South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
All the more reason to nip it in the bud once and for all, charge everyone who made it possible with fraud and throw the book at them.Actually I think this invoice manipulation is common
Just let the bank take the financial loss and not pass it on. That wil solve the problem.All the more reason to nip it in the bud once and for all, charge everyone who made it possible with fraud and throw the book at them.
If dealerships and banks don't actively aid people in acquiring excessive debt to buy cars they can't afford there might even be a price drop in cars someday. Doubt any of us will live that long, but someday, maybe.
You or him?
You.
Just let the bank take the financial loss and not pass it on. That wil solve the problem.
After two idiots stop paying and the bank can't recover their money from the asset that is actually ment to make the loan secure the banks will readjust the risk they are willing to take once they realise they can't string the idiot along for another 10 years and refinance it 3 times. If those loses start rolling in for the bank they will cut their reckless lending. If you take that easy credit out the world will change.Only when the car is a write-off or the idiot who over extended his debt stops paying, so not solving the entire problem.
So Audi posted a response on Facebook.
The customer signed a declaration that the dealer could over-inflate the invoice by R250 000 to the finance company, to pay his residual on his trade in car.
So that's why he wants more money from Audi - he owes the bank more than the insurance pay out.
Well, a 110% bond is legal, so I would love a response from a lawyer type person on this. Anyway, would a diligent bank not pick up when a R750k car now costs R1bar? I think the bank knew about it and found it accepatable. Most of the time the bank representative sits on the dealer floor.
Two parties to a bond so they can agree any different valuation without consequence.
What they did was between dealer and borrower - which negatively affects a third party - the lender. Potentially an issue if the bank didn’t know. The question is what was the true sales price?
Would still love a comment from a legal eagle as to how unlawfull it was.
This guy was fishy the moment he spammed my twitter feed with promoted rants aimed at Audi. Who has the time and money for that rather than using the usual channels?
Really? Reminds of that guy who put up a Cell C billboard.
They probably mean via an Audi dealer?Doesn't sound like the dealer was Audi direct.
A letter from Audi to the chancer
View attachment 532971
View attachment 532973
View attachment 532975
They probably mean via an Audi dealer?
Are Audi dealerships all Audi Sa owned and run or can they be franchised?
Bit unethical of Audi to do that, and I hope the bank nails them for it...
But Mr-I-WANT also needs to be charged with fraud for it as well....