russo and steel chop job camaro copo - Page 3

**olredalert** · #21 04-22-2008, 02:58 AM

------So,,,Other than a huge amount of aggravation at this point, what are you out??? You seem to have a pretty expensive car in your possesion that you havent paid for. You and Drew seem to be at an impasse at the moment, and you seemingly have the upper hand if you also have the title. No matter what Drew said to you (good or bad) you have the car and you have your money. Something needs to happen and if it were me I would keep an open mind to any offers from the other side. Maybe you had better think about informing your local authorities about the chances that someone from Arizona may be giving them a call and tell them why. Sometimes its better to be proactive. Good luck!!!.........Bill S

real-muscle-1 · #22 04-22-2008, 03:06 AM

the camaro and title are back to the person that was selling it @ the auction, (my check) is not back to me. i did place a stop payment.

ZL1#17 · #23 04-22-2008, 03:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
As much as it SUCKS Id take what happened with a grain of salt and say lesson learned, sell the car for what it really is and write the rest off as a loss.. Legal fees will be way more than the price difference IMO unless you can go after everything including lawyer fee's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Will someone please help me understand why this man has to take a loss on a car that an auction house mis-represented? In the ad, Russo & Steele does not have a disclaimer stating that this is how the car was represented to them and that a buyer should research the vehicle as to it's authenticity. Since I have never bought a vehicle at auction, I have no idea about auction contract(s). When do they make you sign a contract, before you bid or after the bidding ends?

**427king** · #24 04-22-2008, 04:00 AM

If someone stops payment on a check and doesnt return the merchandise they can be prosecuted for that . Im not sure where the person holding the car that he hasnt paid for has any negotiation power except to return the car . Sounds to me like that would mean the buyer doesnt want to return the car he just wants it cheaper, and that choice[to lower price] would be up to Russo Steele not the buyer....

**quick-bowtie** · #25 04-22-2008, 04:04 AM

I DONT think he should have to take a loss but understanding how the law works and the prices of lawyers.. Its WAY to costly, you'd spend more with a lawyer than you would lose if you sold the car and took a loss (unless of course your a lawyer and can rep yourself). Sure its not right but thats the way our messed up country works.

As for Russo they dont write the ads on the cars, thats the owners that do that and they sign a form stating that what they wrote is true and if there is a problem its worked out between the buyer and seller..like King said the auction is just a venue bringing buyers and sellers together.

and yes you sign a form after you win the bid, and you sign another contract before you get your bid number stating all the facts.

From what I gather real muscle is mad that he is still having to pay the commissions on the purchase which Im sure by contract he has to... Thats where customer satisfaction comes into play I for one would want to make my customer HAPPY but not all businesses think that way.

NovaMob03 · #26 04-22-2008, 04:06 AM

Well, if the car & title are back with the seller, what's the issue? Did you just want to tell us that R&S was still trying to strong-arm you to consumate the deal?
Time to move on

**Charley Lillard** · #27 04-22-2008, 04:17 AM

When a car is mis-represented at Barrett-Jackson, they let the buyer out of the deal and charge the seller both the buyer and seller comissions. Russo hopefully has something similar.

**olredalert** · #28 04-22-2008, 04:34 AM

-----Well,,,Now the picture becomes clear. Not blaming you, but the facts about possesion, title etc. were not clear to me. Charlie (the voice of reason) has spoken and Drew apparently needs to (once again) do the right thing!!!!!!!!......Bill S

**quick-bowtie** · #29 04-22-2008, 05:16 AM

Usually that is the case that the seller pays both commissions and I agree with that to a point.. but what if like in this case where the seller (assuming so at the price he paid last year) didnt know the car was re-bodied and bought thinking it was a legit car? The car was restored sometime ago and has changed hands 4 times that I know of in the past couple of years.. I think the auction companys need re-write there contracts to agree to let both sides out of the deal/commisions if it can be proven that the seller wasnt the one building a suspect car that can be proven a fraud.

**Charley Lillard** · #30 04-22-2008, 05:55 AM

From Russo and Steel's point of view.... They sold what they thought was a COPO. The buyer writes a check for the car and leaves with the car. A couple days later the buyer calls and says it is a rebody. Russo has no car or way to verify what the buyer is saying and the buyer has stopped payment on the check. If I were the auction house I would want to keep all the money until the car was back to me and it's condition could be verified be a expert. You come here and bash Russo when in fact you took the car for several days and had stopped payment. I'm told they came and got the car still partially apart. For all they know you might just be some kind of nut. Your issue should be more with the seller that did not disclose the rebody to Russo.
What if I was a seller of a real car that was not rebodied and someone took it home and a couple days later cooked up a rebody story because he had buyers remorse ? Maybe just pop the cowl panel off and mess things up with a welder etc. There is no way for the auction houses to verify every car. It's the people that are bringing the cars that are the problem.

Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars.