BEWARE: Regency Infiniti Set me Up by Forging Document

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by !SG

mainlander is name used to describe anyone from the mainland of china. usually can tell via accent. but if it take offense to it, then i appologize.

of course i question your motives. no one goes and creates a new username. either youve never been here before, or you have, but dont want to be linked to any post that is searchable. everyone knows its always about face, and im sure if the news cared, you'd be on tv ranting about it, thus the next easy step is to go onto an online car community, where opinions can easily be swayed with selective facts given.

What i asked for, which helps you in your case, was a simple picture of the deposit documents. this will aid you in your case.

and as for seeing it once or twice, more like a couple dozen. actually its fairly entertaining to watch, just gotta remember to whip out the phone to record the video.


you never got a copy of the original purchase agreement????

well good thing you posted, and good thing you blocked out ur personal info! good work!

1. That is true. I am not a regular RS user. I came here just for reminding local auto consumers. My motive is of course not like a saint, I want they get punished, not like I want to be a volunteer educator for VSA. But my motive does not mean result. Your motive for creating a forum or website was probably making money, but the result is that it can provide a good online community for auto enthusiasts. Market economy works by assuming people have selfish motives yet they still do the good things and find a way to benefit each other. If you want every person act on altruistic motives and you want the society works that way, congratulations, you have found communism.

2. While the word is OK, it is at least an unintentional over-generalization to associate a particular kind of action with a group of people which has 1.3 billion population.

But I am OK with it, I saw more of this in China. I often treat it like Russel Peters' comedy with my smile. When my friends in China asked me "do they discriminate Chinese?" I always answer, "it is not as severe as the kind of discrimination you'll see within China between regions, between locals and immigrants, between urban people and agricultural people, or between the rich and the poor." That is the part that I like about Canada. That part is, I think, the meaning of true civilization.

3. No, I have seen it. But I don't have it. Thanks very much for everything.

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by spoon.ek9

it's most definitely different writing. no doubt about it.

Originally Posted by GLOW

didn't even bother to try to make it look similar


lol

Yeah. Now Rick Kingdon said that the salesman forgot showing me that and forgot giving me the copy.

[legalaction]

VSA comliance officer has made her decision. She said it was not recommended to use this kind of purchase agreement. All they can do is to issue a warning to the dealership, try to educate them and give them a copy of the recommended deposit contract. She refused to answer my question on whether this is a legal contract. She said it was "not recommended". There is nothing more they can do.

So beware, they can easily get away with this type of behavior. They will keep using this as a tactic to trap the customers.

[BlackZRoadster]

Nice result, im glad it turned out good for both parties at the end.

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by BlackZRoadster

Nice result, im glad it turned out good for both parties at the end.

Sure. You can be assured that the worst outcome is just returning the deposit. You can do whatever you want to do now.

[legalaction]

UPDTAE:

1. I got an official letter from VSA yesterday which says they have resolved the issue. The dealership has refunded me the money.

2. I bought the same vehicle from another Infiniti dealership 3 weeks ago. There are two things I like about them more than Regency: first, they make it very clear that the deposit is refundable; second, for similar price as I got from Regency, I got the technology package. The price difference is about $3000. So Regency sucks in both customer service and price.

3. Any dealership/individual could do this to their customers. They just want to screw you although they know they will give you the refund. They can do this because the punishment from VSA is too small. So do not put down any deposit even when they say it is refundable.

I want to thank people here on RS. You guys make this process not a hard time but rather entertaining. Both those who supported/helped me and who tried to argue with me. I hope this thread can give local consumers more information. Especially for new immigrants and international students. I might do a Chinese version of this on Vansky.

[Presto]

Thanks for the update. Glad things worked out for you.

[LSF22]

Good to know things worked out!

And have fun with your new toy.

Post up some pics soon!

[spoon.ek9]

good to know you got your money back. i'm not surprised the dealership wasn't punished, but it's still disappointing that this is something VSA deems as an acceptable practice. perhaps they don't have the power to punish the dealership or is that wishful thinking on my part?

[Rich Sandor]

The VSA can only suspend licences or levy fines when there has been an actual violation of the Motor Dealer Act. For example, fines for dealers operating without a licence, or licence suspensions for dealers who have been convicted of acts contrary to the motor dealer act.

The VSA will not fine dealers just based on a minor complaint from a customer. The VSA does employ people such as ex-dealers who understand the dealer's side of the business and they understand that sometimes customers can be totally whacko as well.

[racerman88]

happy ending!!!

[UFO]

^happy ending could have happened weeks ago as the dealership had already offered to refund the deposit. OP just wanted to drag this out and handcuff the dealership with the VSA threat.

Originally Posted by legalaction

2. ...first, they make it very clear that the deposit is refundable;

3. So do not put down any deposit even when they say it is refundable.

So, did you have to put down a deposit at the dealership you eventually purchased your vehicle? Surely they wouldn't have seriously talked pricing with you unless you had...

