Ferrari of San Antonio sold me a damaged CPO car, lied to me, refuses to make it right.

Gosh, I cannot imagine how you reacted if a girl dumped you by not returning your incessant phone call.

 

In all seriousness, maybe this is exactly why the GM did not feel the need to give that 1500 back because he had enjoyed the car for a while before the car was taken back. Can't have cake and eat it too.

 

David,

I believe you have run out of "hurt feelings compensation" on this thread. After 200 posts, you are still talking about your standard of business ethics and trying to make people believe that you were "poorly treated" and not properly compensated. Whether you were or not is no longer relevant. You passed that point 100 posts ago and by asking for the thread to be deleted.

Your not the first person to show up on Fchat with a beef about a Ferrari dealer and won't be the last. They almost always end the same way with the original poster never posting again. It is a real shame because Fchat is a tremendous resource for Ferrari owners.

 

+10000. Why did he ask the thread to be deleted?

 

I felt something not right from the very first post...

 

I think Porsche is better suited for you based on your previous experience. I don't have a tdf so I never even bother to whine at all. I didn't even bother to whine at all when I had number of porsche gt cars that I bought at stickers. Go figure. This is not about principle, buddy. This is about where you see yourself in this world and how other sees you. Look back to this post 10 years later, then you should be able to start to understand. If you start to understand sooner, it only means you grow up faster than you would like.

 

This is a good point. I don't disagree.

 

Other than the butch re-dye (which I think was the ultimate reason for buyers' remorse), it doesn't seem to be that bad a car. Seems mechanically sound. The four cosmetic things are all easily mitigated to me.

All of my Ferrari have an underbody rash; I only can see it when on the lift. I mean, why just focus on the front underbody? Any Ferrari with 50K miles will have the WHOLE underbody tray look like Gary Busey's face. To me as long as underbody scrapes are not visible, I'm okay with it.

The one-inch scratch can be professionally improved, it won't be perfect, but much better. The paint bubbling is sadly relatively common in the FF. (Again, a half-inch bubble not a show stopper in my book)

The dent in the inside wheel arch can easily be minimized so that you only see it when looking for it. I think FSA gave it a pass because of the location:

Again, would I be okay with it? Well, if they gave me another 7K - definitely - which they seem ready to do.

I think what happened is the blue re-dye was the ultimate no go for the OP. I have to look at it myself, but I would consider the exterior cosmetic stuff mentioned on par for a 9-year-old 50K Ferrari CPO or not.

 

50,000 - 9 year old car....

 

T H I S.
Prior to any purchase.

Marcel Massini

 

OP always speaks about the brand, the dealer, the GM, etc but NEVER about himself. After all, it is the OP and nobody else that SHOULD have done a personal inspection. He did not. Now, all the others are guilty, he - of course - is not.........

Running out of popcorn.

Marcel Massini

 

I bought a car from these guys a number of years ago and it was as described. They were a bit squirrelly with the delivery but otherwise it was a good experience. If the car arrived and was not as described I certainly wouldn't have accepted either. In my case I offered to fly across the country but the salesmen assured me the car was flawless and it was. I agree that you just never know, one persons standards will differ from another's especially with people who just treat these cars as just another unit. I would either have to see a car in person or have someone I trust take a look at it. This has saved me in the past.

 

While I'm semi-reluctant to post again in this thread, because it's gone in so many different directions, what's going through my head at the moment should be said, I think, and I haven't seen it expressed herein, yet.

The purpose, IMO, of the CPO process is to establish and warrant a STANDARD. This is to give a buyer peace of mind. Yet, a recent post indicates that FNA says that the individual dealers apparently do their own thing. That, everyone, is a problem. As there really is no standard at all. In other words, CPO is nothing more than elaborate marketing language, designed to give confidence that a product is, in fact, a good one and remove doubt for a potential buyer that has now been suggested (or confirmed?) to be left up to the interpretation of the dealer CPO-ing it. Fine, I suppose, if you know that, but this also creates a potential conflict of interest on the part of the dealer CPO-ing it, if they are also selling it. And, therein lies the rub. Either there's an objective standard and it is observed, or there isn't. It seems that FNA is aware of dealers taking advantage of these subjective, sketchy and possibly fraudulent practices, but doesn't want to take action. I'm not sure if this is predatory, but the advice of caveat emptor seems even more appropriate, now. Even when dealing with "elite" CPO cars.

