Well, I found a vehicle that I want to purchase which has 35k miles on it. I checked out the dealer’s website and it was listed as a manufacturer buyback. I contacted the dealer and they stated that the customer complained of a power issue. Chrysler took the vehicle back and couldn’t find any issue with the car whatsoever. He eluded to the fact that this car came from Cali and that they have really loose lemon laws. A 1 year bumper to bumper warranty is included in addition to a 3 day no questions asked return policy. Due to it being titled as a lemon, I obviously have my concerns; one being reliability and 2 being resale value.
Anyone have experience in this regard? Any input is appreciated.
Edit: The vehicle was reacquired by Chrysler when the odometer read 30k miles.
Have you researched the general reliability/major known issues with this vehicle?
So long ago that it’s probably not even worth while as a data point, but in the 1980s I bought a Chevy “Big 10” 6-cylinder pick up truck that was a dealer return. I think it had about 6,000 miles on it. Anyway, by 20,000 miles the rings were shot, it was belching blue smoke and the headliner was falling down. Complete lemon, but at the time I was a: lots younger and more naive and b: there was no internet to speak of, so I couldn’t look shit up.
It is true that there is a bit of a cottage industry of lawyers who specialize in abusing California’s generous lemon laws. I probably wouldn’t have any problem buying the car after the normal due diligence, but the I would probably expect a pretty good discount. You need to do some research on what the title issues will be with the car. Definitely do not take the dealer’s word for it!
In California, when a dealer has to buy back a car, the title is branded as a “lemon law buyback.” Most states don’t do that, though, so you’ll have to figure out what (if anything) your state will put on the title. Most likely, you’ll just get a clear title but I’d definitely double and triple check with the local DMV that the “lemon” brand won’t turn into a “salvage” or “rebuild” brand when it crosses the state line.
Even if you do just get a clear title, in these days of CarFax the buyback is going to have a pretty detrimental effect on the resale value, so I’d expect a discount reflecting that.
Yeah, while the dealer was up front about it being a manufacturer buyback, I checked the carfax which stated the issue and that mark will always be with the vehicle. For resale purposes, they better discount it decently, otherwise I won’t entertain this purchase.
If you’re buying this car with intent to resell, I’d skip it. If you’re buying the car with the intent of driving it until the transmission falls out (which is how I have personally approached all my vehicle purchases), then go for it.
Personally I wouldn’t trust Chrysler for buyback vehicles as far as I can throw them. The reason I say that is in 2001 my now ex-wife and I purchased a brand new Jeep Grand Cherokee. We had major problems with it, the most serious being the brakes. Every 5,000 miles or so the brakes would need the rotors either turned or replaced as they would either warp or have excess wear on them. It was so bad the car would vibrate during braking Like the front end was going to come off. We would take it in, have the rotors either replaced it turned and a few thousand miles later they would start again. It took almost a year of “negotiating” with Chrysler before they agreed to take the Jeep back under the lemon law. The problem was never corrected, in fact the Chrysler techs could never identify the problem.
After about six months after they took it back I got curious and ran a check on the vin number and discovered that Chrysler moved the Jeep to another state and resold it. What they should have done is crushed the pos. I feel terrible for the new owner, because I’m sure what Chrysler did was put new rotors on the Jeep, so when the new owners took it for a test drive it was fine. I’m sure they were very excited that they were able to purchase a new looking Grand Cherokee for a good price. But I know a few thousand miles after they drove it off the dealers lot the brakes started to vibrate. They would have taken it back to the dealer, the dealer would have turned the rotors and a few thousand miles later the problem would be back again.
Long story short is that Chrysler screwed another person with this defective vehicle. Unless you could get it in writing that whatever the problem was has been completely fixed I wouldn’t chance it. If it was like my Jeep the problem might appear to be solved only to crop back up a few months after you buy it. Buyer beware.
On the other hand, it’s perfectly possible that they sold the car to another dealer who did manage to fix it. Lemon laws are really more about dealership service departments than they are about cars. The whole idea of a “lemon” as in one systematically flawed example of an otherwise reliable model is generally a myth. Most lemon law claims are like yours; it’s essentially one unusual problem that your local dealer couldn’t fix after repeated attempts. It’s usually more of an issue of the local dealer lacking the expertise and/or motivation to actually troubleshoot and fix the problem than it is any fundamental deficiency in the car.