 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chrysler Cars / October 2007US car dealers turn away Canadian new-car buyers - is that legal?
Now that the Canadian dollar has reached parity with the US dollar (1 USD = 1CDN), the media here in Canada is running many news items pointing out that US car dealers are turning away Canadians who want to plunk down cash to buy a new car. The dealers say that their franchise agreements prevent them from selling vehicles to people who live outside their territory. I remember from a few years ago where there were moderate differences in prices in the Chicago area and all sorts of games were being played (both by customers and dealers) to sell cars to people outside a dealer's franchise area. In any case, it seems like some of the off-brand vehicles (Hundai sp?, Suburu sp?) are more likely to look the other way and sell to Canadians. But I'm wondering if franchise agreements that contain geographic-based sales clauses are violating any trade laws that may be on the books in the US, and hence could be used to break this rule and open the floodgates to the many Canadians that are ready to save $4k to $30k on a new vehicle. In the mean time, can anyone point to entities called "independent dealers" who buy new vehicles and turn around and re-sell them (as used) even if they haven't been used? > Now that the Canadian dollar has reached parity with the US dollar (1 > USD = 1CDN), the media here in Canada is running many news items > pointing out that US car dealers are turning away Canadians who want > to plunk down cash to buy a new car. They'll try anything to protect their excess profits from Canadians. Several years ago when the CDN$ was about 0.67 US the shoe was on the other foot. In the west Americans came from Washington and Alaska to buy their vehicles at a discount in Canada. A Vancouver, BC area Chrysler dealer had quite a business selling Neons to USA buyers. The dealer split the C$4k difference with the USA buyer. After several threats from Chrysler that dealer actually lost their Chrysler franchise. Some manufacturers, such as Honda, have stated they won't honor warranty work on cross border vehicles. > In the mean time, can anyone point to entities called "independent > dealers" who buy new vehicles and turn around and re-sell them (as > used) even if they haven't been used? I don't remember the name, but I did see on TV several weeks ago a Toronto independent dealer importing USA cars. This is one way it is done: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=2eaf555f-83ff-4a71- abe4-1ac2e48da188&k=88155 > Manufacturers can't stop Canadians from buying used cars and importing them, > which is what some brokers and dealers that The Vancouver Sun contacted are [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > felt for a few years, when they start showing up in the used market, which > could push down prices. The problem right now is Canadian buyers are buying lots of vehicles. If buyers simply went on strike for a month or two, I'll bet things would change. Porsche just made an announcement of an 8 to 10% price reduction in Canada. Interesting. The EU has made restrictive practices illegal. Anyone can buy any car from anywhere. Earlier, manufactures would insert hurdles. E.g. when I bought a car in Germany to bring to Britain I had to wait 2 years (mid-eighties); Mercedes were quoting this lead time for RHD vehicles. All gone and 6 years ago I bought another Merc in Germany and had no problems, though I had to pay significantly more for RHD (but less than in UK). DAS For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling --- >> Now that the Canadian dollar has reached parity with the US dollar (1 >> USD = 1CDN), the media here in Canada is running many news items [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Porsche just made an announcement of an 8 to 10% price reduction in > Canada. "Who" has it wrong. I worked for DC in Western Canada during the Exporting times in the mid 90's through early 2003. No dealer lost there franchise for exporting vehicles. That is against the law. There is no law stating that a US person cannot buy a vehicle in Canada. However the law stated that all vehicles "sold within Canada" must meet Canadian Federal safety vehicle standards" If you look at the vehicles in Canada you will have the sticker stating that in your car. The US has the exact same sticker and wording for the US. So if an american purchased a vehicle from Canada and brought it down to the US the Vehicle's warranty was voided by DaimlerChrysler because technically it does not meet US safety laws. After the first year of exporting to the US DC re-wrote the dealer agreements stating any vehicle found to have been exported outside of Canada is against the franchise agreement, but the punishment was a chargeback of any warranty repairs done on the vehicle prrior to being reported exported, as well as all rebates paid to the dealer. > I worked for DC in Western Canada during the Exporting times in > the mid 90's through early 2003. No dealer lost there franchise for > exporting vehicles. You are missing the point of my original post. I said NOTHING about the issue of EXPORTING or IMPORTING. I an talking about a Canadian walking into a US car dealership and plunking down cash to buy a new car, then putting his own plates on the car and driving it off the lot. The Canadian customer is the one who will be importing the car back into Canada, and who will have to deal with any regulatory, compliance, or tax issues. The point is that the US dealerships are saying that their franchise agreements prohibit them from selling cars to Canadians - the reason being that their sales territories (or customer residency addresses restrictions) are strictly defined in the franchise agreements. I'm wondering if there are US laws (constraint of trade, etc) that would make such clauses illegal. For example, can a General Motors franchise agreement in Dallas say that I am not allowed to sell a new car to a resident of Fort Worth? Would such a clause violate any existing state or federal trade laws? If indeed Americans came to Canada 5 to 10 years ago and bought new cars (NEW cars) right off the