BEWARE of AZ Dealer "JSC Motorcars". How NOT to buy a Ferrari

I never quite understand theses posts. Your friend was obviously induced to buy something based upon false representations. If those representations were materially false and if your friend reasonably relied upon said representations, he should get a estimate regarding the repairs and take them to a lawyer and file a claim, assuming your friend is serious about this issue. If he is just venting through this post and if he is not serious, that's another story.



Good luck either way.

 

Would you marry someone, based on photos and descriptions?

 

Not sure why your friend cannot post here -- "because he's new" doesn't mean anything. He should just join and post.
Alan

 

I'd consider it

 

hehe yeah thats what I did just tell your friend to post here, that simple

 

I've driven 3 scuds at exotics racing - they all had check-engine lights on and various detail issues...

Honestly, the problems you detail are not really that bad given the abuse these cars take. A typical scud at Exotics will run just about non-stop on a busy day. They usually have 2 of them so they can give them a little break. It's Las Vegas...people sweat; the interior takes abuse. However, if they lied or misrepresented things, that is different.

My engine cover was misaligned at some point also and has a rub.

The suspension rattles are somewhat typical. You can tighten things up there and reduce the noise dramatically. Threads on that.

Gas smell is a concern if you think it could actually be a leak.

The engine cover is not CF underneath if that is what you are expecting...it is black paint.

Calipers repainted is unacceptable based on your description.

If you are dissatisfied and feel it was misrepresented, then I would ask them to buy it back. I think you can get a scud with less "work" to be done in the 150s-160s.

Good luck.

 

FWIW, the OP indicated that the car might have come from "Exotics Rental" and not "Exotics Racing" in Las Vegas. I am uncertain if that is a differentiating point or not. I waited a while before posting on this thread, because I wasn't sure if I would or wouldn't.

Regardless, I feel like people buying cars which have a known history of rental use should be a little bit more careful in the process. How on EARTH could an ex-rental car, with "high mileage," be represented as anything close to "excellent condition?" And this is according to the seller and the mechanic? How could you possibly know if they have some sort of relationship or not? It's impossible if you think about the economics:
1. Ex-rental car goes on the market, with rental use disclosed. Immediate hit of 10-15 percent (that's probably conservative).
2. Maintenance history is unknown or otherwise undisclosed. Basically, these cars get fuel, oil changes, and tires. They get the minimum possible investment to keep them in operation. Do they care if, when you get in, the CEL or Gearbox light is on? Nope. Do you care? Not really. Do you drive it ANY different if it's injured? Probably not.
2a. If the maintenance history is unknown, and assumed to be minimal, what motivation would the seller have to "recondition" or otherwise "refurbish" the car prior to sale when the selling price is already going to be relatively low? No motivation - they want their cash / equity back out of the car immediately, regardless of how much that is. Remember, the rental car company is a business. Money tied up in the Scud (to-be-sold) is money that could otherwise be used to buy a new car, which is a revenue stream.

I'm really sorry that this happened to the OP's acquaintance. But, careful due diligence could probably have avoided this situation. "Schedule and laziness" really aren't two reasons in favor of justifying this purchase. They're more like excuses. Sorry, but it seems like the buyer got burned and didn't look carefully after his money on the purchase. The seller was trying to unload a so-so car (and maybe that's generous - the buyer thinks its a dog) and found a hasty buyer - seller wins.

Did the seller misrepresent the car? Maybe - we only have 1 side of the story. Does it happen all the time? YES! Caveat Emptor - buyer beware, right? So many cliches here - "If it's too good to be true, it probably is." also comes to mind.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I never buy a used car without seeing it myself and taking a test drive or ride.

 

+1 on above..

I'll chime in here as mine was perhaps an analogous car. When I bought mine, the only thing that I asked the seller was "does it drive". Granted I had a PPI done by a local shop and he used the term it being a "5-6/10 condition". My 360 was a cheap car with high miles. I didn't care and I knew I would need to "restore it" to its current nice condition (see witness by other FCar owners). He can either restore it and keep it or contest the sell and get a lawyer and sell it back, etc. etc. I chose to restore mine and don't regret it a minute. Alot of the rattles are probably small things to fix. FYI trusting their mechanic did the PPI wasn't too smart. I don't mean to sound accusatory.. we've all been there. But once the money is spent.. it's hard to get it back.

