Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA)
I arrived with a quote estimate which I got from sthmazda's website through email. I provided this email to my salesman, who drafts up a better preliminary quote. The moment the pen touches the paper, and I am about to sign, sales manager Ryan Mcgehee conveniently comes around the corner to “save the day.” Ryan asks me “hey man, where did you get that APR and loan term from? Was it sthmazda.com?” I replied, “yes,” and show him the email. After running my credit, I am awarded competitive APRs. Ryan Mcgehee did not like this and feeds me absolute nonsense. He says “Since the car isn’t here, I don’t want you to sign because what if it comes broken in half from being transported overseas? Then you would say to me, ‘Ryan this isn’t my car,’ and then I would have to show you the papers you signed.” First of all, it is either Mazda (the manufacturer) or the transportation company’s liability, not the dealership nor mine. Additionally, as a new car purchaser, we are protected by Colorado Lemon Law. Second, if the car was split in half, no dealership would accept it as it would breach contract and fail the inspection.
As the final cherry on top, I was presented two different pieces of paper with varying rates and terms. I encircled my choices and signed these papers on 12/07/2023. So, not only is my credit lowered from the hard pull, but I have a written and oral “guarantee” from Ryan Mcgehee. A “guarantee,” as defined in section 6-1-708 clause (I) in the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA): “A person engages in deceptive trade practice when such person: Guarantees to a purchaser or lessee of a motor vehicle or used motor vehicle who conditions such purchase or lease on the approval of a consumer credit transaction as defined in section 5-1-301 (12), C.R.S., that such purchaser or lessee has been approved for a consumer credit transaction if such approval is not final. 'Guarantee' means a written document or oral representation between the purchaser or lessee and the person selling or leasing the vehicle that leads such purchaser or lessee to a reasonable good faith belief that the financing of such vehicle is certain.”
Ryan Mcgehee then stated, “I am happy to put your name down and take your $1,000 deposit to hold it.” This was a clear indication of a reasonable good faith belief that financing is certain. Only for Ryan Mcgehee to then renege my guarantee and mention the “split in half” scenario. His logic: “The approval is only valid for 30 days and the car isn’t here, so I will have to re-run it once it is here.” But, where is the logic in that? I stated, after he ran my (not final) approval, I will buy today within this 30-day window. A willing buyer! But, Ryan Mcgehee says “I can’t let you sign it.” Due to this, Ryan Mcgehee directly caused me punitive damages through deceptive trade practices after reneging on a reasonable good faith “guarantee,” wasting 3 hours, temporarily lowering my credit, and Uber fees.
The papers from earlier were not “just a piece of paper,” as Ryan Mcgehee and one of his colleagues were discussing; making sure I was in earshot after I had walked back from the washroom. Now, I will have a temporarily lowered credit score and will have to rent a car in the interim since I will theoretically get a lower approval after this hard pull. Seems like Ryan Mcgehee should pay for this rental. Predatory and deceptive sales practices such as Ryan Mcgehee’s are what has led to the auto industry bubble. Sales in this decade are formed from relationship building, not trying to screw over buyers by providing them a reasonable good faith “guarantee,” and then reneging because he wants to sell it to someone who has a lower approval so that the buyer has to pay more and Ryan Mcgehee gets a larger commission. After all, it is all about the bottom line, right?
Drivers, know your rights.