Interesting video about dealer sales tactics

Interesting video. Basically, if you buy a new RV from a dealer, you are on your own. The RV you bought, and any issues that might have come with it, are yours. The dealer is not even responsible or obligated to repair warranty issues if they dont want to.

Here is the video
https://youtu.be/xElhTNS_xn8?si=z-sWKaayW2VSme_t

I posted that video a month or so. Under the law, if you buy an RV or anything from a seller, there is an expectation that it will work. For lack of a term I will call it a common law principle. This is different than a warranty. This legal principle has a relatively short time element attached to it.

For example: if you buy a TV and when you bring it home it doesn't work, you have a right to bring it back and get your money back. Time is of the essence.

However, You can contractually give up this right according the the courts. CW (no surprise) has closing documents when you by an RV which purportedly contain said clauses. Some claim the closing documents are deceiving and that they had no idea they were giving up legal rights.

In these cases, the seller doesn't have to be the manufacturer of the product. They can be middlemen.
 
There's nothing new there. The RV dealer is not the one offering the warranty, the RV manufacturer is. The dealer is simply facilitating the sale.

RV dealerships are not franchises as car and truck dealerships are. An RV manufacturer can only do so much to get their dealerships to perform effective warranty work.

That was very clearly spelled out in our purchase docs in 2019.

You gotta actually read and understand what you're signing and agreeing to. Too many people do not. And the plaintiff did not, or did but tried to get out of what they agreed to. A competent attorney would have explained that do them when they first met. Maybe that happened, maybe it didn't, I don't know.

They screwed up by suing the wrong entity in the wrong place. That's why picking the correct attorney is so critical.

The video does not say what part of the Class B remained unrepaired, chassis or house. They are and always have been separate warranties offered by different companies. Thor actually said "Sue us where you agreed to."

Ray
 
Last edited:
There's nothing new there. The RV dealer is not the one offering the warranty, the RV manufacturer is. The dealer is simply facilitating the sale.

Ray


As I said above, this is not about warranties. The manufacturer in Indiana gave the warranty. Everyone accepts that fact. The argument with the dealer is over the legal concept of "Revocation of Acceptance" which the court would probably uphold except for the fact that the buyer signed away his rights under "Revocation of Acceptance" when unwittingly signing the closing documents.

The moral to the story is to take the closing documents home and read them or if the sales price is a lot of money, have an attorney read them with you.

My guess is than any competent attorney would tell you not to sign the papers unless you are willing to take a chance that you may have bought a lemon and will be without a meaningful remedy.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. Documents are signed removing all liability from the selling dealer. While we were signing papers on our new Flagstaff 21FB, the "mechanic" hooked it up to our truck. Before leaving I did a walk around and the hitch latch was still raised!
We purchased a new Tracer Air in 2017 from the same dealer [my fault for going back]. Our 70 mile trip home was uneventful. The following morning I crawled around underneath and found this.
The brake wires on the left side were worn clear through the insulation. In no way was I taking it back for repairs when they never checked it over in the first place. We are completely detailing our new Forest River before our first adventure. Then we'll see what we missed
 

Attachments

  • 05.jpg
    05.jpg
    218.1 KB · Views: 21
  • 06.jpg
    06.jpg
    218 KB · Views: 24
  • 07.jpg
    07.jpg
    243.7 KB · Views: 26
I think what people want and expect is just plain old honesty. You know-the Golden Rule thing.

You buy an RV from a very personable sales person who seems like a likeable person just like you. You find an RV you and the DW are excited about and you decide to buy it.

The salesman gets you to verbally commit and moans about getting the paperwork out of the way. "This will only take a minute and the RV is yours!" He quickly shoves volumes of paperwork in front of you and says "initial here and sign there." I don't ever recall a salesman EVER telling me to "read the paperwork and initial and sign here."

However, this is just all part of the script (or con) regarding the issue at hand. You are signing away your legal State "Lemon Laws" and Common Law rights. You never even read the paper work because if you did read and study it it would take hours. You would probably have numerous questions and possible scenarios. The salesman will role his eyes and tell you "not to worry the paperwork was just legalize dreamed up by the legal department at corporate".

