C
CuriousCase15
Guest
- Jurisdiction
- New Jersey
Hello: I'm not sure if I have a case.
I bought a "new" 2013 Hyundai Sonata in July 16, 2015. My paperwork lists the car as new. I found out after trying to work with the dealership to activate a trial that required entering my VIN number. This is where I found out I couldn't do it because my VIN was assigned to another who had already used the trial. I was unable to access the VIN until November 2016 and find a car employee who would assist me. A series of events in February 2017 required me to call the main Hyundai customer line which led me to find out that not only am I not the first owner of my "new" car but it had been used by the dealer as a loaner. This was not disclosed to me on the paperwork that was provided to me which is a disclosure form list whether the car was used as a loaner, rental, etc.
Also my five year warranty started at the date of first use in July 31, 2013. I didn't buy the car until July 16, 2015. This was not disclosed to me about not receiving the full warranty. I was told about the five year warranty as well as it was listed on my car sticker. As it is now the warranty is set to expire July 31, 2018.
The caveat is the dealership where I bought my car was sold to someone else. I learned that my car was one of the last 2 sold from the original dealer back in November 2016z
I visited the current dealership on Saturday where a salesman was trying to put me in a new version of my same car, no money down where my payments would be the same. He said the dealership's new owners only assumed the assets and not th losses of the previous dealer. I don't know if that's true as my degree is in economics and not law.
I'm wondering what are my options as to how to proceed? This is my first new car only to find out I paid a new car price for a car that not only was a loaner car but where I was the second owner.
Do I have a case even though my dealer sold the dealership where I bought my car? The new dealership made it seem like they were willing to work with me. I didn't know if it was because a case would be bad publicity.
would be bad publicity.
I bought a "new" 2013 Hyundai Sonata in July 16, 2015. My paperwork lists the car as new. I found out after trying to work with the dealership to activate a trial that required entering my VIN number. This is where I found out I couldn't do it because my VIN was assigned to another who had already used the trial. I was unable to access the VIN until November 2016 and find a car employee who would assist me. A series of events in February 2017 required me to call the main Hyundai customer line which led me to find out that not only am I not the first owner of my "new" car but it had been used by the dealer as a loaner. This was not disclosed to me on the paperwork that was provided to me which is a disclosure form list whether the car was used as a loaner, rental, etc.
Also my five year warranty started at the date of first use in July 31, 2013. I didn't buy the car until July 16, 2015. This was not disclosed to me about not receiving the full warranty. I was told about the five year warranty as well as it was listed on my car sticker. As it is now the warranty is set to expire July 31, 2018.
The caveat is the dealership where I bought my car was sold to someone else. I learned that my car was one of the last 2 sold from the original dealer back in November 2016z
I visited the current dealership on Saturday where a salesman was trying to put me in a new version of my same car, no money down where my payments would be the same. He said the dealership's new owners only assumed the assets and not th losses of the previous dealer. I don't know if that's true as my degree is in economics and not law.
I'm wondering what are my options as to how to proceed? This is my first new car only to find out I paid a new car price for a car that not only was a loaner car but where I was the second owner.
Do I have a case even though my dealer sold the dealership where I bought my car? The new dealership made it seem like they were willing to work with me. I didn't know if it was because a case would be bad publicity.
would be bad publicity.
