Check FlexiSpot Sale now and use my code 'YTBXL650' for extra $50 off the XL6 and 'LEHTOSLAW' for extra $30 off on their C7 chairs and E7 standing desk series FlexiSpot C7 chair: bit.ly/3U1mr93 FlexiSpot standing desk: bit.ly/3TXLWZ2 FlexiSpot recliner: bit.ly/4d1qFGk
You covered pretty much everything except if the chair has battery backup for power outages. It looks like a great deal. Going to click link now. Edit. I checked out the website but couldn't see the chair. Maybe there is something wrong with my settings? Anyway it appears to be on sale for $480 for the rest of the. day
I agree, this whole playing ignorant by the dealer is hogwash. 30 years as dealer making sure all VIN's match should be top priority when taking in a trade or selling a vehicle. The consumer is not knowledgeable in VIN locations.
Yea being a likely franchises dealership or at least a licensed dealer they should 100% be held liable because they had to get a dealer license which stolen property sells should be a prerequisite of that license. I mean your going to pay more at a dealership 90% of the time but for that extra cash you get all the possible warranty options, the payment plans, the knowledge that your not going to flat out get robbed and left somewhere and you get a cleaner car than others with all the spiffy waxing and crap they do to cars. And receiving stolen property from a dealership should put them out of business or revoke the license and fine them as well as reimbursing the customer with extra for wasting their time with the stolen goods.. without that as a policy whos to say they havent been selling more or even doing the vin coverups themselves? Its like bringing a dirty cop to court, your word against theirs unless you somehow have flat out proof. With a dealer it should be required they go over each and every car or be subject to government regulation and correctional sentencing along with fines just like the criminals who stole the damn car would get.. the thieves could work for the bastards
You sell me a stolen car, then when you get caught you say I still owe you for trying to sell me a stolen car. That’s got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
Seems like the loan company would wind up somehow getting their money back from the dealer. With that, demanding payment from the buyer even though the deal is off seems to be some form of double-dipping, and therefore fraud.
So many things wrong with this situation. The guy trades in a 2017 truck for another 2017 truck, and doesn't realize it? He pays $40k plus trade-in value for the thing... OOF. The dealership is somehow able to get a clear title on a stolen vehicle with a VIN swap. And now the guy is still making payments on it? WTF?
People are free to make whatever financial decisions they like, but that's one hell of a loan to get into for a truck. Unless the truck is a capital expense in order to make a living farming or something like that, it doesn't make sense. Buy a cheap car cash and save up for the one you dream of later.
If youve failed to notice, these days experts and authorities are rarely held accountable and have little to no culpability for their mistakes let alone their complicency in malfeasance and criminality
Bank's due diligence amounts to asking the dealer if they own the vehicle. If the answer is yes, they have no further need to check. This one is entirely on the dealer for selling something they lacked clean title to.
Here in New Zealand (and I think Australia is the same) "LMVD" (Licenced Motor Vehicle Dealers) are licenced and bonded and part of those conditions is that they guarantee clear title on all cars they sell. If the car is later found to have money owing on it, the car dealer must pay out the outstanding money. If the car turns out to be stolen and must be returned to original owner, then the car dealer would be required to provide a full refund. Having said that the "Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal" is a special not-quite-court where some retired ex Used-Car Dealer sits in place of a judge, so decisions tend to NOT favour customers, unless the case is really cut and dried in their favour.
Bought a slightly used large Horse trailer and financed $32k. Took it in for a repair 4 months later and discovered something that made us question the title. Reported it and the Police confirm that it was stolen. Sent that report to the Finance company (Berkshire Hathaway). They sent a form by overnight (not cheap back then) which we returned with the information requested. Got a check back for all payments (except for the Credit Check fee of $50) in two weeks and a letter I could send to the credit agencies. Also informed me that they would waive the Credit Fee on my next loan application from them. GREAT SERVICE!! Took me a year to get back the down (25%) from the used trailer dealer, required a letter from a lawyer - not good service.
im glad you named the company, any business that does good work and has good integrity like that should be named so people know who to go to just as the poor practicing, no integrity businesses get named so people know who to avoid
I believe the dealership is 100% liable. Although they may not have known at the time the truck was stolen, they have been in business long enough to do a thorough inspection to make sure that the all of the VIN's matched. All of this could have been avoided during the chain of tranfers from each trade in/ sales transactions. The dealers finance company will likely have to take this as a loss. As Steve pointed out each party involved with this truck will have to trace back in reverse and unravel the chain of possession.
I appreciate that you tell us there's an ad at the end of your videos. I specifically watch it because you tell us it's at the end and don't inturrupt the content.
@@Drylochnot necessarily if it had a replacement ECM or reprogramming done on a dealer level scan tool with access to the vehicle manufacturer directly
Where is the due diligence from the lender? Part of what they do to secure a loan and the consumer pays for is verification of VINs and an examination. The dealer is on the hook as well.
The bank will issue you a loan as long as your credit rating is good and you are considered low risk of default. The due diligence of the actual purchase is something you have to do, not the bank. They don't care about what you spend the money on, all they care about is your ability and probability of paying them back when the loan is due.
It's not the bank's job to certify that the dealer holds clean title. Holding that title is implied by the dealer, when offering the vehicle for sale. The fact that the deal effectively lied to both lender and buyer means this one is wholly on the dealer.
It does, but the buyer still took out a loan from the bank, and the bank is owed money by someone. At the moment, the dealer has the bank's money, until they return it to either the buyer or the bank. If the buyer doesn't go get the money back, and refuses to pay the bank, the buyer is the one in trouble.
@@bergmanoswell879The bank is the one who wants that 40k which they know the dealer has. The bank is the one with lawyers sitting around. If they've got time to tickle themselves they've got time to litigate on behalf of their customer, the buyer. They can get that 40k back sooner, or choose to maybe maybe not get the money back by harassing their customer. A smart bank would be happy to get their money back, a lazy bank will be tickling themselves trying to do as little for their customer as possible.
NOW the dealership wants to "make it right". Additionally, I love when they excuse themselves by saying, "this never happened beforr", as if that means anything.
Well if it's something you never delt with before you should talk to your lawyer. I don't believe any lawyer would tell them to try and pull what they did. Remember as much as we love to hate lawyers, they aren't only there to get us out of trouble but also to prevent us from getting into trouble.
Guy sues dealership, dealership sues woman who sold it, woman sues the person SHE bought it from... And lawyers get paid all down the chain. The system works as our masters intended.
@@MonkeyJedi99 When there's a chain of crime, that's what naturally happens. Everyone in the chain is going to claim they had no idea it was stolen, even the thief. It's how the system has to work, to get to the bottom of it since it didn't pop up earlier in the chain.
You brought to mind the time I ordered a recliner chair with standing assistance for my mother-in-law. After putting it together I named it my Blood, Sweat and Tears chair, literally. I was warned. The customer comments said that 4 stars for comfort, 1 star for ease of assembly and 5 stars for return policy. I won the battle but eventually lost a big toe nail in the process. It could have been a much better experience if their assembly instructions were done in the correct order.
If you got a loan from a third party to buy it, you would still have to repay the loan even if you were defrauded in the purchase. It is not the loan issuers fault.