lot, then why weren't the dealerships afraid of violating their franchise agreements? Weren't the same restrictions in their franchise agreements as we are being told are in the US dealer's agreements? I realize that this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but Pennsylvania has a 6% sales tax. Allegheny and Philadelphia Counties have a 1% sales tax, thus making a 7% sales tax paid on items purchased there. If a person goes to a surrounding county and makes a major purchase they can save 1%. BUT, eventually you will be billed for the 1% if the out of County dealer didn't collect it. And now they notify the county if you make major purchases other than vehicles, ie., appliances, furniture, etc.. >I realize that this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but > Pennsylvania has a 6% sales tax. Allegheny and Philadelphia Counties [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > notify the county if you make major purchases other than vehicles, > ie., appliances, furniture, etc.. With a cash and carry situation, it is fairly simple to get around some taxes. Registering a motor vehicle is much different. I don't know how the Provinces work, but here, you cannot register a vehicle unless the proper taxes are paid. Importing can subject you to certain regulations also since the vehicle must comply with Federal regulations for emissions and safety. All of that said, I don't see why a dealer should turn away a buyer that walks into his store. I can see where GM may want the dealer to refuse so they can keep the Canadian dealers happy, but I doubt any laws can be made. Canadian dealers have the same restrictions on selling new vehicles to US purchasers. There are even stickers on the vehicle that state "not intended for sale in the US', or something like that. There is no problem selling into neighbouring cities, or provinces, as I understand it, just across international boundaries. >> I realize that this isn't exactly what you're talking about, but >> Pennsylvania has a 6% sales tax. Allegheny and Philadelphia Counties [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > walks into his store. I can see where GM may want the dealer to refuse so > they can keep the Canadian dealers happy, but I doubt any laws can be made. > Canadian dealers have the same restrictions on selling new > vehicles to US purchasers. There are even stickers on the > vehicle that state "not intended for sale in the US', or > something like that. My question remains. Do US franchise agreements between CAR DEALERS ->and<- AUTO MAKERS (such as Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Volkswagon, BMW, Mercedes, Volvo) stipulate that they cannot sell new vehicles to purchasers with out-of-boundary primary residential addresses? Can a dealer in Michigan refuse a sale to a resident of Ohio, for example? Are there not US trade laws (restraint of trade?) that would make such a practice illegal? Would it be the case that the prohibition of selling to a Canadian customer is technically illegal, but the Canadian customer has no recourse under US law? There are no such laws. Franchise dealers have no obligation to sell to anybody, just as they have no obligation to sell at a particular price. There are restrictions when it come to which VEHICLES can be sold in some instances, however. I. E. cars sold in states that do not require California emission system can not be sold in states that do, like the states in New England. Even that does not restrict the dealer from selling the car, but it does prevent it from being licensed in that state. In other words a vehicle without California emission, that would be driven only on private property, but not only the public highways, could be sold in a California emission only state. mike > My question remains. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > customer is technically illegal, but the Canadian customer has no > recourse under US law? > > My question remains. > > > > Are there not US trade laws (restraint of trade?) that would > > make such a practice illegal? > There are no such laws. Can a Denny's refuse to serve or do business with black customers? There is no law against it? > Franchise dealers have no obligation to sell to anybody, just > as they have no obligation to sell at a particular price. Why would a franchise owner refuse someone paying MSRP, paying in cash (or bank draft, or some other registered security) ??? Why do US dealerships say that it's their FRANCHISE AGREEMENT that prohibits them from selling to Canadians? What salesman would be happy with the franchise owner nixing such a sale? Why are we hearing reports of US dealerships getting letters from auto makers reminding them that they can't sell to Canadians? What about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restraint_of_trade > Can a Denny's refuse to serve or do business with black customers? > There is no law against it? I have no horse in this race, but from a legal standpoint, blacks are a protected class. Canadians are not. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > >> Canadian dealers have the same restrictions on selling new [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > customer is technically illegal, but the Canadian customer has no > recourse under US law? Yes they have agreements that state where a dealer can sell vehicles. They don't restrict the dealer from selling to other customers they just state that Joe-Bobs Chevrolet will be the only authorized dealer for a certain area, and that the company won't set up another dealer for a set time period. As for restricting the sales to other areas, it depends on the federal and state emission and safety laws. In NY for example a NEW vehicle must meet NY standards (which are the same as California) You cannot buy a vehicle new in another state and register it in NY unless it meets those standards. As for buying in Canada and registering it in the US. It is usually restricted due to the emissions and the high importation fees. Those are Federal importation rules. Same ones that apply if you buy a Ferrari and try to import it. They have to go through a Federal inspection and retrofit so they comply with the laws in the US. Doesn't matter if the car was bought in Canada or Africa they still have to be imported the same way. The same import restrictions apply taking the vehicle into Canada. No laws saying that those restrictions are illegal exist. The dealer can refuse to sell to anyone. They own the vehicles and can sell or not sell to whomever they please. They can even have you removed from the dealership and arrested for trespassing if they desire.  