I am almost tempted to go through the motion of buying a new RV just to balk at the paperwork and tell the salesman that I want to take the signable paperwork to my attorney for review before signing. I would love to see the look on his face when he realizes he just lost his commission on a 150 thousand dollar RV because of the paperwork. I would love to hear the later conversation with the sales manager and the General manager. :campfire::trink39:
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the repost PhilFromMaine. I hadnt seen that you had the video posted already. Wasnt trying to step on your toes.

But yes, you are hitting the nail on the head for what my concern was when seeing the video. It was strictly the part about "revocation of acceptance". The dealers know that these RVs are so low quality that they needed to resort to these tactics to insulate themselves from having to deal with the consequences of garbage products. Instead of forcing the manufacturer to build better products, they are putting everything on the buyer. That aspect just doesnt sit well with me as a consumer.

With regard to which part was still broken, it sounds to me like the broken part was the vehicle side of the RV, not the house side. So I agree the plaintiff was barking up the wrong tree for that. But can you blame them? Seems like common sense would be that you bought an RV from a dealer. The RV has problems. You bring it back to the dealer. The dealer facilitates repairs. In this case the dealer essentially told them "not my problem, you signed documents at the time of purchase that it was not my problem, so f**k off". Legally, sure the dealer covered themselves and was able to behave that way. But should a dealer be treating a customer that way? There is certainly more to the story, what were the interactions between the dealer and the buyer prior to the lawsuit, etc, but it further goes to show that once you leave the lot, the dealers (generally speaking) have no use for you and dont even want to see your face again, until its time to buy again. Any issue you have the dealer puts on the manufacturer. Then the manufacturer sends you back to the dealer. Then the dealer sends you back to the manufacturer, etc etc etc.
 
Yeah, it does

The video does not say what part of the Class B remained unrepaired, chassis or house. They are and always have been separate warranties offered by different companies. Thor actually said "Sue us where you agreed to."

Ray
Yeah, it does. In the first minute or two, Steve names a couple of minor things and then says that the engine failed, the major item.

And FCA was a party to the suit.
 
Sorry for the repost PhilFromMaine. I hadnt seen that you had the video posted already. Wasnt trying to step on your toes.

But yes, you are hitting the nail on the head for what my concern was when seeing the video. It was strictly the part about "revocation of acceptance". The dealers know that these RVs are so low quality that they needed to resort to these tactics to insulate themselves from having to deal with the consequences of garbage products. Instead of forcing the manufacturer to build better products, they are putting everything on the buyer. That aspect just doesnt sit well with me as a consumer.

With regard to which part was still broken, it sounds to me like the broken part was the vehicle side of the RV, not the house side. So I agree the plaintiff was barking up the wrong tree for that. But can you blame them? Seems like common sense would be that you bought an RV from a dealer. The RV has problems. You bring it back to the dealer. The dealer facilitates repairs. In this case the dealer essentially told them "not my problem, you signed documents at the time of purchase that it was not my problem, so f**k off". Legally, sure the dealer covered themselves and was able to behave that way. But should a dealer be treating a customer that way? There is certainly more to the story, what were the interactions between the dealer and the buyer prior to the lawsuit, etc, but it further goes to show that once you leave the lot, the dealers (generally speaking) have no use for you and dont even want to see your face again, until its time to buy again. Any issue you have the dealer puts on the manufacturer. Then the manufacturer sends you back to the dealer. Then the dealer sends you back to the manufacturer, etc etc etc.

Thank you for bringing up the subject matter again. I think more people should be made aware of this.
 
Thank you for bringing up the subject matter again. I think more people should be made aware of this.

I think most people only fall for this once. But it could be a very expensive lesson to learn.

I'm 100% in agreement about reading and UNDERSTANDING all documents. And don't let the salesperson be the one explaining what it means!!

Just my $.02
 

Try RV LIFE Pro Free for 7 Days

  • New Ad-Free experience on this RV LIFE Community.
  • Plan the best RV Safe travel with RV LIFE Trip Wizard.
  • Navigate with our RV Safe GPS mobile app.
  • and much more...
Try RV LIFE Pro Today
Back
Top Bottom