@@Tugela60 that’s why you name the finance company in addition to the dealership in the lawsuit. This 20 year old kid has a slam dunk case. The dealership is going to be forced to repay every penny this kid is out and the dealership will be made to repay the lender.
@@brianwatson6002 The lender did not give the loan to the dealer, they gave it to the buyer. It is not the lenders responsibility to fix the buyers mistakes, that is the buyers responsibility. The lender has a contract with the buyer, not the vendor, meaning they have no standing to sue the vendor. The buyer obtained a loan from the lender, secured with property he did not actually own. That means the loan is effectively unsecured, but the buyer still needs to pay it back or the lender could go after any other assets the buyer might own. Being unsecured does not mean the loan magically goes away or that some third party is liable for it.
Sh*t rolls downhill, the dealer obviously either didn't do their due diligence or hoped no one would notice. To save face they should have made this guy whole then work it out on their end. Now, how many potential customers have they lost, ridiculous.
Yeah, a fake VIN should have absolutely set off red flags. The thieves might have put on a VIN for a similar vehicle, but records should have shown it in a different area. Plus they could have verified the title with the state that issued it. The dealer didn't do their due diligence (in the best case scenario) and now they're passing it off to someone who had less opportunity, knowledge, and capability to do the kind of checking they should have done. Any court should see that they held the power in negotiations to be able to sway things in their favor and would likely rule in the buyer's favor.
Dealership owes him a lot of $$$. They have his older vehicle and have a fiduciary responsibility to the customer… and that’s the LAW! As a dealer it’s in all the laws/paperwork/application when you get your license.
So let me get this straight... The dealership sold stolen goods they didn't have good title to and claim they don't have to make their victim whole.....
Why would the DEALERSHIP not know that this was a 2017 and not a 2019 truck? One would think that the dealership would know enough about trucks to know that the truck was not the right year.
Exactly. Why didn’t the dealer hook up a scan tool to check the vehicle for system faults before buying it? Make sure there was nothing questionable or suspicious being reported by the car’s computer. That should have turned up immediately that the VIN in the window didn’t match the VIN stored in the computer’s memory. It’s called due diligence, and a licensed (professional) car dealer whose sole purpose and existence is trading and selling cars shouldn’t have to be forced to do things like this to both protect themselves and their customers.
@@davidh9638well I mean they sell trucks, they should know the difference between the trucks you are selling. 2. Part of taking a vehicle in on a trade is reviewing the car/truck mechanically to assess how valuable it is (what kind of repairs it needs etc) if the vehicle is newer then 1995 it will have an OBD2 port. It allows a scan tool to hook up to the vehicle which reports information such as vin, trim, and specific mechanical data. On a vehicle that is from 2017 it will have that info, the dealership has much better scan tools then the 20 dollar special from Walmart. It's very easy for them to check
Yeah, same. But he traded in his old truck as part of the deal so he's out any equity he may have had in that... and his credit is going to be toast. At 20 yrs old, that's the last thing you need on there.
I worked as a tech for a dealership years ago that had that problem. They sold a custom van, a few days later it was back on a lift with cops all over it. Turned out it was stolen. They had to give him his old car and his money back. Interestingly, it had been stolen years ago, the insurance had settled, and it had been sold and registered two or three times since in two different states and no one caught it! The VIN had been altered as you mentioned, but they didn't alter all the copies on the van! I don't know what happened to the van, but it probably went to the insurance company since they had settled with the real owner.
I actually appreciate the commercial. Just had back surgery 2 weeks ago and looking at a spinal fusion of L3-L5 in the near future. Already have a new knee, hip, left shoulder, and right shoulder this fall. This chair looks like a good option.
almost reminds me of National Lampoon's Vacation... Chevy Chase's character trades in the old car. He sees the new car and wants to reject the car, but the dealer has already crushed the trade-in.
Only if the insurance covered that situation, which I'm guessing there is not currently title insurance for cars like there is real estate. If this keeps happening, it will probably become a thing.
@@carboncopy4183 Insurance companies make profit by receiving premiums and not playing claims. They are NOT, out of the goodness of their "heart", going to pay for an uncovered situation. I'm sure this situation would not meet the definition of "theft" as far as the insurance policy is concerned.
I have seen terms in Bank agreements that essentially permit the bank to claw funds from ones savings or checking if they fail to make payments on a loan from same bank. I keep this in mind for my savings so that if I ever do get into financial difficulty, my savings is not drained by the bank when i urgently need it for a liver transplant or such. I don't borrow or save in same bank.
It is time for title insurance on vehicle contracts . My son lost a car because the dealer bankrupted and didn't pay the auction yard .His father in law lost a truck used in his business purchased from the same dealer. The police pulled over my daughter in law for a stollen car towed it and left her standing on the road .
"titling it as a 2019 when it's actually a 2017; the VIN wouldn't reveal that..." Yes it would, unless it was from before the 80s. In 1981 the VIN was standardized in the US for all cars sold in the US and the 10th digit represents the year of the vehicle.
As soon as they would have told me to kick rocks, I’d say I’ll be calling all of the local tv stations news departments and showing them that you sold me a stolen car and aren’t willing to make it right.
Let the loan company repo the truck. Just call the company say you aren't able to make the payments and tell them where they can find the truck. Sit back and watch the chaos.
Why isn't the credit company fighting this with him? If he were to stop payments, they would be out of pocket. My friend bought an RS6 which was advertised as being in immaculate condition. He was very specific that he wanted the body- and paintwork to be perfect, which they claimed it was and it appeared to the untrained eye to be just that. He had a bodywork guy to apply ceramic coating to the car and the tech gave my friend the bad news that it had been in an accident and that the fix was done poorly. So, with that, he called the dealer to ask for remedial work to bring it up to the stadard expected, but the dealer said no. So my mate rang the credit company and they got the repairs done and then sent the dealer the bill. The dealer paid it because he knows who butters his bread.
I forgot to say, this is in Britain. It strikes me as odd that the same isn't done in America as it makes sense as the finance company technically owns the car and it was defective at purchase. Thanks for calling my mate a liar though. I really appreciate it.
@@phoenixh87 Lenders usually do stand with the buyer in the USA for car sales. If this guy speaks to the lender, assuming it's a big bank or credit union (which it probably is for a truck being sold for over $40,000), this guy shouldn't have much trouble getting them to go after the dealership. Lenders do not like to be associated with stolen vehicles.
As a long time dealer I check the VIN in several places a well as the engine number. And check for obvious repairs or modifications. The update in sheetmetal and or grilles etc is usually fairly easy to spot. In close to 50 years I have never bought a stolen car. I have however had too many cars checked by Transport or the Police that I have checked for financial encumberances. Generally ones paid out that later come up as encumbered. Worse encumbered to the financial institution that actally sold it via auction. And yes this has cost me sales Nearly bought a couple tat turned out to be defected which is also supposed to show as an encumberance
Why isn't there a process for just unrolling the entire thing until the truck gets back to its owner. Dealer gives the money back to the buyer with interest, and gets back the traded in truck because it was acquired improperly and they should have had no right to sell it. The lady who sold the truck to the dealership gives the money back. Etc. seems like it should just be a default process that doesn't tie up the courts.
