anyone know who I can report a dealer to about scamming customers besides the BBB?

And the name of the person scammed would be?

You know, the person that has actually lost money in this situation?

 

[confused14law]

I thought this was your trade in?

If so, it is no longer your car.

No, the ad is for the car that I currently own, not my trade in. In my original post I mentioned that I did a google search for the VIN# for my trade in AS WELL AS the car I currently own. Originally I just wanted to see how much they were listing my trade in for, then I noticed they were still trying to sell the car I own as recent as two days ago.

Thank God you are here to not only tell us about used cars listed on Craigslist (which, by the way, isn't CLOSE to illegal) but personal judgments as to our character.

I didnt say listing any car on craigslist was illegal. It is illegal for bait and switch. So unless they magically clone my car, I cant see how that would not be the case.

If your friend goes and asks for the car and they say, "Sorry, we sold it." There is no crime. At all.

Clearly this is not a forum you should be giving advice for if you have never heard of bait and switch as being illegal.

.

Which is a huge problem. Nothing has happened yet.

Again, unless they cloned my car....

I hope you don't just beat up random people that stand next to old ladies because you believe someone may be ready to cause someone harm. Could be a real problem at the dance hall.

I really hope your job does not consist of reading above a third grade level, since you clearly did not read my posts correctly, nor other house example I gave.

You are. You are effectively stalking this dealership... you are mad they are going to get more for your car than they paid you for the trade in (legal and normal), you are mad because they sold the car but didn't pull the craigslist ad (legal) and that the person on the phone didn't know the car was sold (could be an honest mistake... legal).

What? These are false accusations you are making. If anything, I got my car for a very good deal and I was able to pick apart the final contract and omit other random crap in there that they tried to make money on. Besides, the car I traded in was a lease, no money lost at all. I was just curious what they were selling the car for compared to the price I was given at the initial contract of the lease which was 3 years ago.

You, on the other hand, are having friends misrepresent themselves because you believe yourself to be the reincarnation of Sherlock Holmes.

Compliment, thanks. You are welcome to see others get screwed in the shadows along with the other guy and comment afterward. Since when is preventing something bad from happening to someone else such a crime? I really hope you are not a firefighter considering your ideals.

You don't think this is a bit obsessive?

No, I hardly feel that doing the right thing is ever obsessive. Don't you think trolling on a legal forum without any real knowledge of what is going on and making over 5k posts a little obsessive?

 

[confused14law]

And the name of the person scammed would be?

You know, the person that has actually lost money in this situation?

So far unknown, I am beginning to hope its you.

 

[cyjeff]

No, the ad is for the car that I currently own, not my trade in. In my original post I mentioned that I did a google search for the VIN# for my trade in AS WELL AS the car I currently own. Originally I just wanted to see how much they were listing my trade in for, then I noticed they were still trying to sell the car I own as recent as two days ago.

Uh huh.

I didnt say listing any car on craigslist was illegal. It is illegal for bait and switch. So unless they magically clone my car, I cant see how that would not be the case.

I guess you still don't understand that listing don't magically vanish on Craigslist.

Clearly this is not a forum you should be giving advice for if you have never heard of bait and switch as being illegal.

It is perfectly legal to make a mistake... especially if they have another car of equal value that could be sold in it's stead.

This really isn't as iron clad as you seem to think it is.

Again, unless they cloned my car....

I really hope your job does not consist of reading above a third grade level, since you clearly did not read my posts correctly, nor other house example I gave.

You were the one that said you were going to play vigilante.

What? These are false accusations you are making. If anything, I got my car for a very good deal and I was able to pick apart the final contract and omit other random crap in there that they tried to make money on. Besides, the car I traded in was a lease, no money lost at all. I was just curious what they were selling the car for compared to the price I was given at the initial contract of the lease which was 3 years ago.

Still not your business.

Compliment, thanks. You are welcome to see others get screwed in the shadows along with the other guy and comment afterward. Since when is preventing something bad from happening to someone else such a crime? I really hope you are not a firefighter considering your ideals.

The law is clear. It is only a crime after it has been committed. So far, no crime is committed.

No, I hardly feel that doing the right thing is ever obsessive. Don't you think trolling on a legal forum without any real knowledge of what is going on and making over 5k posts a little obsessive?

At least I am not stalking a car dealership... without cause.

 

[cyjeff]

So far unknown, I am beginning to hope its you.

Awww, that's nice.

So, anyone that isn't willing to jump onto your little conspiracy wagon is not worthy of protection?

You may have to turn in your little cape there.

You see, if you REALLY wanted to ONLY do good as opposed to wanted to screw someone over, you would want EVERYONE protected.

that is, after all, how LAW works.

 

[confused14law]

Uh huh.

Yes, that is exactly right.

I guess you still don't understand that listing don't magically vanish on Craigslist.

No, I understand that perfectly. You do not seem to understand that listings for my car dont magically appear a month after being sold on Craigslist and two or three other sites as well.

It is perfectly legal to make a mistake... especially if they have another car of equal value that could be sold in it's stead.


This really isn't as iron clad as you seem to think it is.

Sorry, I do not believe this is a mistake. In a bait and switch, this is as close to a home run as you can get. I have read articles about the most common bait and switch methods are newspaper ads and how it is impossible to know if the car was sold in the time frame of the ad coming out. I have a contract with the date on it saying the car with the VIN# they are advertising was sold over a month ago, which was listed two days ago. The only thing that is iron clad is your will to try and prove my story wrong for some reason.

You were the one that said you were going to play vigilante.

Just doing what is right, call it what you want.

Still not your business.