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by LSF22

Good to know things worked out!

And have fun with your new toy.

Post up some pics soon!

Thanks. I am very satisfied with the new car.

Originally Posted by spoon.ek9

good to know you got your money back. i'm not surprised the dealership wasn't punished, but it's still disappointing that this is something VSA deems as an acceptable practice. perhaps they don't have the power to punish the dealership or is that wishful thinking on my part?

Yes I was a little disappointed. The VSA compliance officer said the dealership's procedure is "not recommended" and "need a little education". And that is all they can do.

Originally Posted by Presto

Thanks for the update. Glad things worked out for you.

Thank you.

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

The VSA can only suspend licences or levy fines when there has been an actual violation of the Motor Dealer Act. For example, fines for dealers operating without a licence, or licence suspensions for dealers who have been convicted of acts contrary to the motor dealer act.

The VSA will not fine dealers just based on a minor complaint from a customer. The VSA does employ people such as ex-dealers who understand the dealer's side of the business and they understand that sometimes customers can be totally whacko as well.

So the Motor Dealer Act says nothing about altering a contract or forging an agreement? But from the compliance officer's response, I can see that VSA is a perfect textbook example of regulatory capture. If you are not familiar with this concept, please search it on WIKIPEDIA. So it is normal and it is a problem with every modern society, but if people are interested, they can change this. That is how the "occupy wall street" thing came out.

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by UFO

^happy ending could have happened weeks ago as the dealership had already offered to refund the deposit. OP just wanted to drag this out and handcuff the dealership with the VSA threat.



So, did you have to put down a deposit at the dealership you eventually purchased your vehicle? Surely they wouldn't have seriously talked pricing with you unless you had...

No I got the money two days after I post the compliance officer's decision but I just updated this thread today because they sent me the official letter of resolution.

No I did not have to put down a deposit to negotiate the price. I just negotiated the price via phone, gave them my credit card information for deposit, and picked up the car the next day.

[Rich Sandor]

Originally Posted by legalaction

So the Motor Dealer Act says nothing about altering a contract or forging an agreement? But from the compliance officer's response, I can see that VSA is a perfect textbook example of regulatory capture. If you are not familiar with this concept, please search it on WIKIPEDIA. So it is normal and it is a problem with every modern society, but if people are interested, they can change this. That is how the "occupy wall street" thing came out.

I've taken another look at the purchase agreement that you posted.

Just a few lines above where you signed, IT IS CLEARLY WRITTEN:

"Deposits, partial payments, and down payments are non-refundable."

The fact that the manger wrote it in, again, by hand after you've already signed it, doesn't mean that the document was forged or altered. He was just repeating something that was already there.

Did you even bother to read the purchase agreement before you signed it?

[Rich Sandor]

In my earlier posts on page 3, I originally thought that the paper you had signed was just an "offer to purchase" or "purchase worksheet" - which is really not a contract per se. (at that time, you had not posted the image)

But now that I see it, it clearly is a purchase AGREEMENT - which means you are AGREEING to purchase the vehicle. It is NOT an "OFFER" to purchase or a "payment worksheet" Technically it is a legally binding contract, which you signed, which DOES have a section that clearly says deposits are non-refundable.

That said, the validity of a contract is very easy to dispute in court. For example, if the contract states that a deposit is non-refundable, but the salesperson says that it IS refundable, then it would be easy to argue that the contract is void, because it is not the same as what you were told you are signing.

If you are unhappy with the resolution of the VSA, remember that the only things it can enforce, are the laws. It cannot enforce good business practice, it can only "encourage" it.

[achiam]

Completely off-topic, but I was wondering -- if a person came into a dealership with like, $100K in cash, could a dealership legally accept it as payment? (I'm not sure if they have to report cash over a certain amount to stem criminals?)

[Rich Sandor]

I do believe we have to report cash transactions over $10k in cash to the government.

There is no reason why we would not accept cash, in fact I'm not even sure if a business can legally deny cash.

I have had buyers pay with cash on several occasions, although nothing over $50,000.

(by the way, $100,000 in hundreds is a really phat wad of cash. Its like a solid brick of $100 bills.)

[Redlines_Daily]

I have a friend who bought a 650i with cash. Dealership knew something was fishy, but they didnt care..they even encouraged my friends "associates" (term the dealer used) to come buy too and assured them there wouldn't be any "problems"... -_-

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

I've taken another look at the purchase agreement that you posted.

Just a few lines above where you signed, IT IS CLEARLY WRITTEN:

"Deposits, partial payments, and down payments are non-refundable."

The fact that the manger wrote it in, again, by hand after you've already signed it, doesn't mean that the document was forged or altered. He was just repeating something that was already there.