You would think. But it absolutely would require court enforcement. Someone, somewhere in the chain, would refuse, saying that they aren't responsible because they acted in good faith. Or they don't have the money. Or it's not their problem. Or they just don't want to.
What is wrong with that idea is the part about the buyer getting back his trade in. The person who bought the trade in did so in good faith, there was no problem with the paper on the trade in. The only way the buyer of the stolen truck gets his trade in back is if someone can persuade the buyer of the trade in to sell it back. That buyer may have invested in improvements or repairs, loan costs, etc., may also have traded something, or just may like it and not want to sell for any reasonable price. I agree the person who bought the stolen vehicle should obviously be compensated for loss of the vehicle he traded but that vehicle is now gone forever and ain't ever coming back to the previous owner.
@@kimlground206 Ah, but the vehicle was traded in under false pretenses. Yes, everyone acted in good faith, but it was understood that the trade-in would go toward a vehicle that the dealer was allowed to sell. I don't know if this argument would hold up in court, but it seems to be the obvious argument to make.
Money solves all issues, and the kid agreed to relinquish ownership of the trade in voluntarily with no expectation to ever see it again. The amount of potential issues involved in rolling back all deals deals made just isn't feasible. For example, what if the kid doesn't get the trade in back in the same condition it was when he handed the keys to the dealer? What if it was wrecked? What about any loans on it that were paid off? What about the trade in of the person buying the kid's trade in? And on and on...
@@silverhurst7241 Money distributed properly would go a long way toward making everyone whole but no matter how it works out the only ones walking away smiling will be the lawyers.
I know someone who sold a motorcycle which didn't have the correct title with it. It changed hands 7 more times from his possession before someone looked at the serial number and discovered the discrepancy. Since it had never left the state, the state police tracked back through all the 'owners' quickly and told this guy "either you prove to me where you got it from or you pay what the last guy paid for it- of you go to jail". He couldn't prove where he got it from so he had to pay. Plus the Cop told him that the serial number on the bike and the title were going to be red-flagged in the system so if either came up for titling again he was going to have to explain things or he'd be jailed for fraud. From that I've learned to always have legal proof of where you acquired something from so you don't end up as the last guy holding the bag, and to check serial numbers and all paperwork carefully before you lay out one dime of money on anything.
It is not the lenders fault, they issued the loan in good faith. They did not purchase the vehicle, the buyer did. The buyer has to sue the dealer to recover the money.
@ColtonRMagby No, the dealer owes the buyer, and the buyer owes the lender. There is no reason why the lender has to take responsibility for the buyers mistakes.
@@ColtonRMagby The lender has no contract with the dealer, they have no grounds to sue them. The buyer is the one who took out the loan, that is the person the lender has a contract with.
If you buy anything stollen and you do so unknowing, then you are not obligated to honor such contract. There is no legal contract because selling something stollen is illegal and therefore the contract is null and void. So, the seller is obligated to repay the buyer any money it has collected for the sale of such goods that was illegally sold, including large items like vehicles. If it purchased such stollen items for resale the seller has to go and sort it out with the original source. If it acquired the items for resale mistakenly the error can't be transferred to someone else. The moment the item is identified as stollen the error should be traced back to the source and each "passer on" should be obligated to return all funds it received in the sale of such item. So, If I was the buyer and I unknowingly found out that the item I just purchased is stollen, first I must report it to police and prove that I legally acquired it. The seller then has to refund me the value lost. That seller then can go and get refunded by its source. Any loses that are caused by the transaction should be paid by the seller and/or it's insurance. That is how I think the proper way of dealing with transactions involving items of this nature. This way you are very cautious that an item of this nature is more hassle than benefit to you if you are reckless with what you retail with. And hopefully this type of transactions is stopped early on, it's value because of it is diminished, helping end or reduce theft because of its loss of value. I also think it is a very ethical way to deal with it.
I don't even need the chair, but I still enjoy hearing you talk about it and pretty much everything lol 😂 That's when you know you have a true gift for public speaking 👏 .
Completely agree. Dealership should be held criminally for profiting off stolen goods. If it was a pawn shop, you KNOW criminal charges would be filed.
The VIN can also be checked with a generic OBD2 scan tool. The pcm/ecm has a VIN assigned to it that should match the VIN tag on the dash or door jamb. On newer vehicles like the one in this video, the VIN is stored in all modules.
So buyer of truck says: give me my money back you sold me a stolen truck. Used car dealer says: So what we aren't giving you your money or old truck back.
I learned to take my ODB2 reader any time I buy a vehicle. One of the things it does is check the vin, then I look at the tag in the windshield, if they don't match, I walk away.
I would love it if a) Steve started using a laugh track, and b) an on screen counter of ‘People say Steve…’. Steve you’re great and I love your videos.
At about 3 am multiable police agencies showed up at the house across the street and towed away the toyota pickup my neighbor had purchased from a private party. He could not prove the seller knew it was stolen. A group of men would go to an insurance auction and buy a totaled vehicle then drive around in a tow truck to steal a similar vehicle and switch the VIN. He latter bought the same truck from the insurance company that was now the legal owner.
He bought a truck. Some time later, someone took his truck away without his permission and will not give it back? File a stolen truck report. Send copy to insurance.
I usually skip the ads, I must admit, but, when this one started, I had to check it out! I wish I had been aware of it/it had existed a couple of years ago when I bought a new chair for my elderly mother! I may still have to see if I can scrounge up the extra $500!
2 easily accessible vin numbers A pillar and B pillar Open the driver door look towards bottom of pillar there is a tag that has vin and a bunch more info about vehicle
Now I wish I needed a chair. That "less than $500" got my attention. I did buy one of their desks some months ago and it's great. So, does anyone watch through Steve Lehto's advertisement at the almost end of some of his videos? Yes, I usually do.
This actually happened to me. Bought 25K from a Ford Dealer. Two months later the DPS shows up and says this is stolen. The daughter of the dealership owner jacked the truck. They filed a stolen report. She brought the truck back a few months later. They got paid by insurance but didn't tell insurance or police it was not stolen. Got all worked out, but I had to go down to the dealership and throw a shit fit. Had to go to small claims court. Judge talked smack to me, but DPS stood up for me said, no, this is legit.
"The bank knows. The language is in an agreement *_THEY_* drafted" Why would they do that? It's not going to be because they care about the rights of ...anyone... Are they forced to by law? Does it make it cheaper for them in court?
I sold used cars for four years, and I don't know of any cases where we checked to confirm all VINs on a car matched. We'd just take the vehicle ID from the plate near the windshield A-pillar and that would be the end of it. This just isn't the sort of thing that normally raises suspicion. It's not easy swapping a VIN plate. You'd need to remove the dashboard or the windshield, you'd need to undo the existing VIN plate, and you would need to replace everything so expertly that it would withstand a visual inspection. The chance that a VIN plate has been swapped is about as low as the chance that you will find a bag of money hidden under the backseat. So I can't blame a dealership for failing to check the other places where the VIN is stamped to confirm that the numbers and letters match. It's just not normal protocol. HOWEVER, the dealership was remiss for its failure to discover that the VIN was issued in the wrong year -- it should have been able to tell the truck was a 2017 model, not a 2019. So I fault the dealer for a lack of due diligence, but I think the lawsuit's reasoning is incorrect.