SignatureSteve W. Near Cooperstown, New York NRA Member Pacifism - The theory that if they'd fed Jeffrey Dahmer enough human flesh, he'd have become a vegan. >> >>> Canadian dealers have the same restrictions on selling new [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > sell or not sell to whomever they please. They can even have you removed > from the dealership and arrested for trespassing if they desire. there may be an issue with warranty as well. I had a Ram 3500 pick up come in with the check engine light on. we found it needed a gas cap but warranty would not cover it because the vehicle was manufactured and sold in Mexico. we were told the vehicle has no warranty in the USA. > there may be an issue with warranty as well. For the last time. This is not about warranties, This is not about emmissions or other regulations This is not about import/export issues, duties or taxes This is about a Canadian walking into a US dealership and plunking down a money order or cashiers check for the full MSRP window-sticker (Monroney) amount for a given new vehicle (plus any applicable state or local retail sales tax) and loading the vehicle onto a flatbed truck and driving away with it. Why on earth would a US car dealer turn away a sale like that? The reason being offered is that the FRANCHISE AGREEMENT prohibits sales to Canadians. So I'm asking if such an agreement is legal, given restraint-of-trade laws. >> there may be an issue with warranty as well. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > sales to Canadians. So I'm asking if such an agreement is legal, > given restraint-of-trade laws. Yes it is legal. Restraint of trade has NOTHING to do with Federal Import/Export laws. SignatureSteve W. Near Cooperstown, New York > > For the last time. > > > > This is not about emmissions or other regulations > > The reason being offered is that the FRANCHISE AGREEMENT > > prohibits sales to Canadians. So I'm asking if such an > > agreement is legal, given restraint-of-trade laws. > > Yes it is legal. Restraint of trade has NOTHING to do with > Federal Import/Export laws. Again, we are NOT talking about import or export issues. The US dealer is NOT involved in import or export activities when (or if) he sells a new car to a Canandian customer. It's the Canadian customer who must import the car into Canada - the dealer is NOT involved. >>> For the last time. >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > sells a new car to a Canandian customer. It's the Canadian customer > who must import the car into Canada - the dealer is NOT involved. well f.ck em. i'm going mondya to bring a chevrolet halfton in to canada. Hopefully shes all made in the USA and i don't have to pay any duty :) >> there may be an issue with warranty as well. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > sales to Canadians. So I'm asking if such an agreement is legal, > given restraint-of-trade laws. maybe you should take this to misc.legal, it is already crossposted to 3 groups why not add a legal group since you are asking a legal question. you do know these groups are full of people who can tell you why your mini-van makes a rattling noise when driving over bumps but as far as legalities I don't think so. unless you are just trolling. if so then excuse me I will get out of the way. > maybe you should take this to misc.legal, it is already > crossposted to 3 groups why not add a legal group since > you are asking a legal question. The NNTP server I'm using won't let me have more than 3 groups unless I specify a "follow-up to" group, which would make it difficult to follow the thread. > you do know these groups are full of people who can tell you why > your mini-van makes a rattling noise when driving over bumps but > as far as legalities I don't think so. I'm thinking that someone in these three auto groups must know something about dealer franchise agreements - moreso that anyone in misc.legal. There are many posts in this group that pertain to the relationships between car dealers and auto makers, so at one level my question about what is contained in those agreements is no different. More generally, the design, manufacture, and operation of vehicles is heavily goverened by legalities, many of which are also talked about in these groups, so again the discussion about vehicles and laws are also not out of place here. > unless you are just trolling. if so then excuse me I will get > out of the way. I am not trolling. Every day, as the Canadian dollar climbs above parity and appreciates in value has more Canadians shopping in the US for all manner of goods. When a Canadian can save at least $5k, and in some cases more than $20k for a vehicle, I'm sure you can understand why it is such a burning issue for those of us that are told by the US dealership that they can't sell us a new vehicle. In the capitolist, freemarket land of the USA, a country boardering on recession, a vendor declines to do business with a customer. Where is the logic in that? > In the capitolist, freemarket land of the USA, a country boardering on > recession, a vendor declines to do business with a customer. Where is > the logic in that? Pressure from the vehicle manufacturers. If they adjusted their CDN prices to no more than 10% above the USA prices this cross border shopping problem would not be such a big deal. But Canadians are mostly all working and the car companies are greedy. They'll have to change. Those who don't want the hassle of buying a car in the USA may wait this out. The result will be lost sales. >> In the capitolist, freemarket land of the USA, a country boardering on >> recession, a vendor declines to do business with a customer. Where is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > They'll have to change. Those who don't want the hassle