That car could be locked up for a really long time! By the time this is settled it might be eligible for "antique" status.
How would that help the quality of this site? Is the site under water right now? Is a certain percentage of revenues set aside for "improvements" or customer research? Is there any public accounting of the subscription? Is so, I would love to see it. I might even subscribe if I feel it is spent well/responsibly. How many subscribers are there? At $15 a pop, what does it add up to? What about sponsorship? How much does that pull in? There are 15 year old kids running bulletin boards for free. Why does this one need so much money? How is it spent? Until such disclosure, you are just blowing smoke. It could be a lousy $15 or $150k, no diff. 15 cents, even.
He said it's a matter of public record. He didn't say he read it. Why do you keep twisting his words and typing innuendo?
Roy Did the first "owner" steal the car from the first lease Co. by "selling" a car that was owned by the first lease company and he did not own to the second dealer and leaving the country with the money? If that is in fact what happened would that be a criminal act? (Knowingly selling a car one does not own and leaving the country with the money from that fraudulent sale) Please point me to a post where I said Josh was arrested. Are you publically stating that the dealers I have bought cars from would not immediately reimburse me if they sold me a car previously stolen or with defective title? Are you publically stating that I would hold a gun to some one's head to collect a debt? Are you publically stating that under the WA law that governs Car Dealers that you don't owe Josh full reimbursement for selling him a previously stolen car or a car with defective title? Please explain why any insurance Co. that you may have would deny coverage for the honest error/omission you have made in selling a car with defective title?
Who sells a Gallardo for a whopping $2500 profit anyways? Sorry but this thread is silly, if I buy a car from a dealer and it gets confiscated for ANY reason I would wake up the next day and sue the dealer I purchased the car from. Why would I care how Roy got the car and from whom? I bought the car from Roy, end of story.
Dude, you're way smarter than 360spider... hell, Roy and his attorney have told him to sue them and he hasn't done it yet...
I see your point. You just go back to the car source but i find this to be a narrow view that may not be fast or productive. I am taking another view (may be legally incorrect but common sense to me). Roy is a victim as much as this guy Josh. Problem with him going after Roy is this: If both had a clear valid title then how can the leasing company prove ownership? You got the title, you got the car, Nobody faked or stole a title here. Afterall the arrest and towing was made on the leasing company's saying. Do they have a valid car title too? I bet not. So how did they get the court order on a stolen car charge? Then if they dont have a title showing ownership I would investigate what is the relationship or employees relationship with the guy who sold it in the 1st place. Finally, a stolen car don't get sold with a clear title so I would look into why this guy ended up with the car title. These are the real issues. Sueing Roy wont get to it. But may be your right. The legal system has its ways and to go there may be everyone has to sue everybody else. What a mess and further waiste of money. The worst in all of this is that ANY OF US can be a victim under the same circumstances. There is nothing that Roy or Josh could have done. May be they should work toghehter to go to the root cause instead of figthing and spend their money on each other. They are in the same bag. I think the leasing company is streching to have someone else take the loss. If they gave someone the title, I dont think this would fly in court under "stolen car". The leasing co is either in a scam with the guy who they claim stole it or they got scammed by that guy. But nobody stole anything.
As a dealer who has faced a similar situation I can tell you all first hand the correct way to handle this situation. First step is for Roy to completely refund his customers purchase price including any delivery and or taxes. second step is for Roy to take action against the dealer he bought the car from. He says he was only acting as a "broker", if the title was ever assigned to Cats Exotisc, he was acting as the selling dealer. Third step is for the dealer in LV to go after their insurance company and bonding agent. At that point the insurance company for the leasing agent should step up, as the car was infact stolen from them. Either way Roy has to step up and make HIS CLIENT whole, sooner rather then later, before the entire exotic community begins to take note of his actions.
I find it of particular importance to note the second quote's point number 5. Roy is saying that 360Spyder has to sue him. Not that he has to sue the leasing company or the Nevada dealer, but that he has to sue HIM in order for the process to proceed. So I can't see where Napolis comes from when he says this: and this: and this: It is clear, to me, that Roy is trying to help 360Spyder help himself. Follow protocol and this thing will run its course. Period, end of story.
Adam, what ever happened in the end? I was working for a dealership that had a car siezed due to stolen parts once, they took the car but I am not sure about the back end of what ever happened and if the dealer was ever compensated. Did your insurance cover this or did you recoup from the other dealer?