Mr. Lehto, I believe you left out an important detail in your explanation of why lenders don't get paid. When a lender is assigned the loan as part of the purchase contract, you are 100% correct, I as a lender cannot collect on an invalid purchase contract. That said, if I as a lender write a loan independent of the initial purchase (such as a refinance or cash-pay to the dealer) in which I'm un-involved in the purchase transaction, I as a lender have the absolute right to collect from that borrower, even if the underlying collateral ends up being totaled, invalid, or fraudulently obtained.
I don't understand why the statute of limitations would allow the stolen vehicle to be recovered/seized for a longer period of time than it would allow the person who was sold the stolen vehicle to sue whoever stole it from them. Is there am issue with one of these SOLs tolling but the other not (eg because a diligent owner could have determined the vehicle was stolen)?
My answer is no dealer's do get scammed and the driver shouldn't be on the hook the driver get his money back or should get that money applied to a different vehicle on their lot with zero negative affect on their credit but on time payments should boost the drivers credit score. And getting credit pulled for a replacement vehicle shouldn't affect their score.
You mentioned in the earlier part of the article that the buyer traded in his 2017 truck toward the purchase of the "2019" which was proved later to be a 2017, so through subrogation the buyer has full equitable interest in the original truck once the transaction is voided and loan payments are terminated.
The dealership should know the difference between a 2017 and a 2019 truck by looking at available color scheme, glass, trim, lighting (like tail light configuration), and options. At the least, they were negligent. At worst, they noticed the discrepancy sometime after they purchased it, and sold it on regardless, knowing the year of the truck didn't match the title.
In New Zealand if you buy a stolen vehicle from a licensed motor vehicle dealer then they’re responsible for refunding the costs include. Also in New Zealand, most vehicles do not have a VIN number visible in the front pillar/windscreen.
Thanks for seeking out these clever schemes and posting them, 😆 the creativity people come up with to get out of unfair (in their mind) situations is entertaining as hell plus i know to check the titles condition before purchase, as well as having a mechanic with me when i buy.
Actually, they're able to pull a vin off the ecu. Police have vehicle scanners that hook up to the ecu. Also, some shops that are connected to the states, smog, ect. Are required to up load data.
Worked for a company involved in this type of situation. It dragged out for years, the buyer claiming they invested much more money in the vehicle before it was seized than the seller thought was believable.
So... I do insurance. Doesn't the dealer have Title Insurance for... exactly this scenario? Or is there an exclusion that kicked in because they failed to do their job and check all the vins?
The dealership should’ve known a fraud because they were multiple red flags here. I will hope Steve you report on this that the purchaser won his lawsuit.
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
Check FlexiSpot Sale now and use my code 'YTBXL650' for extra $50 off the XL6 and 'LEHTOSLAW' for extra $30 off on their C7 chairs and E7 standing desk series
FlexiSpot C7 chair: bit.ly/3U1mr93
FlexiSpot standing desk: bit.ly/3TXLWZ2
FlexiSpot recliner: bit.ly/4d1qFGk
You covered pretty much everything except if the chair has battery backup for power outages. It looks like a great deal. Going to click link now.
Edit. I checked out the website but couldn't see the chair. Maybe there is something wrong with my settings? Anyway it appears to be on sale for $480 for the rest of the. day
My Flexispot standing desk is one of the best purchases I've ever made
How do you keep ads off your channel?
The instant someone connects a scan tool it’s going to show the vin number and model year.
@@brianwatson6002and the Dealer didn't notice or care
The dealer should be on the hook, and should reimburse the customer. They sold a car that wasn't theirs to sell.
I'd also be concerned about making payments on a car that I knew to be stolen. Sounds like a potential liability on my end!!!!
I agree, this whole playing ignorant by the dealer is hogwash. 30 years as dealer making sure all VIN's match should be top priority when taking in a trade or selling a vehicle. The consumer is not knowledgeable in VIN locations.
Yea being a likely franchises dealership or at least a licensed dealer they should 100% be held liable because they had to get a dealer license which stolen property sells should be a prerequisite of that license. I mean your going to pay more at a dealership 90% of the time but for that extra cash you get all the possible warranty options, the payment plans, the knowledge that your not going to flat out get robbed and left somewhere and you get a cleaner car than others with all the spiffy waxing and crap they do to cars. And receiving stolen property from a dealership should put them out of business or revoke the license and fine them as well as reimbursing the customer with extra for wasting their time with the stolen goods.. without that as a policy whos to say they havent been selling more or even doing the vin coverups themselves? Its like bringing a dirty cop to court, your word against theirs unless you somehow have flat out proof. With a dealer it should be required they go over each and every car or be subject to government regulation and correctional sentencing along with fines just like the criminals who stole the damn car would get.. the thieves could work for the bastards
Maybe the buyer of this vehicle got the tags off of another vehicle or swapped vehicles and put the other tags from the other vehicle on it ?
Due diligence, and Best business practices!
You sell me a stolen car, then when you get caught you say I still owe you for trying to sell me a stolen car. That’s got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
What gives them the right to repo a vehicle that is stolen and not even theirs ?
@@dcraexonthe law gives them the right
Seems like the loan company would wind up somehow getting their money back from the dealer.
With that, demanding payment from the buyer even though the deal is off seems to be some form of double-dipping, and therefore fraud.
@@mikeslater6246 possession is 9/10 of the law, but if they don’t possess what the repo company is trying to possess then the possession is frivolous
the seller should be arrested.
AND...All the payments made prior to the seizure should be returned to borrower when the deal is held void.
or an acceptable vehicle provided, with as much equity as the borrower had.
Let's not forget his actual trade-in too.
@@TheRealScooterGuy Bingo!
What about my dude's trade in? He traded in a 2017 as well as took out a loan.
@christopherscott8272 counts as a payment.
40K + a trade-in for a used truck. Kid got ripped off twice.
So many things wrong with this situation. The guy trades in a 2017 truck for another 2017 truck, and doesn't realize it? He pays $40k plus trade-in value for the thing... OOF. The dealership is somehow able to get a clear title on a stolen vehicle with a VIN swap. And now the guy is still making payments on it? WTF?
People are free to make whatever financial decisions they like, but that's one hell of a loan to get into for a truck. Unless the truck is a capital expense in order to make a living farming or something like that, it doesn't make sense. Buy a cheap car cash and save up for the one you dream of later.
Not if he was upside down
"Kid"? People of all ages make poor financial decisions based on emotions.
@@username7763 fiscal literacy is unamerican.
He was sold a stolen truck, so the seller should be on the hook for it, and he should get all payments made to date paid back.
Plus interest
Plus ALL taxes and fees!
and his 1ST car to
@@cjjorge6636damn,that’s gotta hurt 😢
how about getting his tradein back?
The dealership is 100% liable for not checking the vehicle's VIN thoroughly.
Wrong. The kid buying a truck for the 1st or 2nd time should have /s. But seriously, WTF is wrong with people/dealers nowadays?!
Aren’t the experts with the dealership and loan company responsible for a lack of due diligence???
Should be charged with selling stolen goods, both bank and dealer!