of buying a car > in the USA may wait this out. The result will be lost sales. Oh, the car makers will change alright. But the change will not extend to their car pricing. They will simply apply their corporate resources to further tighten their manipulative take from Canadian consumers. This will involve both, the stick and the carrot approach, as it were. The stick: For example - lobby governments for stricter vehicle import/export policies, and/or take advantage of existing Canadian import restrictions by deliberately designing more of their U.S. dealer bound vehicles so as to NOT comply with Canadian RIV rules. The carrot on the other hand: For example - provide cars destined for Canadian dealers with sentimental token features designed to make the no-nonsense Canadian consumer feel all warm and fuzzy inside, such as replacing the brand name "Toyota" with "Kyota" (from Kyota Protocol), and the brand name "GM" to "GM Free" (meaning "This car was made with No Genetically-Modified food ingedients"), and throw in with the vehicle purchase, complimentary Carbon Credits as a commitment to an albeit unprovable yet very much in vogue climate hypothesis. :-) Ken >>>In the capitolist, freemarket land of the USA, a country boardering on >>>recession, a vendor declines to do business with a customer. Where is [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Ken That post was insensitive and uncaring!! LOL! Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > > In the capitolist, freemarket land of the USA, a country boardering on > > recession, a vendor declines to do business with a customer. Where is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > They'll have to change. Those who don't want the hassle of buying a car > in the USA may wait this out. The result will be lost sales. I believe I see consumer resistance taking place. Near my house is a large lot that the nearby Honda dealer uses for excess new vehicle storage. The lot is about 0.5 km from the dealer and isn't too obvious from the street. I recently noticed more vehicles there than ever, in fact the numbers are increasing daily. The lot is nearing full. Nothing is more effective than consumers stopping their purchases. No one likes to be gouged, even the rich. I sent my message directly to i-A4B019.01040106102...@news.telus.net by fault. If you have recieved my message please post it on this newsgroup so people can view my points , thx my points in brief, is that the population of Canada is just about the population of California. Dealership won't dare ruin their relationship with Manufacturer by selling cars to Canadian just for a period of cross border shopping frenzy. Dealership cherish their good relationship with the manufacturer, cuz they can make really better profit by buying cars at bigger reduction on their whole sale value, if they get a better rating from Manufacturer. My suggestion to canadian is to keep their money in their pocket until the Canadian retail market get starve, so the retails would lower they already high profit margins. On the other hand, wait til the US economy to crash, so the snobs would eventually fight for our loonies in the pockets. > My suggestion to canadian is to keep their money in their pocket until > the Canadian retail market get starve, so the retails would lower they > already high profit margins. Very good suggestion, that's what I'm going to do. Thank goodness Chrysler made my Concorde (CDN assembled car) very well and parts are readily available. My dealer doesn't like it though, they reminded me how old it is the other day when I bought a small part they don't have in local stock. Considering the very significant design changes now being made to cars because of high and increasing fuel prices, it isn't a good time to buy a vehicle for a long term keep anyway. I can see the reluctance of manufacturers to reduce Canadian prices until this currency situation levels out, however they could use rebates quite effectively in this situation. The more expensive vehicles have the biggest price difference and some expensive car dealers, such as Porsche and BMW, have already announced rebates. >On the other hand, wait til the US > economy to crash, so the snobs would eventually fight for our loonies > in the pockets. Unfortunately that is happening and the USA $ is dropping to levels even the currency experts weren't expecting. (C$1 = US$1.048 now) The USA is dropping interest rates and CDA needs to keep interest rates where they are or even higher to avoid excessive inflation; this will drop the USA $ even more. As the USA economy and $ drop the Canadian economy is negatively affected. The Canadian forestry industry has already been affected by both the USA housing recession plus the falling USA $; many Canadian lumber mills are shutting down. So many CDNs may soon not have jobs to pay for the cars at any price. > Yes they have agreements that state where a dealer can sell > vehicles. They don't restrict the dealer from selling to other > customers they just state that Joe-Bobs Chevrolet will be the > only authorized dealer for a certain area, and that the > company won't set up another dealer for a set time period. We are not talking about restrictions on where (physically, geographically) a dealer can operate from. We are talking about a US dealer refusing to sell a new car to a Canadian customer soley on the basis that the customer is Canadian. There is no question as to the ability of the Canadian to produce funds or sufficient payment. There is no issue as to how the Canadian customer moves the purchased vehicle away from the dealership to it's destination (where-ever that may be). The sale is not contingent on the dealer delivering the car to the Canadian customer's place of residence, or a responsibility to insure the car can be registered for operation in the customer's jursidiction. > The dealer can refuse to sell to anyone. Restraint of trade laws say that it is illegal to have a contract between two parties that restricts trade between them. That would make it illegal for a car maker to have a clause in a franchise agreement stating that the dealer is prohibited from selling products to specified persons or groups. If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states that the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, then couldn't a MacDonald's franchise agreement have a clause saying that Big Mac's can't be sold to blacks? Are you saying there is no law that would make such a clause illegal? > If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states that > the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, then couldn't > a MacDonald's franchise agreement have a clause saying that Big Mac's > can't be sold to blacks? > > Are you saying there is no law that would make such a clause illegal? Blacks: Protected class. Canadians: Not protected class. Certain laws trump others. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > > If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states > > that the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Blacks: Protected class. Ok, replacem blacks with Asians, or native indians. > Certain laws trump others. Ok, what law trumps what other law then? A franchise agreement is a private contract. If the franchisor stipulates a condition that the franchisee cannot sell across an international boundary, then the franchisee has to choose to honour, or defy the conditions of the agreement. If the penalty for breaching the contract is loss of the franchise, then that is the result. I believe that only discrimination that you can't include in a contract would be areas protected by constitutional provisions, or by specific legislation. Certainly here in Canada protection from racial discrimination is provided by the Charter of Rights. Any service business has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose, as long as it does not violate Charter Rights. Ford operates in Canada as a separate company, Ford Motor Company of Canada, and that could lead to warranty restrictions if they so choose. ? >>> If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states >>> that the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Ok, what law trumps what other law then? > A franchise agreement is a private contract. If the franchisor > stipulates a condition that the franchisee cannot sell across > an international boundary, then the franchisee has to choose > to honour, or defy the conditions of the agreement. There is no such cross-boarder selling in this case. The US dealer is not doing the leg-work to import the car into Canada - the Canadian customer is. Why is that concept so hard to understand? The new car will leave the US dealer's car lot either by the Canadian customer driving it off the lot himself, or with his own hired flatbed transport. >> A franchise agreement is a private contract. If the franchisor >> stipulates a condition that the franchisee cannot sell across [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > customer driving it off the lot himself, or with his own hired flatbed > transport. I'm sure if you walked in and paid cash, there would be no questions asked... "My Name Is Nobody" <nobody@msn.com> wrote... > [...] I'm sure if you walked in and paid cash, there would be no questions > asked... May I refer you to the last line of the first paragraph in the OP's original post: On September 27, Mopar wrote... Now that the Canadian dollar has reached parity with the US dollar (1 USD = 1CDN), the media here in Canada is running many news items pointing out that US car dealers are turning away Canadians who want to plunk down cash to buy a new car. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The dealers say that their franchise agreements prevent them from selling vehicles to people who live outside their territory. I remember from a few years ago where there were moderate differences in prices in the Chicago area and all sorts of games were being played (both by customers and dealers) to sell cars to people outside a dealer's franchise area. In any case, it seems like some of the off-brand vehicles (Hundai sp?, Suburu sp?) are more likely to look the other way and sell to Canadians. But I'm wondering if franchise agreements that contain geographic-based sales clauses are violating any trade laws that may be on the books in the US, and hence could be used to break this rule and open the floodgates to the many Canadians that are ready to save $4k to $30k on a new vehicle. In the mean time, can anyone point to entities called "independent dealers" who buy new vehicles and turn around and re-sell them (as used) even if they haven't been used? >>> A franchise agreement is a private contract. If the franchisor >>> stipulates a condition that the franchisee cannot sell across [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I'm sure if you walked in and paid cash, there would be no questions >asked... Actually, there *would* have to be some questions asked and the answers recorded. For openers, there are US Federal banking rules on recording of transactions over $10,000. And I strongly suspect that Canada has similar laws if you wanted to take the car in the other direction. The dealer needs a name and address to fill out the title transfer paperwork for the car - even if the dealer doesn't handle the titling and registration of the new car, they still need to fill out and give the title form to the buyer so the buyer can handle it themselves. And they have to apply in the state of sale for temporary registration so the car can be driven away, unless the buyer wants to have the car shipped across the border to it's destination. The car maker has the right to find out those details, and if the dealer made sales transactions that violated the franchise agreements the car maker can choose to take action. --<< Bruce >>-- > The car maker has the right to find out those details, and if the > dealer made sales transactions that violated the franchise agreements > the car maker can choose to take action. That's the meat of it. "Bruce L. Bergman" <blnospambergman@earthlink.invalid> wrote in message > For openers, there are US Federal banking rules on recording of > transactions over $10,000. And I strongly suspect that Canada has [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > --<< Bruce >>-- And for three easy cash payments of $9999 this car can be yours! Don't be