- Thread starter
- #1
Yes, frivolous. I am not sure why they don't just include in MSRP, but there may be a good reason. For example, investors are concerned about gross margin, so they may have to increase MSRP by 3000 instead of charging 1500 flat rate delivery to maintain 50% margin. Since flat rate is industry standard practice, they can't base on actual without becoming uncompetitive nationally.What a joke.
I think it's all smoke, and mirrors. They get the average buyer in the chair, give him/her what they think is a good loan payment without mentioning the destination charge. Plus we all know there is a profit for the companies cooked into that charge, but that would be hard tp prove. Sadly it's all part of the game. The lawsuit is a bust, and probably won't go anywhere. The problem with the lawsuit is that there are to many lawyers with nothing to do. So, they grab onto any BS thing they can to get.Yes, frivolous. I am not sure why they don't just include in MSRP, but there may be a good reason. For example, investors are concerned about gross margin, so they may have to increase MSRP by 3000 instead of charging 1500 flat rate delivery to maintain 50% margin. Since flat rate is industry standard practice, they can't base on actual without becoming uncompetitive nationally.
It is impossible to "hide" the destination charge on a new vehicle. It is on the legally required window sticker and included in the MSRP. Note also that there is no dealer margin on the delivery charge (invoice=msrp). Are you thinking about "dealer doc" fees or ADM?I think it's all smoke, and mirrors. They get the average buyer in the chair, give him/her what they think is a good loan payment without mentioning the destination charge. Plus we all know there is a profit for the companies cooked into that charge, but that would be hard tp prove. Sadly it's all part of the game. The lawsuit is a bust, and probably won't go anywhere. The problem with the lawsuit is that there are to many lawyers with nothing to do. So, they grab onto any BS thing they can to get.
No sir, just opining that somehow the dealer could get some of that destination fee. Like you said the fee is posted right on the window sticker. No one made the plaintiff pay the charge. He could have walked away form the deal. It's just another frivolous law suit taking up space on the court docket.It is impossible to "hide" the destination charge on a new vehicle. It is on the legally required window sticker and included in the MSRP. Note also that there is no dealer margin on the delivery charge (invoice=msrp). Are you thinking about "dealer doc" fees or ADM?