If youve failed to notice, these days experts and authorities are rarely held accountable and have little to no culpability for their mistakes let alone their complicency in malfeasance and criminality
Bank's due diligence amounts to asking the dealer if they own the vehicle. If the answer is yes, they have no further need to check. This one is entirely on the dealer for selling something they lacked clean title to.
@@bergmanoswell879 banks have a duty to verify...
Here in New Zealand (and I think Australia is the same) "LMVD" (Licenced Motor Vehicle Dealers) are licenced and bonded and part of those conditions is that they guarantee clear title on all cars they sell. If the car is later found to have money owing on it, the car dealer must pay out the outstanding money. If the car turns out to be stolen and must be returned to original owner, then the car dealer would be required to provide a full refund. Having said that the "Motor Vehicle Disputes Tribunal" is a special not-quite-court where some retired ex Used-Car Dealer sits in place of a judge, so decisions tend to NOT favour customers, unless the case is really cut and dried in their favour.
Bought a slightly used large Horse trailer and financed $32k. Took it in for a repair 4 months later and discovered something that made us question the title. Reported it and the Police confirm that it was stolen.
Sent that report to the Finance company (Berkshire Hathaway). They sent a form by overnight (not cheap back then) which we returned with the information requested. Got a check back for all payments (except for the Credit Check fee of $50) in two weeks and a letter I could send to the credit agencies. Also informed me that they would waive the Credit Fee on my next loan application from them. GREAT SERVICE!! Took me a year to get back the down (25%) from the used trailer dealer, required a letter from a lawyer - not good service.
im glad you named the company, any business that does good work and has good integrity like that should be named so people know who to go to just as the poor practicing, no integrity businesses get named so people know who to avoid
I believe the dealership is 100% liable. Although they may not have known at the time the truck was stolen, they have been in business long enough to do a thorough inspection to make sure that the all of the VIN's matched. All of this could have been avoided during the chain of tranfers from each trade in/ sales transactions. The dealers finance company will likely have to take this as a loss. As Steve pointed out each party involved with this truck will have to trace back in reverse and unravel the chain of possession.
I appreciate that you tell us there's an ad at the end of your videos. I specifically watch it because you tell us it's at the end and don't inturrupt the content.
He's right about the chair though, one of my nephews just got one, nice recliner.
I left the sound on while I read the comments.
The Dealship Is Responsible. They Should Of Checked Everything Before selling Any Vehicle.
They should have checked everything when taking it on trade...
Didn't they even do a code scan on it? That would likely have shown the real vin.
@@Dryloch There are ways to defeat this. A professional thief would have a computer setup to do this.
@@Drylochnot necessarily if it had a replacement ECM or reprogramming done on a dealer level scan tool with access to the vehicle manufacturer directly
@@Drylochabsolutely. Every time I plug my scan tool into a vehicle, it displays the vin number, make, model, and year.
Where is the due diligence from the lender? Part of what they do to secure a loan and the consumer pays for is verification of VINs and an examination. The dealer is on the hook as well.
I’ve never heard of a bank verifying all the vins to give out a loan 🤣🤣🤣 my bank didn’t even ask to see the car in a picture
The bank will issue you a loan as long as your credit rating is good and you are considered low risk of default. The due diligence of the actual purchase is something you have to do, not the bank.
They don't care about what you spend the money on, all they care about is your ability and probability of paying them back when the loan is due.
It's not the bank's job to certify that the dealer holds clean title. Holding that title is implied by the dealer, when offering the vehicle for sale. The fact that the deal effectively lied to both lender and buyer means this one is wholly on the dealer.
the dealer sold a stolen vehicle. I would think that would put the burden back on the dealer.
And any contract they made is now void.
It does, but the buyer still took out a loan from the bank, and the bank is owed money by someone. At the moment, the dealer has the bank's money, until they return it to either the buyer or the bank. If the buyer doesn't go get the money back, and refuses to pay the bank, the buyer is the one in trouble.
@@bergmanoswell879The bank is the one who wants that 40k which they know the dealer has. The bank is the one with lawyers sitting around. If they've got time to tickle themselves they've got time to litigate on behalf of their customer, the buyer. They can get that 40k back sooner, or choose to maybe maybe not get the money back by harassing their customer. A smart bank would be happy to get their money back, a lazy bank will be tickling themselves trying to do as little for their customer as possible.
NOW the dealership wants to "make it right". Additionally, I love when they excuse themselves by saying, "this never happened beforr", as if that means anything.
So they are saying it might happen again?
"This never happened before...that you know of!
I think they meant "we have never been caught doing this before"
Well if it's something you never delt with before you should talk to your lawyer. I don't believe any lawyer would tell them to try and pull what they did.
Remember as much as we love to hate lawyers, they aren't only there to get us out of trouble but also to prevent us from getting into trouble.
@@JCGver I love attorneys...knowledge is POWER. Isn't that why we're all here in the first place?
Nice to hear Steve talking so passionately about his specific area of expertise.
"I sued him so often, we became friends." 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Guy sues dealership, dealership sues woman who sold it, woman sues the person SHE bought it from... And lawyers get paid all down the chain.
The system works as our masters intended.
@@MonkeyJedi99 When there's a chain of crime, that's what naturally happens. Everyone in the chain is going to claim they had no idea it was stolen, even the thief. It's how the system has to work, to get to the bottom of it since it didn't pop up earlier in the chain.
Yep they both made money! Why wouldn't they?
The real crime here is that a 20 year old is getting a $40,000 dollar loan on a used truck.
You brought to mind the time I ordered a recliner chair with standing assistance for my mother-in-law. After putting it together I named it my Blood, Sweat and Tears chair, literally. I was warned. The customer comments said that 4 stars for comfort, 1 star for ease of assembly and 5 stars for return policy. I won the battle but eventually lost a big toe nail in the process. It could have been a much better experience if their assembly instructions were done in the correct order.
I wouldn't pay a freaking penny take me to court and tell the judge and jury how I won't pay for something that's stolen.
once it's on your credit report it never goes away . even if you are not at fault , the report says you stopped making payments which would be true.
If you got a loan from a third party to buy it, you would still have to repay the loan even if you were defrauded in the purchase. It is not the loan issuers fault.
@@ronblack7870 that’s why the buyer names the finance company in addition to the dealer in the lawsuit.
@@Tugela60 that’s why you name the finance company in addition to the dealership in the lawsuit. This 20 year old kid has a slam dunk case. The dealership is going to be forced to repay every penny this kid is out and the dealership will be made to repay the lender.
@@brianwatson6002 The lender did not give the loan to the dealer, they gave it to the buyer. It is not the lenders responsibility to fix the buyers mistakes, that is the buyers responsibility. The lender has a contract with the buyer, not the vendor, meaning they have no standing to sue the vendor.
The buyer obtained a loan from the lender, secured with property he did not actually own. That means the loan is effectively unsecured, but the buyer still needs to pay it back or the lender could go after any other assets the buyer might own. Being unsecured does not mean the loan magically goes away or that some third party is liable for it.
Sh*t rolls downhill, the dealer obviously either didn't do their due diligence or hoped no one would notice. To save face they should have made this guy whole then work it out on their end. Now, how many potential customers have they lost, ridiculous.
Yeah, a fake VIN should have absolutely set off red flags. The thieves might have put on a VIN for a similar vehicle, but records should have shown it in a different area. Plus they could have verified the title with the state that issued it.