silly, every one of these can be worked around if the dealer wants to make the sale. It is not much different that here in New England where people register in Vermont. > Don't be silly, every one of these can be worked around if the dealer > wants to make the sale. It is not much different that here in New > England where people register in Vermont. It is different. Selling across state lines is different then selling across national boundaries. The US is one big market, the US and Canada are two separate markets even with NAFTA. I live in MA and bought my car in Nashua NH. The dealer registered my car in MA for me because there is nothing to stop someone from NH registering a car in MA on behalf of someone from MA, the US constitution expressing prohibits the states from erecting trade barriers between each other. As a MA resident I'm bound by MA law so even though I bought the car in NH I had to pay MA sales tax (NH has no sales tax). MA cleverly insures that the sales tax on cars is paid by requiring that it be paid to the Registry of Motor Vehicles at the time that the car is registered, my dealer took my sales tax check to the Registry for me just like they would if they had been a MA dealer. I'm also required to buy a car that meets California emission standards, NH residents aren't, so even though my dealer is in Nashua most of the cars on their lot all have the California emissions package because a substantial portion of their customers are from MA. If I had wanted to by a diesel from them I couldn't unless I had a NH address because diesels don't meet MA emissions standards. Restrictive sales agreements are very hard to enforce without the cooperation of governments. State governments aren't allowed to make trade policy so there is no one to give a company cover if they wanted to restrict their dealers from engaging in interstate trade. National governments are always torn between free and restricted trade policies. On the one hand almost all economists favor free trade so we have agreements like NAFTA. On the other hand politicians don't like free trade because they are more sensitive to the jobs that are lost, which are more visible, then to jobs that are gained which don't make headlines. So the US and Canadian governments aren't going to do anything to help their consumers do cross border shopping, quite the opposite they are going to erect as many barriers as they can. For example when US consumers tried to by pharmaceuticals from Canada, where there is price fixing, the FDA forbade it on the grounds that these drugs might be unsafe as if Canada was some third world country with no drug regulations. > So the US and Canadian governments aren't going to do anything > to help their consumers do cross border shopping, quite the opposite they > are going to erect as many barriers as they can. The CDN Gov is helping CDNs buy USA cars by posting helpful info on their web site. > Selling across state lines is different then selling across > national boundaries. The US new car dealer IS NOT SELLING INTO CANADA. The US new car dealer is selling to a Canadian resident. The US dealer is not authorized to collect Canadian taxes. The Canadian customer must show proof to the relavent Provincial department of Transportation that applicable provincial sales taxes were paid before the vehicle can be licensed for operation on public motorways. Such taxes are uaually paid at the boarder when the vehicle is brought into Canada. > Restrictive sales agreements are very hard to enforce without the > cooperation of governments. The Canadian federal gov't and the various Provincial gov'ts do not prohibit the importation of vehicles (new or used) by Canadian citizens from the US into Canada, and they do not employ restrictive or onnerous tactics to prevent the lawful registration and use of those vehicles in Canada. To the contrary, the Canadian gov'ts publish guides explaining how to perform such importation and registration. The US and relavent State gov'ts have no rules or mechanisms in place to prevent or hinder the sale of new or used cars to Canadians by US dealers. Hence this is not an issue of trade policy or trade law between countries. This is a restraint-of-trade issue which makes such clauses in franchise agreements illegal if not unenforcible. It's like most the people responding to your question didn't read your question.... strange.. it must frustrate you. To answer your question; it's illegal for the dealerships not to sell you a car on the basis of your race - that violates the civil rights you can enjoy while in the jurisdiction of the states. (You do not have to be a US citizen but instead just be in the states to have rights.) Having a policy not to sell to Canadians is no different as having a policy not to sell to Jews or Blacks. When I say Jews or Blacks, people can automatically see the point more clearly. The agreement between the manufacture and the dealership is mute and has no merit. Your problem is NOT with the manufacture but instead the dealership that is breaking the law and pulling the trigger so to speak. Of course, the franchise agreement is illegal however that's not for you to dispute but the dealership. You must make your claim against the dealership. 3 main points to prove in a discrimination complaint / law suit: 1. Is the discrimination intentional = yes, the dealership/manufacture state it's their policies NOT to sell to Canadians that are in their stores and buying their products within the USA. This isn't an export issue or tax issue (there is procedures already in place for both of those issues so they are mute.) 2. Motive = their motive is profit: their policy is to protect their dealerships on both sides of the border. 3. To prove that this policy exists. This is usually the hardest to prove. You can always scream discrimination however who in the world is going to admit it? Well, the dealerships will every time. You'd think with the 1, 2, 3 covered people would line up and take the dealerships to court. The problem is, people are don't understand they have the right to and they are lazy and assume the worst. > It's like most the people responding to your question didn't read your > question.... strange.. it must frustrate you. > > To answer your question; it's illegal for the dealerships not to sell > you a car on the basis of your race... Canuk is not a race. Race is a protected class. Nationality is not a protected class. > ...