When is a "Clunker" not a "Clunker?"

GOOD QUESTION! As one California couple found out. A recent US News and World Report (September 23 2009) story is one we may be hearing more about soon. It involves the couple turning in their 2001 model nissan, under the CARS program, for a more economical VW. Days later, while passing the dealership, they notice the very nissan they turned in, on the sales lot. Thinking they had been scammed, they inquired at the dealership as to what had happened to their Government approved "deal." The dealerships reply?
Dealer Ken O'Donnell told California's Orange County Register that the couple had misunderstood the transaction. "They came in for the cash for clunkers, but we went out and looked at the car and decided it's a pretty clean car, so we took the car on a trade-in. "We decided we're going to give them the $3,500 they would have gotten from the clunker program as the trade-in. We're not asking the government for any reimbursement."

Sound like a fair "deal" to you? Well, that seems to be determined by what you think about your Government. Posted below are some of the comments left on Orange County Register's web posting of the story.

I’m glad that this dealership saved me and the other taxpayers $3500 by not seeeking reimbursement for this car.
The sellers got what they bargained for - a $3500 credit on their new car - and there is one less clunker rebate being sent out by the government. Everyone wins.---Anonymous

My thoughts exactly. as a taxpayer, I don’t want to pay for a perfectly good used car to be junked, which is what would happened in this case under Cash for Clunkers.
better the dealer pay the $3500 out of their own pocket than mine. too bad, so sad. it would be different if they HAD gotten the rebate, and the dealer kept the car and resold it, which would be defrauding the public. but Cash for Clunkers couldn’t go away soon enough as far as I was concerned. I see no problem here.---BrianGuy

Not Really! They end up loosing and the dealer ends up winning because they were sold a car for thousands and they still turn around and sale the clunker, that's make extra money and they only end up giving them $3500, they could off given them $5000 for the car. It is been sold for $6000 plus if they finance it they are getting more money so yes I feel they did get scam, why couldn't they put it on sale for $500 dollars more they went for $2500 more witch is what they were scammed for because the sales guy new what that xterra was worth that's why they didn't seed for reimbursement cause they new they were going to make money of off them.---Ed

This has nothing to do with our tax dollars - the dealership, the private corporate dealership - mislead these people and decided they would be better off reselling the car privately than taking whatever the Feds would give them. They took advantage of an existing federal program to get people in the door. This is what happens when private insurance companies are in charge of our health care - they are motivated only by how much profit is in it for them.--icedamericano

Or maybe it just shows that when you rush a new program without taking into consideration the related consequences, loopholes, etc, this sort of thing happens. The “anointed one” rushed this program through, just like he has tried to rush the health care bill. I still wonder how many of our elected officials have read that one. Maybe instead of trying to pass so many new ideas for “change”, we should slow down and really think about whether it’s needed or just publicity stunt.--ocdisgusted

Or maybe it just shows that when you rush a new program without taking into consideration the related consequences, loopholes, etc, this sort of thing happens. The “anointed one” rushed this program through, just like he has tried to rush the health care bill. I still wonder how many of our elected officials have read that one. Maybe instead of trying to pass so many new ideas for “change”, we should slow down and really think about whether it’s needed or just publicity stunt.--Zek

So, there's just a small response to a "big" issue. Though as far as the deal itself, we feel like ALL consumers have been warned for years about reading the fine print on any piece of paper you are required to sign. Did the couple save the planet? Hardly! did the dealer save the Government tax dollars? Not really. So is this really a big issue? NO! But we do see the consumers concern.

As we at Harmony have posted before, the older cars on the highways do cause a significant danger, not only to the environment, but to the motoring public. Smoke screens from poor exhaust, stalling on busy highways, defective lighting and what if that car has not been maintained well and the brakes are faulty? Surely, these vehicles could be worth more sentimentally to some owners than the $3,500 dollars the Government is offering, but people please, if your auto needs repairs and you (and the planet) would benefit from upgrading to a newer model, TAKE THE MONEY!
Where the money , or credit towards the newer car, comes from is really a small matter compared to the hazard your "clunker" causes your fellow commuters.

For the complete story from both sources follow these links:

Couple shocked to find their ‘clunker’ is for sale.

What If Your Clunker Wasn't Junked?

Thanks for reading and remember, small print could foil a BIG deal.