The dealer didn't do their due diligence (in the best case scenario) and now they're passing it off to someone who had less opportunity, knowledge, and capability to do the kind of checking they should have done. Any court should see that they held the power in negotiations to be able to sway things in their favor and would likely rule in the buyer's favor.
This is why dealerships have a bad rep. They really don’t care about the customer in my opinion.
They're not called stealerships for nothing.
Dealership owes him a lot of $$$. They have his older vehicle and have a fiduciary responsibility to the customer… and that’s the LAW! As a dealer it’s in all the laws/paperwork/application when you get your license.
I think they know this. I believe they are stalling; hoping to get paid before having to pay.
So let me get this straight... The dealership sold stolen goods they didn't have good title to and claim they don't have to make their victim whole.....
Pretty much
They know they're liable. They all do this on the off chance the victim falls for their lie. It's all about hoping to save a few dollars.
In my experience sometimes this is also done because the debtor doesn’t have the cash on hand.
The Dealer should be criminally charged.
Why would the DEALERSHIP not know that this was a 2017 and not a 2019 truck? One would think that the dealership would know enough about trucks to know that the truck was not the right year.
Agreed. That is incredible that a used car manager couldn’t tell the difference. Did they even bother to look at the truck before acquiring it?
Exactly. Why didn’t the dealer hook up a scan tool to check the vehicle for system faults before buying it? Make sure there was nothing questionable or suspicious being reported by the car’s computer. That should have turned up immediately that the VIN in the window didn’t match the VIN stored in the computer’s memory. It’s called due diligence, and a licensed (professional) car dealer whose sole purpose and existence is trading and selling cars shouldn’t have to be forced to do things like this to both protect themselves and their customers.
A truck is a truck. How are you supposed to be able to tell how old it is just by looking?
every model year has changes and differences.. a dealer is in the business of knowing this
@@davidh9638well I mean they sell trucks, they should know the difference between the trucks you are selling.
2. Part of taking a vehicle in on a trade is reviewing the car/truck mechanically to assess how valuable it is (what kind of repairs it needs etc) if the vehicle is newer then 1995 it will have an OBD2 port. It allows a scan tool to hook up to the vehicle which reports information such as vin, trim, and specific mechanical data.
On a vehicle that is from 2017 it will have that info, the dealership has much better scan tools then the 20 dollar special from Walmart. It's very easy for them to check
Hyvää päivää.
Thank you Steve.
I would just not payments. What is the bank going to do...repo the truck?
They can ruin your credit score. Y'know, the fake numbers *that didn't even exist the year I was born!!!*
Yeah, same. But he traded in his old truck as part of the deal so he's out any equity he may have had in that... and his credit is going to be toast. At 20 yrs old, that's the last thing you need on there.
@@ianbattles7290 listen at about 6 minute mark..
Sue you for the balance....
He can dispute the marks against his credit report.
The lawmakers should make sure the statute of limitations on suing the seller is no shorter than statute on seizing the stolen car.
I worked as a tech for a dealership years ago that had that problem. They sold a custom van, a few days later it was back on a lift with cops all over it. Turned out it was stolen. They had to give him his old car and his money back. Interestingly, it had been stolen years ago, the insurance had settled, and it had been sold and registered two or three times since in two different states and no one caught it! The VIN had been altered as you mentioned, but they didn't alter all the copies on the van! I don't know what happened to the van, but it probably went to the insurance company since they had settled with the real owner.
I actually appreciate the commercial.
Just had back surgery 2 weeks ago and looking at a spinal fusion of L3-L5 in the near future. Already have a new knee, hip, left shoulder, and right shoulder this fall. This chair looks like a good option.
almost reminds me of National Lampoon's Vacation... Chevy Chase's character trades in the old car. He sees the new car and wants to reject the car, but the dealer has already crushed the trade-in.
I recently purchased a chair like the one you advertise. No heat or massage but I've got blankets. Not cheap but worth every penny. Good for sleeping.
Shouldn’t insurance come into the picture at some point?
why? Insurance is for damage to a car, not fraud
Only if the insurance covered that situation, which I'm guessing there is not currently title insurance for cars like there is real estate. If this keeps happening, it will probably become a thing.
@@Rashnak66 you can get theft covered so you aren't making payments for a vehicle you don't possess. anymore.
@@carboncopy4183 Insurance companies make profit by receiving premiums and not playing claims. They are NOT, out of the goodness of their "heart", going to pay for an uncovered situation. I'm sure this situation would not meet the definition of "theft" as far as the insurance policy is concerned.
@@Rashnak66not only for damage.
I have seen terms in Bank agreements that essentially permit the bank to claw funds from ones savings or checking if they fail to make payments on a loan from same bank. I keep this in mind for my savings so that if I ever do get into financial difficulty, my savings is not drained by the bank when i urgently need it for a liver transplant or such. I don't borrow or save in same bank.
I live in the area. I’m watching this one closely because I am a bank loan officer/vice president. This will be a teaching point for years to come.
Why is the dealership not responsible for selling stolen goods,a private citizen would be?
It is time for title insurance on vehicle contracts . My son lost a car because the dealer bankrupted and didn't pay the auction yard .His father in law lost a truck used in his business purchased from the same dealer. The police pulled over my daughter in law for a stollen car towed it and left her standing on the road .
"titling it as a 2019 when it's actually a 2017; the VIN wouldn't reveal that..."
Yes it would, unless it was from before the 80s. In 1981 the VIN was standardized in the US for all cars sold in the US and the 10th digit represents the year of the vehicle.
Perfect follow-up to the recovered classic car story yesterday. A real world example of what you said coukd happen.
This is where I live. The dealership is toast if they don't make this right!
As soon as they would have told me to kick rocks, I’d say I’ll be calling all of the local tv stations news departments and showing them that you sold me a stolen car and aren’t willing to make it right.
@@brianwatson6002 not only did they sell him a stolen truck, they stole HIS truck because he traded in his 2017 truck!!!
That was a very well-done ad for the chair; sincere, precise and informative. I'd buy!
Let the loan company repo the truck. Just call the company say you aren't able to make the payments and tell them where they can find the truck. Sit back and watch the chaos.
Your a great story teller. Thanks for sharing. Been watching you for years
Why isn't the credit company fighting this with him? If he were to stop payments, they would be out of pocket. My friend bought an RS6 which was advertised as being in immaculate condition. He was very specific that he wanted the body- and paintwork to be perfect, which they claimed it was and it appeared to the untrained eye to be just that. He had a bodywork guy to apply ceramic coating to the car and the tech gave my friend the bad news that it had been in an accident and that the fix was done poorly. So, with that, he called the dealer to ask for remedial work to bring it up to the stadard expected, but the dealer said no. So my mate rang the credit company and they got the repairs done and then sent the dealer the bill. The dealer paid it because he knows who butters his bread.
Lenders are not going to do that, your buddy was making it up.
I forgot to say, this is in Britain. It strikes me as odd that the same isn't done in America as it makes sense as the finance company technically owns the car and it was defective at purchase. Thanks for calling my mate a liar though. I really appreciate it.
