OK - so now that the first and second act are over (car wrecked, car repaired) - I have two simple questions: Who ended up paying for this (and what did they have to pay)? Who indeed was the dealer who perpetrated this loss?
No update at all? You got the discussion going would be nice to conclude it... Even if you don't name names..
Seems like they went for a joy ride and screwed this car up. Lawyer up and sue their ass. You'll get on autoblog, motortrend, and get a new car and probably more money. There is plenty of precedent for this lol.
I wouldn't worry about improper installation at the factory. I would get it like you want it. The dealer is not going to want to have to place a very high MSRP car with someone else and at the same time make you mad.
Legal Files is one of my favorite columns in SCM. In a nutshell, the article says the OP should have filed a claim with his insurance and let them battle the dealer's insurance. That 'service' is part of what you pay your insurance premium for. The article says the OP is entitled to have the car repaired and compensation for the diminished value of the car. However, he may need to get his own legal help in order to get the diminished value claim. (I'm assuming that SCM assumed his policy did not have a diminished value aspect) The SCM author back-of-envelope guessed the diminished value at $75K so it would probably be worth looking into. The author also says that since the FF already had 1700 miles on it, it was a used car, had depreciated, that the OP was not entitled to a new FF. For anyone following this thread, its worth reading.
The diminished value question was always at the heart of the issue. There was never any doubt about fault or that the OP was not entitled to a new FF. The problem is how to get the diminished value actualized. One way would have been to seek compensation under the dealer's insurance property damage clause. If the OP filed a claim with his insurance, he would have lost control over that because the OP's carrier would have no interest in recovering that loss since it was not part of the repair. Thus the OP would be forced to take direct legal action to recover diminished value. I think the 75K figure is ball park correct so it is indeed worth pursuing.
I was only summarizing what the article said. And three pages back was about all I had time to read. The other point of the SCM article is making sure you have an agreed-upon-value insurance policy for a collectible or high value car. Anyway, I hope it all works out.
Is the dealer outed in SCM? I hope the OP will follow up when the dust is settled. He has an opportunity to help the community here by giving both a warning to would be buyers and a disincentive to would be sellers.
This has happened to me once a few years back! Damage was higher than 50k. Car ended up back in Italy at the factory and got repaired! Dealer was perfect during the whole process.
Could the situation be, that the dealer gave the OP a better offer, in return of not naming them here on F-Chat? Or would the dealer be able to take the OP to court, if he outed them on F-Chat?
I wonder what happened? IMHO, I think the fact that the car became 'fit to enjoy' (fixed) voids all claims for loss of enjoyment (that $2,500 p/d rental costs). The OP has not trash talked or been emotional throughout the whole ordeal on this forum. I think it'd be hard for the dealer to file anything against the OP, after all it's not defamation if the disclosed information is purely factual. Disclosing the dealer's info (identifying the dealer) would be risky but perhaps it's not enough to be dangerous. (But purely my opinion) In the worst case scenario - I would take the car, and put it through unbelievable amounts of tests, diagnosis, quality tests, everything & anything to prove that it is NOT the same car to the standard as it would be when new (or 3 months old etc). Just to become the world's greatest PIA. Hahahahaha. But I'm back to the original curiosity... I wonder what happened.
I was in the same situation but with my Lexus I took it in for Service and the tech crashed the car. It was not totaled but had significant damage. The dealer gave me a fully loaded car for no money Out of my pocket. Props to Prestige Lexus in NJ. They owed up and ate the difference on my car vs new car.
It would certainly be standard practice, if a settlement was reached, to execute a full release of claims on both sides as well as a confidentiality or non-disparagement agreement. The latter usually only last for a set period of years, often being viewed as possibly unenforceable if they go on forever (in deference to the First Amendment or as against 'public policy'). So eventually we might hear something. Can't be entirely sure what the radio silence means, but I suspect that at least it means that the OP feels that the dealer or Ferrari is trying to work with him constructively and that speaking publicly would not be net additive.
Had a similar experience with mercedes many years ago (beyond statute of limitations) where they gave me a brand new car and I signed a confidentiality agreement as well as a non disparagement clause. My guess is that is why sucker an has gone radio silent
My transport company ruined my hood and 2 lights, which have been replaced by Ferrari dealer and paid by the transports insurance. Should I go after the transport company/insurance for depreciation?
Ok I don't get it, shouldn't there be an insurance clause and policy which allows the insurance company to sue the other party on your behalf? Also in terms of contract law, would it be too harsh to file for punitive damages as well as other damages? You should also email Ferrari S.p.A so they could give these guys some pressure.