Must we only do what is necessary?
In order to maximize benefit for all, the seller keeps his money. Why should he give it to the buyers when it is to his detriment, the buyers’ detriment, and to the detriment of whoever has to deal with the buyers’ newly-fed sense of entitlement in the future?
Personally, I believe it is immoral for the buyers to even ask for the money. They had every opportunity to examine the car and knew they were buying as-is. That means the car’s problems are now theirs to solve.
Not to even mention - there’s a rather large difference between a Corolla and a Van
It is not necessary to “teach” them anything. They will learn something from this experience without anyone “teaching” them anything. We all learn from our experiences. It is the main way folks learn anything.
I have bought and sold many rigs. All of them are sold “as is where is”. I have never even thought about asking a Previous Owner (PO) for some $$ back after a breakdown of a used car. That is nonsense.
If the OP as a PO, does give these “nice young men” back some $$, then she has created an experience that leads them to believe that “as is where is” means nothing. Then when these “nice young men” buy a used car from me, and it breaks down. They now assume that I as the PO, will be OK with them asking for some $$ back. What an awakening for them when I tell them no dice, it was “as is where is”, too bad so sad.
Maybe next time they will invest in a pre-purchase check out by a qualified mechanic. I hope so. It is the best insurance that they can buy. I will often split the cost of one with a young, first time, car buyer. Yes, I do that to “teach” them something. Does that seem wrong to you? I hope not.
If “a couple of young guys” (per the OP) cannot commit $2000-2500 combined per year towards maintaining and insuring a vehicle, no matter if it’s leased, used, or new, then they cannot afford it, and they shouldn’t have bought it.
And if you cannot afford a car, you bum a ride with someone, take the bus, or walk. Those are your options if you are “poor” in the sense that you are talking. Those are your options if you have managed to ruin your credit by the age of 25.
We ALL know the risks of buying a 14-year old van. You are almost guaranteed that it’s going to need major repairs sooner rather than later. That is why it was priced at $1800 v. the $28,000 they’d have to come up with if they wanted to buy it new.
The OPer priced it fairly, provided the opportunity for them to pay a mechanic to look at it, and had no knowledge that the transmission would need to be replaced in 30 days. He/she did NOTHING wrong, and he/she has no moral obligation to pay one dime to the buyers toward repairs.
P.S. And if the OPer is really considering helping them out, my advice is to insist on a mechanics’ receipt that includes the VIN. Just because they’re allegedly so poor that they couldn’t scrape together $1800 doesn’t mean that they’re honest. It could very well be a scam.
I wouldn’t be so definite about that. For instance:
Note that this applies to private sales as well as dealers.
Now, even if the OP was in Mass., this probably wouldn’t apply to the OP’s situation because of the timing. And I think it’s unlikely that the OP’s jurisdiction has a law that applies to their particular situation, but it’s certainly not impossible that the OP is legally obligated to take the van back and refund the buyer’s money.
A couple of young guys buying an old van together sounds like they were planning to use it as a work truck. If that’s the case, taking a bus (nonexistent in many areas), walking, etc. are not viable alternatives. It’s not like one can lug rolls of carpet or boxes of tools without a vehicle.
The van’s seller is not responsible for how these guys get around though.
A leased car at $200 per month is $2400 a year just in car payments. Then add in the price difference for getting full coverage (liabilty,comprehensive ,collision and GAP*) on a vehicle vs liabilty only. Depending on the price of the insurance, you’re talking about thousands more per year in cash outlays for a leased vehicle ( my son pays $1800 a year for liabilty insurance. He doesn’t have a bad driving record but he’s young and a relativley new driver) And at the end of the lease, you have nothing to show for the thousands you’ve paid .
Which doesn't mean leasing or buying new can't be your best option - but there are an awful lot of people who can afford to maintain a series of cheap used cars ( you don't put a new engine or transmission into a car you paid $900 for - you get rid of it and move on to the next beater) who can't afford to lease. Might it be more expensive in the long run? Yes, but one part of poverty is having to take the path that is more expensive in the long run but requires less cash in the short run - it's not just about cars.
- GAP insurance covers the difference between hte balance owed and the book value of the vehicle
Massachusetts’ Lemon Aid law seems to apply only to the cost of correcting “emissions and safety” problems exceeding 10% of the purchase price of the vehicle, not general mechanical problems.
Never suggested otherwise. But in your brilliant discussion discussion of leasing, you didn’t confine your suggestion to the two guys in the OP. You suggested leasing, and argued that this demonstrated that “there are options for poor people who really need a car.”
By “‘poor’ in the sense that you are talking,” you mean actually poor, right? If YOU don’t mean poor, then don’t fucking use the word poor.
Again, show me where i ever suggested otherwise. Nothing in my post even hinted that the OP did the wrong thing. In fact, earlier in the thread, i explicitly said that i don’t think the OP has an obligation to help them.
My response was confined to addressing your asinine argument that, if poor people can’t afford a crappy used car, they should just lease a new one instead. I’m sure that your next suggestion will be that, instead of taking out payday loans or auto title loans when they get in a jam, poor people should just use a credit card or apply for a loan from the bank. And why do those stupid poor people go to the ER when they’re sick, anyway? If they’d just buy some good health insurance, they could go to a regular doctor. And what’s with poor people eating junk food? Amirite?
This is the second time you’ve proposed this.
I am by no means an expert but I’m pretty sure swapping out a transmission is a bit more complicated than changing the windshield wiper blades.
From this website here some of the steps involved for removing the transmission are:
Not exactly the proverbial piece of cake.
I am going to assume that since you equate this with nothing more than “getting one’s hands dirty” you are either a certified, master mechanic or you have no idea as to what you are talking about.
It is exactly because I am NOT a “certified master mechanic” that I am saying this.