@@phoenixh87 Lenders usually do stand with the buyer in the USA for car sales. If this guy speaks to the lender, assuming it's a big bank or credit union (which it probably is for a truck being sold for over $40,000), this guy shouldn't have much trouble getting them to go after the dealership. Lenders do not like to be associated with stolen vehicles.
As a long time dealer I check the VIN in several places a well as the engine number. And check for obvious repairs or modifications. The update in sheetmetal and or grilles etc is usually fairly easy to spot.
In close to 50 years I have never bought a stolen car. I have however had too many cars checked by Transport or the Police that I have checked for financial encumberances. Generally ones paid out that later come up as encumbered. Worse encumbered to the financial institution that actally sold it via auction. And yes this has cost me sales
Nearly bought a couple tat turned out to be defected which is also supposed to show as an encumberance
Why isn't there a process for just unrolling the entire thing until the truck gets back to its owner. Dealer gives the money back to the buyer with interest, and gets back the traded in truck because it was acquired improperly and they should have had no right to sell it. The lady who sold the truck to the dealership gives the money back. Etc. seems like it should just be a default process that doesn't tie up the courts.
You would think. But it absolutely would require court enforcement. Someone, somewhere in the chain, would refuse, saying that they aren't responsible because they acted in good faith. Or they don't have the money. Or it's not their problem. Or they just don't want to.
What is wrong with that idea is the part about the buyer getting back his trade in. The person who bought the trade in did so in good faith, there was no problem with the paper on the trade in. The only way the buyer of the stolen truck gets his trade in back is if someone can persuade the buyer of the trade in to sell it back. That buyer may have invested in improvements or repairs, loan costs, etc., may also have traded something, or just may like it and not want to sell for any reasonable price. I agree the person who bought the stolen vehicle should obviously be compensated for loss of the vehicle he traded but that vehicle is now gone forever and ain't ever coming back to the previous owner.
@@kimlground206 Ah, but the vehicle was traded in under false pretenses. Yes, everyone acted in good faith, but it was understood that the trade-in would go toward a vehicle that the dealer was allowed to sell.
I don't know if this argument would hold up in court, but it seems to be the obvious argument to make.
Money solves all issues, and the kid agreed to relinquish ownership of the trade in voluntarily with no expectation to ever see it again. The amount of potential issues involved in rolling back all deals deals made just isn't feasible.
For example, what if the kid doesn't get the trade in back in the same condition it was when he handed the keys to the dealer? What if it was wrecked? What about any loans on it that were paid off? What about the trade in of the person buying the kid's trade in? And on and on...
@@silverhurst7241 Money distributed properly would go a long way toward making everyone whole but no matter how it works out the only ones walking away smiling will be the lawyers.
I sit through the add because I want to hear the quip at the end.
Ben moves to the rear of the 3rd mike on our right for the chair advert.
And at the very end of the ad, Ben is behind the low flying owl sign
Is this like... a toy or prop called "ben"? Otherwise, why'u do dis?
@@andrewvirtue5048 Yes. Ben is a US $100 bill who moves around the set. In this video he has 3 locations but is usually just in 1.
I know someone who sold a motorcycle which didn't have the correct title with it. It changed hands 7 more times from his possession before someone looked at the serial number and discovered the discrepancy. Since it had never left the state, the state police tracked back through all the 'owners' quickly and told this guy "either you prove to me where you got it from or you pay what the last guy paid for it- of you go to jail". He couldn't prove where he got it from so he had to pay. Plus the Cop told him that the serial number on the bike and the title were going to be red-flagged in the system so if either came up for titling again he was going to have to explain things or he'd be jailed for fraud.
From that I've learned to always have legal proof of where you acquired something from so you don't end up as the last guy holding the bag, and to check serial numbers and all paperwork carefully before you lay out one dime of money on anything.
The seller should be on the hook for this, and the bank or loan service should let the buyer off the hook when he/she couldn't have known.
It is not the lenders fault, they issued the loan in good faith. They did not purchase the vehicle, the buyer did. The buyer has to sue the dealer to recover the money.
@@Tugela60 Still, they shouldn't make the buyer pay back money the dealer now owes them.
@ColtonRMagby No, the dealer owes the buyer, and the buyer owes the lender. There is no reason why the lender has to take responsibility for the buyers mistakes.
@@ColtonRMagby The lender has no contract with the dealer, they have no grounds to sue them. The buyer is the one who took out the loan, that is the person the lender has a contract with.
@@Tugela60 The dealer failed to fact check their inventory, thus making the purchase illegitimate.
That is an excellent question. And the answer is: Only one way to find out.
If you buy anything stollen and you do so unknowing, then you are not obligated to honor such contract. There is no legal contract because selling something stollen is illegal and therefore the contract is null and void. So, the seller is obligated to repay the buyer any money it has collected for the sale of such goods that was illegally sold, including large items like vehicles. If it purchased such stollen items for resale the seller has to go and sort it out with the original source. If it acquired the items for resale mistakenly the error can't be transferred to someone else. The moment the item is identified as stollen the error should be traced back to the source and each "passer on" should be obligated to return all funds it received in the sale of such item. So, If I was the buyer and I unknowingly found out that the item I just purchased is stollen, first I must report it to police and prove that I legally acquired it. The seller then has to refund me the value lost. That seller then can go and get refunded by its source. Any loses that are caused by the transaction should be paid by the seller and/or it's insurance. That is how I think the proper way of dealing with transactions involving items of this nature. This way you are very cautious that an item of this nature is more hassle than benefit to you if you are reckless with what you retail with. And hopefully this type of transactions is stopped early on, it's value because of it is diminished, helping end or reduce theft because of its loss of value. I also think it is a very ethical way to deal with it.
Another great video. Learned so much!
A good recliner is a sleeping aid. 😂
I don't even need the chair, but I still enjoy hearing you talk about it and pretty much everything lol 😂 That's when you know you have a true gift for public speaking 👏 .
Arrest the dealership for selling stolen goods.
they will if it was us WTF RIGHT !
Seriously, you can't buy lawn furniture on Craigslist without the cops trying to nail you for receipt of stolen goods.
Completely agree. Dealership should be held criminally for profiting off stolen goods. If it was a pawn shop, you KNOW criminal charges would be filed.
"be prepared for a short ad at the end of the video" 😂 never change Steve!!! I love it.
Ben is shading the Batmobile. Steve's RHS
And later at 10:18 Ben is slid behind the a tag behind the 8th mic from the left.
@@BenLeitch But we're only at 8 minutes...😉😁
The VIN can also be checked with a generic OBD2 scan tool. The pcm/ecm has a VIN assigned to it that should match the VIN tag on the dash or door jamb. On newer vehicles like the one in this video, the VIN is stored in all modules.
So buyer of truck says: give me my money back you sold me a stolen truck.
Used car dealer says: So what we aren't giving you your money or old truck back.
That's when the lawsuit gets filed.
@@davidh9638 Humorist intent on my post.
I learned to take my ODB2 reader any time I buy a vehicle. One of the things it does is check the vin, then I look at the tag in the windshield, if they don't match, I walk away.
I would love it if a) Steve started using a laugh track, and b) an on screen counter of ‘People say Steve…’.
Steve you’re great and I love your videos.
I don't think the laugh track is a good idea. But the on-screen counter might be good.