- that violates the civil rights > you can enjoy while in the jurisdiction of the states. No - it clearly does not. > ...(You do not > have to be a US citizen but instead just be in the states to have > rights.) Having a policy not to sell to Canadians is no different as > having a policy not to sell to Jews or Blacks. Yes it is (though your *conclusion* on restraint of trade may be right, but not for the reason you cite). > When I say Jews or > Blacks, people can automatically see the point more clearly. Your conclusions may be right, but for the wrong reasons - civil rights (as defined by U.S. federal law) is not the issue. Races and religions are protected classes (civil rights as defined by federal law). Nationality (i.e., being Canadian) is not a protected class. (Currently, protected classes are race, color, sex, creed, and age.) Like I said, you may or may not be right that trade restrictions across borders are illegal, but if it is illegal, it would not be illegal for the same reason that not selling to blacks or to jews would be illegal. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') <info@miona.com> wrote in message > The agreement between the manufacture and the dealership is mute and > has no merit. Mute? You mean they told the dealer to keep quiet about it? > <info@miona.com> wrote in message > >>The agreement between the manufacture and the dealership is mute and >>has no merit. > Mute? You mean they told the dealer to keep quiet about it? LOL! Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > <info@miona.com> wrote in message >> The agreement between the manufacture and the dealership is mute and >> has no merit. > > Mute? You mean they told the dealer to keep quiet about it? No, you need to keep quiet about the fact that Canadians are not a protected class! It's what car companies tried in the (then) European Community, and it's been cracked down upon. When in 1986 I bought a Mercedes in Germany to bring to Britain and save cash the unofficial barrier was a ridiculously long delivery lead time. Outright refusal to sell was illegal, of course. Interestingly, I received a letter announcing the car would be ready three months early and graciously inviting me to come and collect. This restriction was possible since I couldn't just buy a car off the dealership floor or from the 2nd-hand market because I wanted RHD, and there are no such cars in stock in Germany. Six years ago, when I did it again, there was no such restriction, fortunately. Saved a few thousand quid. Less than anticipated since in the time to delivery the UK price was lowered (in the face of a rising tide of personal imports) and the German price raised (esp for RHD vehicles). DAS For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling --- [..] > This is a restraint-of-trade issue which makes such clauses in > franchise agreements illegal if not unenforcible. > "Bruce L. Bergman" <blnospambergman@earthlink.invalid> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > wants to make the sale. It is not much different that here in New England > where people register in Vermont. > And for three easy cash payments of $9999 this car can be yours! > > Don't be silly, every one of these can be worked around if the dealer > wants to make the sale. It is not much different that here in New England > where people register in Vermont. So far I've contacted two U.S. Honda dealers for price quotes. Neither one would give me a quote. The first one gave me a bullshit line about needing me to provide a Washington address so they could charge the 8.5% state sales tax, which would then take them four weeks to process. When I wrote back telling them I'd done my research and that their Washington sales tax story just didn't wash with me, they replied, "I am sorry Honda is trying to make it so difficult for Canadians to purchase down here." The second dealer just ignored my request for a quote altogether. Ken >> And for three easy cash payments of $9999 this car can be yours! >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > is trying to make it so difficult for Canadians to purchase down here." > The second dealer just ignored my request for a quote altogether. I saw on the news the other day (Toronto Ontario news) that Honda is one of the companies who won't sell cars in the US to Canadian's. They didn't say anything about law's, only that most people don't have any problems other then with Honda. >"Ken Moiarty" <kmoiarty35@shaw.ca> wrote... >>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote... >>> And for three easy cash payments of $9999 this car can be yours! >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >anything about law's, only that most people don't have any problems other >then with Honda. There are many reasons why a car maker doesn't want a new car sold in one country to immediately be taken to and registered in a different country. The only way to know for sure is to get through to a 'High Muckety Muck' (VP or higher) at the car maker and ask - and that's if you can get a straight answer from them, they can always say "That's the way it is, Go away and stop bothering me..." Could be import quotas, or export quotas, or missing required equipment like DRL's used to be before they made them fleet-wide, or that the computers will balk sending a USA spec car's warranty and recall notices to a Canadian address... Could be as simple as the Canadian car dealers insisting that if they have to service them they should get the commissions from selling them. And that's a valid complaint. Another valid one it could well be is warranty concerns - since part of the sales price is you've "paid" for your pro-rata share of the warranty costs for that model year into the USA warranty pool. But the Canadian warranty costs pool didn't get contributed to when you bought the car in the USA, so if your car needs any warranty work the Canadian distributor is going to take a loss on it on their books. A few USA Residents having problems