Did you even bother to read the purchase agreement before you signed it?

Thank you for pointing that out. I have to admit that I went to many dealerships before I went to Regency, all of them saying deposit is refundable. So I let my guard down and take that as default. So this is exactly why Regency (not a particular individual ) is shady.

As we know, to make this contract legally binding, they have to let me read it, with my initial on the terms and give me a copy of that. Remember the salesman did not even know the deposit was nonrefundable. Rick Kingdon obviously knew that this would not be a legally binding contract so he wrote that note afterwards.

Or wait, maybe he was so stupid that he did not even know the hidden nonrefundable terms were there already. That is why Regency is shady in drafting these agreements. But Rick Kingdon was only there for months and he may not get used to how to use Regency's tricks.

Another thing is there were only price on the agreement and no VIN numbers. I do not even know which one I am purchasing. There are so many things to make this thing not legally binding. If you look at the VSA guidance, it violated many aspects of a good deposit contract. (separate contracts, initials as consent, clear definition, terms and conditions of deposit)

VSA said they would give them a "recommended" version of deposit contract. And said the dealership "need a little education". I have seen other dealerships' contract and procedure of purchase so I believe Regency is doing this intentionally. An easy way to avoid this is just do not go there.

I find this case more interesting than before after you pointed this out. If Rick Kingdon did not alter the contract and just pointed at these hidden terms, I might not say they altered the contract, but just the contract is not legal under VSA's standard. And I might have not got so pissed off or took that as my negligence. I might even have negotiated another price with them. So the conclusion is that Regency is full of shady scams, but Rick Kingdon is too stupid to effectively use them to control the customers. I just want people like me beware: they want to screw you, do not put down any deposit. But even if you have put down the deposit and they want to control you, you can complain to VSA and get the money back.

The VSA's guidance also gives a bottom line：Even when there is a well written contract says it is nonrefundable, it might in fact be refundable. For example, the dealership must prove that they have incurred cost to hold the vehicle for a long time or paid the cost of modification. Or, if they fail to deliver the specified vehicle.(remember, in my case, no VIN number was specified)

[G35_]

Good to know, hope it all works out

[UFO]

Originally Posted by legalaction

Just got a phone call from this manager and he said that he would give me back my deposit.

Originally Posted by legalaction

Thanks. They did call me and wanted to give the money back to me. But I am disturbed by the action of forging the document. That is way more serious than 1000 dollars.

Originally Posted by legalaction

No I got the money two days after I post the compliance officer's decision but I just updated this thread today because they sent me the official letter of resolution.

You were offered your deposit back long ago (before October) as far as I can tell, but refused it for whatever reason or made it so that they were unable to give you your deposit back and chose to escalate it to the VSA. You were trying to get them on forging the document, when the terms and conditions in that document state that deposits are non-refundable as Rich has pointed out. So everything that you have been saying about how they manipulated and forged the contract is false as the term was in there all along, and I think you need to take accountability and own up to that. You should edit every post you made claiming they forged the contract as they clearly did not, and you just did not read over it carefully first.

I understand that this is down to an issue of pride now, and that you are using legal technicalities to prove that the dealership is in the wrong and you did everything properly. I agree there is probably some level of shadiness at the dealership, but you were already offered back what you were looking for initially yet you were trying to take this 'all the way'.

Originally Posted by legalaction

No I did not have to put down a deposit to negotiate the price. I just negotiated the price via phone, gave them my credit card information for deposit, and picked up the car the next day.

That sounds too easy to be true, are you sure you're telling the full story here? No dealership would give you the bottom line price on a simple phonecall. What's to stop you from taking that price and shopping it around elsewhere?

To me, what it sounds like is this:
-you went to Regency, saw the vehicle you liked, sat down to negotiate a price and placed a deposit on it
-you took that price, called up some other dealerships to see if they could beat it. You tell them "Hey, I'm ready to buy. Regency has a deposit on my vehicle, but if you give me a better price I'll buy from you instead." They did, and you want to get your deposit back from Regency so you can buy the vehicle cheaper somewhere else.

If you changed your mind at Regency because their price wasn't good enough, you should have done more/better research first instead of using Regency's price you negotiated as a base of negotiation with other dealers, that is pretty low. The document was titled 'purchase agreement', seems pretty clear to me? I'm not sure about all the details of your transaction and why you changed your mind, but frankly I don't care.

Something to think about: At the dealership where you eventually bought your car, how would you have felt after placing a credit card deposit over the phone, then you go in the next day and the salesman tells you that your car was just purchased an hour ago by somebody else who was willing to pay more money than you. Your deposit from the night before meant nothing because you did not sign anything, and it was not legally binding. I'm pretty sure you would be equally upset about that, crying for poor business practice, not honouring deposit/agreement, complaining to VSA all the same, etc etc.