Have you ever leased a car? You would know at the time you sign on the dotted line, they give you the amount you owe over the lease period as well as a price that you can buy the car for when your lease is up, or you can walk away from it. I wanted to see what they were selling the car for, to see if I felt differently about giving the car up for my new car. Besides, who are you to tell me what is my business and what is not. We are talking about me looking up a car, it is public, anyone can do it. Besides, my trade in has nothing to do with the fact they are advertising my car for sale, I just mentioned it because that is what I was doing at the time when I found out.

The law is clear. It is only a crime after it has been committed. So far, no crime is committed.

I guess intent isn't never a crime, but luckily they already broke the law by telling my friend the car was available and to come on in for a test drive. Obviously not that clear since you could not see it.

At least I am not stalking a car dealership... without cause.

I have cause to report a dealership for committing fraud. Call it what you like. You might not be stalking a dealership, but you are clearly stalking me and being obsessed with trying to discredit my claims which are concrete.

 

[confused14law]

Awww, that's nice.

So, anyone that isn't willing to jump onto your little conspiracy wagon is not worthy of protection?

You may have to turn in your little cape there.

You see, if you REALLY wanted to ONLY do good as opposed to wanted to screw someone over, you would want EVERYONE protected.

that is, after all, how LAW works.

Conspiracy? I am not looking for anyone to jump on my conspiracy wagon, I asked a very simple question. Whether you believe me or not I could care less. I have my facts, and you have nothing to go by besides opinion of what you think the intent of the dealership is. I have very good reason to believe their intent is malice and therefore I would like to report it to someone who decides that.

That is how the law works. I find it funny that I am on a legal advice website and getting a lecture about law from someone who has over 5k posts and does not seem to know anything.

I would have loved to protect you from their fraud, but I have a saying that I go by, "You can only help somebody so much before they need to be able to help themselves". Clearly, I have presented you with the facts, you still do not believe me, so the only way to show you is by you getting screwed yourself.

Besides, law does not protect everyone.

 

[Andy0192]

I guess intent isn't never a crime, but luckily they already broke the law by telling my friend the car was available and to come on in for a test drive. Obviously not that clear since you could not see it.

Please cite the law they have broken. Just point me to the statute so I can copy it down & use it for future reference.

I have cause to report a dealership for committing fraud. Call it what you like. You might not be stalking a dealership, but you are clearly stalking me and being obsessed with trying to discredit my claims which are concrete.

Your claims are not concrete. You've been fishing, and you are excited because you think you have a nibble. When your friend goes to test drive the car, and they try to sell him YOUR car, then maybe... just maybe... you have a fish in the boat.

If the dealership salesperson says "Ooops, I'm sorry, that car is sold already, but I've got another car just like it...." Please tell me what law they've broken. Again, cite the statute.

 

[swalsh411]

Even if you're right and the dealership is posting a car they no longer have for sale to lure people to come in that's not even close to "malice". And the only way it would work is if either there is something super duper special about your old car or they have it at a lowball price.

It could also simply be an inventory error on their part.

 

[confused14law]

Well, I just want to thank you guys for nothing. Upon looking up the actual law for Andy, I found the answer to my own question. I seriously think all of you that posted something to discredit my information should reconsider posting on this forum since you clearly did not help one bit. Also, dont bother trying to take credit for me finding the information, as I will admit, had I looked up the actual law to begin with, then I would have known who to report to.


So, without further to do, my favorite part of posting my responses is proving you dumb asses wrong yet again.

This is not a Florida law, it is actually a US law, overseen by the Federal Trade Commission.

Here is the exact definition of what they consider bait and switch.

Bait and Switch
How does the FTC define "bait and switch" advertising?

It's illegal to advertise a product when the company has no intention of selling that item, but instead plans to sell a consumer something else, usually at a higher price. For more information, ask the FTC for its Guides Against Bait Advertising.

For your statue. Title 15, Chapter 2, Section 53 - 54 I think.

 

[confused14law]

Oops, forgot subchapter 1.

 

[swalsh411]

My money is on inventory error. When you call a dealership of any decent size to ask about a specific car they don't literally get up to make sure it's on the lot.

 

[Zigner]

Well, I just want to thank you guys for nothing. Upon looking up the actual law for Andy, I found the answer to my own question. I seriously think all of you that posted something to discredit my information should reconsider posting on this forum since you clearly did not help one bit. Also, dont bother trying to take credit for me finding the information, as I will admit, had I looked up the actual law to begin with, then I would have known who to report to.


So, without further to do, my favorite part of posting my responses is proving you dumb asses wrong yet again.

This is not a Florida law, it is actually a US law, overseen by the Federal Trade Commission.

Here is the exact definition of what they consider bait and switch.



For your statue. Title 15, Chapter 2, Section 53 - 54 I think.

Have you been eating many cars?

Just to be clear - from the same federal law you posted comes the following:

The Commission shall have no authority under this section or section 57a of this title to declare unlawful an act or practice on the grounds that such act or practice is unfair unless the act or practice causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers which is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.

Are you claiming that a consumer would not reasonably be able to avoid damages from not being able to buy the car that is advertised, really?

 

[confused14law]

My money is on inventory error. When you call a dealership of any decent size to ask about a specific car they don't literally get up to make sure it's on the lot.

I can understand a couple days or weeks, but a month? You dont think they update their inventory on at least a daily basis?

 

[confused14law]

Have you been eating many cars?

Just to be clear - from the same federal law you posted comes the following:

The Commission shall have no authority under this section or section 57a of this title to declare unlawful an act or practice on the grounds that such act or practice is unfair unless the act or practice causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers which is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.

Are you claiming that a consumer would not reasonably be able to avoid damages from not being able to buy the car that is advertised, really?

Ok, so I quoted the wrong statue, the real one is there. Find it yourself. I have nothing else to prove to you.