Read Post #5. (Post #5 in this thread not note 5) If 360 is to be believed Roy initially told 360 to sue the first lease co. not (Roy). There are two possibilities: 360 misheard/misunderstood Roy or Roy changed his tune after the **** hit the fan. Has Roy refuted 360's statement posted in #5? Adam's Post remains the bottom line. Also see 360's post 28. Read Roy's first post/answer on the subject: "Step 9 Poster was advised to file a claim with his insurance company, get a LAWYER ASAP and have the hearing against the lease company to get his car back. He was also advised by ME and his LAWYER sure sue us, but for what there is not neglect nor will full or knowledge of this car at the time of sale to the poster, we did nothing wrong." Roy's post speaks for itself.
As always...there are 2 sides for every story. Now that I have read Roys side and your side...I have to agree that it was not Roy's fault. I think you are better serverd by having your attorney work with Roy and by working together you and Roy can go after the original person who started this mess. Good Luck to you....and I stand by Roy in that he seems honest in his reply to this very unusual situation. Thanks, UZY
I understand your reasoning........... But let me ask you all something. Has it been proven that the lease company has a claim? Has it been proven that the guy that sold the car actually stole it? Just like the leasing company allegedly gave the person a clean title without doing their diligence, I would think it prudent to just follow the law and not make assumptions no matter how clear things appear in this thread. My belief is that, assuming the current owner of the car legitimate, that he will either get the car back or his money back in full. How all the other parties are made whole again I'm less sure of. I'll be interested to learn......
Thank you for stepping forward and showing that this is not an isolated incident, that it can and HAS happened to other Dealers and Buyers alike...and I am sure it will happen again. It is truly a shame when we have some "dirt bag' throw a wrench into what should be a fun time in buying a car. I also agree with you that he needs tomade whole, how ever, as I have stated here 10 million times by now AND I can not see why the picture does not get understood? AS a BUSINESS I can not JUST willy nilly write checks all over the place AND hope to re-coupe from my insurance company. It HAS to go the correct way, which JOSH HAS been told also 10 million times to CONTACT A LAWYER, get a writ on his car AND maybe this will be a mute point as he will have his car back. IF NOT, he DOES need to start action against me so I may envoke my insurance company todo their JOB!! It is not for ME to do their job. I just do not know why certain people do not understand this. ???? For you to make a statement that I am "somewhat shaddy" or not a "good dealer" before the entire exotic community begins to take note...is just non-sense.. But for the record, Are you still a Dealer? What was the cost of the vehicle you had to re-pay? (or choose to do so anyways) Did you get any compensation from anyone for you? Did you make a mistake in your process and learned you were at fault anyways, so just brushed it under the rug and paid the person back?
Remember, 360Spyder has misstated some other things too, so I wouldn't take everything he says as the Gospel. Although Adam's post may remain the bottom line for you it seems to me that it is dependant on what Roy's insurance company is telling him. If they are saying that they will only cover the loss if there is a suit broght against Roy's dealership then I would be doing the same thing that Roy is doing. If I were in 360's position I would be looking at Roy and Exquisite as allies in this case, I mean after all they got scammed just like he did. I would also have a lawyer looking after my interests. Look, he basically told this guy that it will be covered, but that he has to follow the proper procedure and sue him first (or at least have a lawyer draft a demand letter) so I don't get the big problem with going out and retaining a lawyer. Maybe its different in California, but you can hardly swing a dead cat around here in Michigan without hitting at least one lawyer.
Yes it does. He is saying Josh has to fight the leasing company to get the car back. Roy wasn't who had the car taken away from Josh, the leasing company did that. Josh needs to get a lawyer into court to show a Judge that the title is clear and he (Josh) bought the car legally. Roy has indicated that in two cases involving the same leasing company and the same customer who was given clear titles to two other cars, which he then sold, the end buyers were able to get their cars back by having a hearing against the leasing company. If Josh doesn't want the car back then Josh can file the lawsuit for the refund from Roy, starting the ball rolling downhill, through the court system. Josh gets his money back first and then Roy and then the LV dealer. Very simple really.
Why are you so negative towards Cats? I view your posts as hostile and I'm wondering why. You know we don't know each other and I equally don't know Roy or Cats. But, when it seems pretty evident that the owner will be made whole one way or the other, why are you argumentative? Are you in the auto business? I'm a business owner and in one business that I own about once a year an allegation is made about one of my employees stealing from a client. It would be easy for me to just quickly agree with a customer and pay them what they say they lost. But, I tell my customers to contact the police and file a report. Why do I do this? Do I want to be adversarial with a customer? Of course not.... Am I unethical and don't want to pay? Absolutely not..... But I can tell you in every case - EVERY CASE- the investigation has uncovered the customer miss placed an item and was found by the customer / police or a customer acted fraudulently. So, although this isn't exactly the same scenario, my point is to let the law handle it. Relax..... If Roy or Cats doesn't help resolve this problem I guarantee that there will be another thread exposing it. Until then let's wish everyone a positive outcome...