This situation is resolved now, and I don't have anything more to add. At the end, I think both parties need to take some responsibilty and accountability for their actions. People love to hate on dealerships and many times rightfully so, but there are always 2 sides to the story.

[BlackZRoadster]

Exactly what I wanted to say ^^

But I wouldn't have said it as good as you.
Posted via RS Mobile

[legalaction]

Originally Posted by UFO

You were offered your deposit back long ago (before October) as far as I can tell, but refused it for whatever reason or made it so that they were unable to give you your deposit back and chose to escalate it to the VSA. You were trying to get them on forging the document, when the terms and conditions in that document state that deposits are non-refundable as Rich has pointed out. So everything that you have been saying about how they manipulated and forged the contract is false as the term was in there all along, and I think you need to take accountability and own up to that. You should edit every post you made claiming they forged the contract as they clearly did not, and you just did not read over it carefully first.


I understand that this is down to an issue of pride now, and that you are using legal technicalities to prove that the dealership is in the wrong and you did everything properly. I agree there is probably some level of shadiness at the dealership, but you were already offered back what you were looking for initially yet you were trying to take this 'all the way'.

No. They offered the refund after I filed the complaint with VSA and VSA forwarded the complaint to them. If before that, I might let them go. I accepted the refund but refused giving my credit card info. A compliance officer from VSA is involved no matter what resolution is reached. This thread started after I filed my complaint and VSA confirmed their reception of my complaint. I have not taken this to court yet so I am not taking this "all the way".

I will not change my claim of forgery. Like I said before, it is because they are trying to present a illegal document as legal, and trying to induce me believe that it is legal, by altering the contract:

Forgery and Offences Resembling Forgery

366. (1) Every one commits forgery who makes a false document, knowing it to be false, with intent (a) that it should in any way be used or acted on as genuine, to the prejudice of any one whether within Canada or not; or (b) that a person should be induced, by the belief that it is genuine, to do or to refrain from doing anything, whether within Canada or not.

Think about the following example: I forged a bunch of $20 bills and bought stuff from you, you found out later and sued me. Can I say " it is not forged, it got '20 dollars' clearly printed there, and even got a nice picture of the queen"?

Originally Posted by UFO

That sounds too easy to be true, are you sure you're telling the full story here? No dealership would give you the bottom line price on a simple phonecall. What's to stop you from taking that price and shopping it around elsewhere?

To me, what it sounds like is this:
-you went to Regency, saw the vehicle you liked, sat down to negotiate a price and placed a deposit on it
-you took that price, called up some other dealerships to see if they could beat it. You tell them "Hey, I'm ready to buy. Regency has a deposit on my vehicle, but if you give me a better price I'll buy from you instead." They did, and you want to get your deposit back from Regency so you can buy the vehicle cheaper somewhere else.

If you changed your mind at Regency because their price wasn't good enough, you should have done more/better research first instead of using Regency's price you negotiated as a base of negotiation with other dealers, that is pretty low. The document was titled 'purchase agreement', seems pretty clear to me? I'm not sure about all the details of your transaction and why you changed your mind, but frankly I don't care.

You don't care about my story yet you took you time to make up one. Thank you for the tip. Next time I might try the strategy as you described. It might be very effective. Who knows. I don't see anything wrong with dealerships bidding on getting one customer.

I never hide the reason of changing my mind: to renegotiate the price. I said this in previous posts. Regency refused and threatened me with the forged document. I contacted all three dealerships and did my research before I bought the vehicle. The reason I put down deposit at Regency is that they had one in stock. The other dealership called me two days later and told me they have one just arrived. So I contacted Regency for renegotiation and Regency's response is very interesting. If people are interested, I can tell more about Regency's tricks to hold the customers. But I just want to focus on this altered agreement.

The final transaction worked exactly as I said. Maybe for you it is hard to believe. I remember there was a previous post that said the same thing, he did not even give the credit card number. Just a few phone calls.

Originally Posted by UFO

Something to think about: At the dealership where you eventually bought your car, how would you have felt after placing a credit card deposit over the phone, then you go in the next day and the salesman tells you that your car was just purchased an hour ago by somebody else who was willing to pay more money than you. Your deposit from the night before meant nothing because you did not sign anything, and it was not legally binding. I'm pretty sure you would be equally upset about that, crying for poor business practice, not honouring deposit/agreement, complaining to VSA all the same, etc etc.

I will be upset but I will not complain to VSA. I might just switch to another dealership. In that case they are not doing anything illegal. Nothing can prevent them from doing that, unless there exists a legal contract of deposit clearly stating they will be punished by doing that. But I really doubt there is any economic reason for them to do that. If you have any data from VSA says they got any complaint in this manner please let me know.

I really think VSA should make these contracts standardized to avoid these things, not just "recommendation" and "education".