Laurel Nissan

by BillAdams on 08/08/2014

I initially contacted this dealer with interest in a particular used vehicle that they had listed. At the outset, the salesperson, RJ, was very prompt in responding and providing information regarding the vehicle and inquiring about a potential trade in. However, considering the two-hour drive each way for me to see and test drive this vehicle, I asked for as much information as available on the vehicle, including the dealer invoice. RJ responded to all of my queries, except for the inquiry about dealer invoice, which he simply ignored. When I replied back and again requested dealer invoice, he evasively answered that they only had a "few hundred dollar window" with which to work. Despite the lack of candor in answering a direct question, I made the 4-hour, round-trip drive to view and test drive my prospective purchase. Upon arriving, RJ was friendly although not entirely up on the specs of the vehicle that I had prearranged to come see and drive. After all of the initial formalities, and the dealer assessing my potential trade, I expressed interest in making a deal for the purchase and possible trade in of my vehicle. Once we finally got down to brass tacks, I inquired again about the dealer invoice on the prospective purchase, and again was deflected with some generalities that they only had a small margin . . . blah . . . . Then RJ consults with his GM and comes back with an initial offer, which was for the vehicle at the listed price, and a fair-moderate offer on my trade in. I countered at $990 less; allowing them the option of how they wished to cut it, as between their vehicle and my trade in. RJ took my counter offer over to his GM, SB, and quickly came back with a response of $500 less than their previous offer. I again asked for the dealer invoice and was again denied this information. I countered with $875 less than their initial offer, which put us only $375 apart. At this point, RJ again goes over to the GM with my counter offer . . . . The GM, SB, comes over promptly, abrasively and somewhat awkwardly to tell me that $500 less was his "bottom line," as he simultaneously plopped down on the desk in front of me a listing of their used vehicles with the purported dealer invoice on the subject vehicle et al. In my line of work, this is what we call "trial by ambush" - the withholding of material information until a crucial moment, when it is sprung on the opposition in support of your position. However, because of their previous lack of candor on this precise point, RJ was left two-stepping trying to explain why this information was suddenly being shown. He laid a big turd, saying that they had no hesitation to share this information with me, because this vehicle was the oldest on the lot and because it was such a good deal, as the dealer invoice was so close to the offered deal. Conspicuously missing was any explanation as to why, if this was such a good deal, they deliberately withheld the information from me, despite my prior 3-4 direct requests for this information. Adding to my confoundment was the fact that the Carfax report on the vehicle revealed that the dealer previously acquired the vehicle about a year prior on a trade in, presumably at a wholesale price, then sold the vehicle a few mos later, presumably at a retail price for a profit. Subsequently, about 7 mos later, the dealer bought the very same vehicle back, with an additional 7k miles on it, as part of a trade in for a brand new Nissan Murano, again another transaction, where customer satisfaction was an issue and where they sold a brand new vehicle, thus yielding an inflated dealer-buy-back invoice price on the vehicle. Naturally, at no time did they offer to divulge the details of these multiple prior transactions and how much they truly had in the vehicle, or how much they had already profited off of the same vehicle, which would have been a truer reflection of their "dealer invoice"/cost. Finally, having made a counter offer, which was flatly refused by SB, with a thumb-to-the-nose, "take-it-or-leave-it," bottom-line proposition, I advised RJ that I was not going to bid against myself, and that our dealings were done. Shockingly, as I was walking out the door, passing the service counter, where SB was standing, he beckoned me over as he laid a Kelley's Blue Book report of some type out on the counter to essentially say "see, I told you so," as to the car value. Meanwhile, they actually had the vehicle on the auction block in Harrisburg only 24 hours before, which would likely not fetch the KBB retail value that he was thrusting in my face as I was literally walking out the door. He is the same guy, that no doubt would argue with a potential customer with a trade in as to why KBB is not the proper valuation, but that they only rely upon Edmunds or the BlackBook . . . . . blahhhhhh. Reality be told, at $375 apart from a final deal, I probably would have settled and made the deal for some minor accessories for the vehicle - the roof racks that I had expressed interest in during our discussions, or heck, probably even some minor swag, like a coffee mug and a pen, etc. and I would have walked away tickled. A good salesman would have closed the $375 gap and made a happy customer. He would have expressed a bit of zeal in making the customer happy, instead of arguing with the customer . . . .

Read more