NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
He can't have it both ways.
Nonsense, once he goes to Pollsmoor for insurance fraud he will be getting it both ways.
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
He can't have it both ways.
Shocking service from Audi, that's mabasa, not mabaso.
Who's mabaso supposed to be? Guy in the article is Mabasa.
Shocking service from Audi, that's mabasa, not mabaso.
Who's mabaso supposed to be? Guy in the article is Mabasa.
I've heard way too many horror stories.
Both parties should be charged with fraud!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.
As jy dom is moet jy k@k!So that's why he wants more money from Audi - he owes the bank more than the insurance pay out.
Surely that's not above board?
The most I've seen was 105% bond. It was a specific product offered by one bank in the past and they actually called the product a 105. It was meant as a 100% bond + cost.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.
Surely if he gets anything out of Audi his insurers are going to demand their settlement of the accident back. If Audi is liable it is not his fight, it is his insurers who must go after audi for compensation if the manufacturer is at fault for the fire. He can't have it both ways.
Not being able to afford an Audi is not a horror story.
Massive difference between you asking the bank for an extra 10% and you colluding with a 3rd party to lie to the bank about what something is worth.Well, a 110% bond is legal