Sad, but unsurprising. And, while a dealer might be willing to harm their reputation for a quick sale on a "rough" car in inventory, there's also FNA's and SpA's reputation to consider. So, an objective standard is probably beneficial to everyone concerned BUT the dealer in this transaction. My $.02, only, of course.

That said, the transaction was rescinded, funds returned (but for shipping costs, which isn't unreasonable, I suppose), so the dealer did, IMO, make it maybe as right as they could in this instance. BUT, the fact that they were arguably trying to sell (and sold) an "elite" car that was in this condition is the crux of the issue, isn't it? I'm not taking sides, but I do think FNA & SpA should consider tightening up the dealer's CPO processes in order to better meet the marketing verbiage and claims.

A car's price does reflect the condition in most cases, and maybe the price was about right or in-line for a higher-mileage, "rough" car, but it shouldn't be "rough" if it's supposed to be "elite", either. And, the CPO is something that can boost price or move a car quickly out of inventory. So, the conflict resides at the dealer level, and maybe it's worth it for FNA and Spa to re-evaluate their CPO program?

CW

 

Generally, cars in this poor of shape end up at an auction and go to some small private dealer. I am surprised this one was being sold as a CPO at a Ferrari dealer. I dont think this is the norm. The dealer probably over allowed on a trade and is trying to make up some money which doesn't make it right.

 

I would tend to agree that a car in this condition would/should likely go to auction, as opposed to inventory. And, certainly not inventoried as a certified CPO car. Again, IMO.

You may also well be correct that the dealer is into the car for too much and is now trying to dig themselves a bit out of a shallow hole. It happens.

But, most importantly, it doesn't make it right. Worse, abusing the process to sell this one vehicle potentially undermines a buyer's confidence in the ENTIRE program, which is a much deeper hole and the bigger issue at stake.

CW

 

Thank you.
That's exactly what I have been saying as well, a few days ago.
It means zero. Anybody who just believes in such words (only) is a fool.
Guys don't be naive. Do your homework properly and completely, get out of your chair or hammock and inspect the object of desire personally and with your own eyes, even if it sits 10'000 miles away.

Marcel Massini

 

There, fixed that for you !

 

I want to point out that I believe the car was not originally a CPO; it was demanded from the OP as a purchase condition. Everybody's range of what is acceptable is subjective. To me, personally, the age and mileage of this car should be considered.

50K-9 Years, those exterior defects are totally fine to me. Mostly since the car went from 140K to 100K.

 

Funny - This is all moot anyway because the dealer ultimately *did* stand behind their product and took the car back, when - I don't think they had to.

The OP's only point of contention now is, and he wants his shipping costs refunded. I do think this is unreasonable; the reason is we all agreed that he should have seen the car in person.

Flying out there and having the car inspected by a third-party mechanic, body shop, and leather shop, would have cost him at least the same amount he's out of pocket. (if not more)

Instead, he paid the same amount but got to drive it for a month.

Again, I would consider myself lucky and ahead, and would be THANKING Ferrari San Antonio.

 

As OP has already addressed that, no need to comment.

However, you emphasize EXACTLY the point by your response: when a dealer is willing to certify a car that shouldn't be certified in the first place.

There are some obvious problems in that, especially when the car gets an extended warranty added upon certification. This may "shift" the burden of any repairs covered under warranty to FNA and SpA. I imagine they wouldn't like that very much, even if the buyer would, and it helped the dealer sell a car.

CW

 

I'll throw my hat in here to say that the op made out pretty darn well for not having done due diligence. $1500 for a months Ferrari rental is a great deal. Although the dealer certainly should have done a better job of providing more information on the condition of the car, at the end of the day they did stand up and take the car back. Really this seems like a lesson for the dealer as they are the ones who really got burned here.

 

Car is reportedly back at dealer, IIRC. So, no economic loss. Ironically, with a higher asking price! Reputational damage only. Maybe.

And, given that Ferrari dealers can sell pretty much anything they've got their hands on (for argument's sake), I'm not sure how much damage there might be. Further, in defamation cases seeking monetary damages while some states presume damages, others require that the amount prayed-for has to be proven.

I'd be interested in knowing, if anyone does, what %age of cars that go through the used departments actually get CPO'd. Overall? At Ferrari? I mean, if they're the "elite", what's that mean? The top 10%? 1%? 20%? Just curious...

CW