 

No, you are a 100% correct; just trying to help. You have to assume you are about to get screwed if this world unfortunately.

 

+1

 

Can the OP state how much was paid for the car not just what it was listed for?

Value = condition ...and that is context for what you should expect.

 

Yeah, I think especially with used cars (regardless of the brand of used car) is an area that runs rampant with misrepresentation and borderline (or perhaps outright) fraud.

I sure would like to hear from the buyer in this case, don't know if that's possible or not. Mostly for my own curiosity.

 

buying a rental + unreasonable expectations + the above = disaster.

Not sure what outcome your buddy was expecting. Common sense would dictate that if you knowingly buy a rental, you would invest more time and effort to make sure the car was ok unless you got it at absolute rock bottom price.

 

There is the problem ... do you see it?

Yes, you did see it!

 

HOORAY! This thread is going up on my refrigerator!!! GOLD STAR FOR ME!!!

 

Caveat emptor.

I would never buy anything solely based upon the words of the seller, especially a used car salesman. Doing so is just asking for trouble.

Sucks for your buddy and first thing he should do is get an estimate to see what'll it cost to "restore" it. Once he knows this cost he can decide to repair it or sell and let someone else fix it. I'm sure someone will buy it and take on this cost. Your friend will lose some money and I guess he can chalk it up to a lesson learned.

I don't think going the route of a lawyer will get him anywhere though.

 

Beat me to it. The seller is always going to describe the car in the most positive way possible. The buyer needs to do his homework before buying. If he doesn't, he really can't blame anyone for being dissatisfied with his purchase, aside from material false statements, which would be cause for legal action. The hassle associated with such an action also falls under caveat emptor (could have been avoided if buyer would have done his due diligence).

I didn't get a PPI on my scud before buying because I couldn't find anyone local to do one, but I at least carefully inspected the car and took it for a test drive before signing the dotted line.

 

Lesson learned....next. There will be no way back to your money so that was the cost of the lesson. In my mind an ex-rental car automatically takes 40% hit on resale. Hopefully you got it at 40% less than a comparable car that was treated better.

 

Uhh...yeah
Actually no need for description...photos enough
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

+1

 

I am always amazed that people that have this kind of money to spend on a car are so stupid. Probably a trust fund baby or received a large Inheritance. People that work for there hard earned dollars do their due diligence. A rental car agency is always a red flag whether you are talking an exotic or a Chevy. It is a known fact that rental cars are beat to death.

 

Yeah but here's the key. They actually buy one.

They don't talk about it.. BS'ing with their friends, talking.. talking.. talking... "deciding"..

They DO. That's what gives Credibility.

 

It's a good point, but are they actually better off simply because they did take the plunge? In the case of the OP's acquaintance, maybe not. How does the saying go? Something like if you're consistently wrong, at least you're being consistent?

And FWIW, when I bought (and I realize this may be unique to me), the only two people who knew I was looking for a Ferrari were my wife and my Dad. That had its ups & downs, and even after I bought, I didn't tell anybody (thanks to the advice on this very site). I let them find out on their own. But, that's probably O/T.

Usually I agree with you Curt, this time, I find myself on the other side. Regardless of the outcome of this particular situation, a little more study was probably warranted. And even the "talking talking talking deciding" you refer to might have saved some headache if anybody could have pointed out the (rather obvious) red flags to the buyer. I dunno. In the case of buying a Ferrari (or just about any car, especially used), it's probably not harmful to have the discussion before you write the check. It's like jumping into the water pool and not knowing how deep it is, I guess. I realize you had a little bit of a similar experience with your 360 ("does it run?") but you knew from the beginning you were willing to take on a "project," and barring any catastrophes, you're never gonna sell your car. I think these are big differences between your case and the subject of this thread.

Making a major move in the absence of doing your homework properly doesn't make the move alright. I wouldn't want to buy credibility in this manner.

Edit: I realize you already said "+1 on the above" earlier in this thread.

 

+1. He's back