I am not proposing that they rebuild the transmission or that it will be a piece of cake, but I’ve rebuilt engines just following instructions, with no formal training or prior experience. Perhaps one of these fellows has a friend or relative to help guide them. Replacing a part does not require a professional level of mechanical experience.
Okay, Einstein. You have $1800 that you scraped together with your best friend to go towards buying a vehicle. You don’t have one dime extra to pay for repairs, and you need a reliable car, presumably so that you can work.
-
You sure as shit qualify as being labeled “poor” by virtue of only having $900 to your name and zero extra left to pay for emergencies like car repairs.
-
Buying a 14 year old van is one option, but it’s very precarious because a 14 year old van is practically guaranteed to break down sooner rather than later. And if that happens, you are royally screwed, because you paid your last $1800 toward a van that no longer works and has lost nearly all of its value, no bank will lend you money for repairs on a 14 year old vehicle, and you don’t even have a DP to qualify for a lease.
Wouldn’t a better option have been for them to take the $1800 and put it down on a younger used car, and make monthly payments? Or, yes, even to put the $1800 down on a new leased car? I certainly think so.
Just as there are different degrees of wealth, there are different degrees of poor. And not all poor people are poverty stricken. My daughter, 22, is poor. She made ends meet by living with 3 other girls in a 2 bdrm apartment in a less than swanky neighborhood for the last two years. She doesn’t have a smart phone. She’s poor enough that she could qualify for subsidized housing. Could she afford a $3000 car repair bill? Nope. Could she afford $150-200 per month to a lease a car? Yes, especially if she shared it with someone else.
In fact, her next car will undoubtedly be a leased car until she can get her degree and start making enough money to buy a decent used one.
Welcome to America. Land of the monthly payments.
Thank you for providing actual data. My daughter’s insurance is around $75 per month, but she has a 2001 Honda, so she doesn’t have to pay for full coverage. So let’s assume your son is an average lessee. So he needs to come up with $350 per month for reliable transportation? The buyers in the OP were 2-3 guys buying together. So if they split the cost, we’re talking $175/month + gas… for a brand new car. Perhaps I’m incredibly naive, but that sounds doable to me, even for a person making minimum wage, if you’re young and without dependents.
I absolutely agree. I know many, many people who only look at the monthly payment to determine how much they can afford, and never look at how much they’ve spent overall. And while a lease can be cringe-worthy in terms of wasted money, it does have its place, especially with people who just cannot come up with a big lump sum to buy a decent used car. Because it allows them to work.
Which of your two hypothetical people who’ve struggled to scrape together $1800 has the credit rating that the dealer requires to lease the car on those terms?
Your idea of “poor” seems to be very different from mine.
No , the $150 a month is for liability insurance only. Full coverage on an inexpensive new or leased car would cost him a *minimum *of $5000 per year. So $400 or so a month, minimum for insurance , plus another couple of hundred for a car payment. That’s $600, and we haven’t bought any gas or had an oil change or incurred any excess milage over what’s included in the lease. That’s the main reason hasn’t bought a brand-new car- he has the down payment and can afford the monthly payments but he can’t afford the insurance. I don’t know if he can afford a $3000 repair bill (and I wouldn’t advise him to put that kind of money into his current car), but he can certainly afford to replace this car with another $1000 used car if it comes to that.
And he’s not even “poor”. He’s got a decent full time job, but hasn’t moved out yet so he’s not paying market rent. You seem to be using “poor” to mean “lower middle class” or some such thing with your assumption that people who can’t come up with “a big lump sum” to buy a decent used car can come up with a down payment of $2000 and monthly payments for a leased car. And BTW, it’s not impossible to spend $4000 on a better used car and still have the engine or transmission go within a couple of months.
Well, now you’re talking about a used car, whereas before you were talking about a lease on a new car. Those are not the same thing. At least making payments on a loan for a used car has the benefit of actually leaving them with a car when the loan is paid off, unlike a lease. But earlier you were talking about a new Toyota Corolla.
And even leaving aside the whole question of leases and finances, do you understand the difference between an old van and a new Toyota Corolla?
This is an old van. So is this.
Pop quiz: Is it possible, do you think, that someone in the market for an old van might not actually be very well served by a new Corolla, in terms of what they actually need their vehicle to do?
Even if we assume that every single thing you say about finances is true (hint: it’s not), you have completely failed to take into account the fact that most people who buy old vans do so not because they like the comfort, ride, handling, and cool aerodynamic styling, but because their vehicle needs require the space and carrying capacity of a van.
I don’t know what our young friends intend to do with the van, but i’ll bet dollars to donuts that they need that carrying space for a reason. It could be speakers and amplifiers for their cover band; it could be lawnmowers and garden tools for the business they hope to start; it could be a mattress for getting laid; it could even be large coolers for hiding the body parts from their killing sprees.
And guess what? A Toyota Corolla probably won’t do the trick.
I should add that, as far as i can see, you have still failed to address a key problem confronting poor people: even if a lease or a loan were a better option (and i agree that they can be, for some people), poor people often find those things very hard to get, especially at the sort of payment levels and interest rates that might make financing attractive in the first place.
There was a thread here a little while back where the OP asked for advice regarding her current failing car, and her choices for buying a replacement. She had been offered a loan, but it was at 11.9% interest because her credit wasn’t great.
My wife and i aren’t rich, but when we bought a used car in April, we financed the whole loan (just under $12K), and we got an interest rate of just over 2% because we have decent jobs and solid credit history.
That person with a poor credit history, getting a $12,000 loan like us, would pay about an extra $50 per month, or $600 per year, or $3,000 over the duration of a five-year loan, compared to what my wife and i are paying. That’s incredibly significant if you don’t have much money.