Let’s go old school 😂
At about 3 am multiable police agencies showed up at the house across the street and towed away the toyota pickup my neighbor had purchased from a private party. He could not prove the seller knew it was stolen. A group of men would go to an insurance auction and buy a totaled vehicle then drive around in a tow truck to steal a similar vehicle and switch the VIN. He latter bought the same truck from the insurance company that was now the legal owner.
Good morning
Good morning!
Great video Steve!! So good I even stayed around for the ad at the end. We have the same rug! And sox.. Not sure what to think about that 🤔
Ben’s surfing the Batmobile.
POI Don't say the above in the manner of Hanging Ten Toes (but without the Toes), auto delete unless Steve thinks about it...
Mornin' Bill
The chair sounds a bit like our massage chairs here in Japan... really fantastic.
Thanks as always.
Ben on back of the Batmobile.
Ben has been thrown aside by Batman.
One could say, he's been ben over.
He bought a truck.
Some time later, someone took his truck away without his permission and will not give it back?
File a stolen truck report. Send copy to insurance.
Ben off on a caper with Batman and Robin, Steve's RHS
Nice crowd today. Must be the good weather.
G’nite Bob.
OK< Ben’s gone sailing during the advertisement.
@@user-no1cares I thought he was shrinking...
@@Bobs-Wrigles5555 Or wiped out surfing the Batmobile.
@@user-no1cares I hated it when that happened, salt water (and some sand) comes out of your sinuses hours later
I usually skip the ads, I must admit, but, when this one started, I had to check it out! I wish I had been aware of it/it had existed a couple of years ago when I bought a new chair for my elderly mother! I may still have to see if I can scrounge up the extra $500!
2 easily accessible vin numbers A pillar and B pillar Open the driver door look towards bottom of pillar there is a tag that has vin and a bunch more info about vehicle
Great video! Thanks for the heads-up on the chair, I currently find myself in the market!
Check window, door, underhood, floorpan (especially on manual trans vehicle), & more.
Dealers can use a OBD2 scanner for accurate mileage and a VIN, in addition to the stamped VINs. Takes less than 5 minutes.
Yes Mr Lehto, it's in East Tennessee.
Now I wish I needed a chair. That "less than $500" got my attention. I did buy one of their desks some months ago and it's great.
So, does anyone watch through Steve Lehto's advertisement at the almost end of some of his videos? Yes, I usually do.
This actually happened to me. Bought 25K from a Ford Dealer. Two months later the DPS shows up and says this is stolen. The daughter of the dealership owner jacked the truck. They filed a stolen report. She brought the truck back a few months later. They got paid by insurance but didn't tell insurance or police it was not stolen. Got all worked out, but I had to go down to the dealership and throw a shit fit. Had to go to small claims court. Judge talked smack to me, but DPS stood up for me said, no, this is legit.
"The bank knows. The language is in an agreement *_THEY_* drafted"
Why would they do that?
It's not going to be because they care about the rights of ...anyone...
Are they forced to by law? Does it make it cheaper for them in court?
I am a mechanic. Yes the VIN does contain the year make and modle with in the code.
I paid over a grand for a custom fit lift chair for my Mother over a decade ago. It was a nice chair she really liked it.
I sold used cars for four years, and I don't know of any cases where we checked to confirm all VINs on a car matched. We'd just take the vehicle ID from the plate near the windshield A-pillar and that would be the end of it. This just isn't the sort of thing that normally raises suspicion. It's not easy swapping a VIN plate. You'd need to remove the dashboard or the windshield, you'd need to undo the existing VIN plate, and you would need to replace everything so expertly that it would withstand a visual inspection. The chance that a VIN plate has been swapped is about as low as the chance that you will find a bag of money hidden under the backseat. So I can't blame a dealership for failing to check the other places where the VIN is stamped to confirm that the numbers and letters match. It's just not normal protocol. HOWEVER, the dealership was remiss for its failure to discover that the VIN was issued in the wrong year -- it should have been able to tell the truck was a 2017 model, not a 2019. So I fault the dealer for a lack of due diligence, but I think the lawsuit's reasoning is incorrect.
Mr. Lehto,
I believe you left out an important detail in your explanation of why lenders don't get paid. When a lender is assigned the loan as part of the purchase contract, you are 100% correct, I as a lender cannot collect on an invalid purchase contract. That said, if I as a lender write a loan independent of the initial purchase (such as a refinance or cash-pay to the dealer) in which I'm un-involved in the purchase transaction, I as a lender have the absolute right to collect from that borrower, even if the underlying collateral ends up being totaled, invalid, or fraudulently obtained.
I don't understand why the statute of limitations would allow the stolen vehicle to be recovered/seized for a longer period of time than it would allow the person who was sold the stolen vehicle to sue whoever stole it from them.
Is there am issue with one of these SOLs tolling but the other not (eg because a diligent owner could have determined the vehicle was stolen)?
If there's a statute of limitations, why doesn't it apply to the truck?
My answer is no dealer's do get scammed and the driver shouldn't be on the hook the driver get his money back or should get that money applied to a different vehicle on their lot with zero negative affect on their credit but on time payments should boost the drivers credit score. And getting credit pulled for a replacement vehicle shouldn't affect their score.
It should be encumbant upon a dealer to do a VIN confirmation inspection before selling a car.
You mentioned in the earlier part of the article that the buyer traded in his 2017 truck toward the purchase of the "2019" which was proved later to be a 2017, so through subrogation the buyer has full equitable interest in the original truck once the transaction is voided and loan payments are terminated.
The dealership should know the difference between a 2017 and a 2019 truck by looking at available color scheme, glass, trim, lighting (like tail light configuration), and options. At the least, they were negligent. At worst, they noticed the discrepancy sometime after they purchased it, and sold it on regardless, knowing the year of the truck didn't match the title.
In New Zealand if you buy a stolen vehicle from a licensed motor vehicle dealer then they’re responsible for refunding the costs include.
Also in New Zealand, most vehicles do not have a VIN number visible in the front pillar/windscreen.
One car has the VIN on the firewall in such a way as to do significant damage to the firewall.
One thing not mentioned is his trade-in. If it was sold, can he get it returned? I would like to hear any updates on this one.
Thanks for seeking out these clever schemes and posting them, 😆 the creativity people come up with to get out of unfair (in their mind) situations is entertaining as hell plus i know to check the titles condition before purchase, as well as having a mechanic with me when i buy.
yes you purchased so you pay the bill. hope it was insured then you get payment.
Actually, they're able to pull a vin off the ecu. Police have vehicle scanners that hook up to the ecu. Also, some shops that are connected to the states, smog, ect. Are required to up load data.
Don't dealers run a computer scan on the cars they buy or take as trade in to check the condition and confirm identity?
Worked for a company involved in this type of situation. It dragged out for years, the buyer claiming they invested much more money in the vehicle before it was seized than the seller thought was believable.
There is also an E vin that can be pulled up in the obd data ... I'm sure it can be messed with also but its often overlooked.
So... I do insurance. Doesn't the dealer have Title Insurance for... exactly this scenario? Or is there an exclusion that kicked in because they failed to do their job and check all the vins?
The dealership should’ve known a fraud because they were multiple red flags here. I will hope Steve you report on this that the purchaser won his lawsuit.