while driving through visiting Canada wouldn't be a big problem - they probably have a way to "hand clear" small quantities of the costs between the different divisions. But if they have a big recall and have 100,000+ "unpaid" repairs to do on "Grey Market" cars, that will hurt bad. --<< Bruce >>-- > There are many reasons why a car maker doesn't want a new car sold > in one country to immediately be taken to and registered in a > different country. No, there aren't many reasons. When Canadians are sitting on their hands waiting for prices in Canada to drop because of the increased value of the Canadian dollar, then that is not good for the manufacturers either. It is widely known by Canadians for the past few months (if not the past year or two) that retailers of MANY items are not cutting retail prices to reflect the price reductions they have been seeing at the wholesale and importer level. We should be seeing DEFLATION in Canada, but we're not. > Could be import quotas, or export quotas, You are a moron. I have stated MANY times in this thread that US new car DEALERS have nothing to do with importation or exportation or any mythical quotas. When a Canadian walks into a US new car dealership and wants to buy a new car, that car is not deemed to be exported from the USA any more than a bag of frozen food is deemed to be exported from the USA if that Canadian had gone to a grocery store and bought that frozen food and brought it back to Canada. Truth is that the US gov't doesn't (and really has no way) to measure, track, or record the stuff that Canadians buy at retail and then bring back into Canada. A car is just another retail item. And when that Canadian brings his hypothetical new car from the US into Canada, again the US dealership is not involved AT ALL in that transaction, and the idea or concept of quotas are also not involved. > or missing required equipment like DRL's used to be It is up to the Canadian who brings the car into Canada to make sure it meets all regulatory requirements - not the US dealer who sold him the car. > or that the computers will balk sending a USA spec car's > warranty and recall notices to a Canadian address... Pure speculation - and besides, when you're looking at saving between $5k and $20, do you really care about future recall notices? And also not a reason for the US dealer to deny the sale. > Could be as simple as the Canadian car dealers insisting that > if they have to service them ... That is an issue that's down the road, and plays no role in the initial decision for the US car dealer to refuse to do business with the Canadian customer. The US dealer doesn't know, and really can't know, and really doesn't care, if a Canadian dealership will perform any service or waranty work on the car. Where have you ever bought a car where the dealer wants some assurance that you will bring the car back to them for servicing - or they won't sell you the car? What utter bullshit. > they should get the commissions from selling them. > And that's a valid complaint. And that's a bullshit complaint. I can buy a car at dealer A and get it serviced at dealer B, and dealer B doesn't complain that he didn't get the commission from selling me the car in the first place. > Another valid one it could well be is warranty concerns - Again, a US dealer can tell the Canadian customer that he might have a problem with warranty work, but that's for the Canadian customer to risk or deal with, not the US dealer. That doesn't prevent the US dealer from selling to the Canadian customer at all. > > There are many reasons why a car maker doesn't want a new car sold > > in one country to immediately be taken to and registered in a [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > risk or deal with, not the US dealer. That doesn't prevent the US > dealer from selling to the Canadian customer at all. This isn't a response to you, MoPar Man, but yours was the last post I read so thought I would attach the following link here for the benefit of others who may be interested. http://www.riv.ca/ "cavedweller" <jawnwillie@hotmail.com> wrote in message > This isn't a response to you, MoPar Man, but yours was the last post I > read so thought I would attach the following link here for the benefit > of others who may be interested. > > http://www.riv.ca/ We really had a nice conversation going here until you came along and ruined it with FACTS. > > http://www.riv.ca/ > > We really had a nice conversation going here until you came along > and ruined it with FACTS. I've always been saying that there are fundamentally no blocks in place by the CDN gov't when it comes to importing cars into Canada, and have said that there are plenty of instructions on the net for doing so. The one item that's interesting is the requirement on the US side to fill out paperwork informing them of any motorized (self-propelled) vehicles being exported from the country. There doesn't seem to be any fee or cost for that, but there also doesn't seem to be any teeth to it either. The various forms and proceedures that are done for the car in Canada probably don't require any proof that the US export registration was in fact performed - and if the car crosses back into the USA during routine use, US customs probably would never know the car was improperly exported from the USA. The Canadian import proceedures don't really seem to anticipate that the car being imported from the US into Canada is a NEW car. One example is that a declaration that the car has no outstanding recall issues is part of what's required. A brand new car presumably would not leave a dealer's lot with an unresolved or uncorrected recall issue. Interesting that Canadian Tire is prominently mentioned as a place that a car can be taken to for the inspection and certification of conformity with Canadian DOT rules. See also: http://www.importcartocanada.info/ http://autosportint.com/quick_quote.html http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070919/Car_deals_070919?s_ name=&no_ads= http://www.ucanimport.com/ http://www.apa.ca/template.asp?DocID=253 ------------------- The name of the Case which states that Canadian dealers must do warranty work on U.S. cars is: Toyota Canada Inc. v. Lipetz, 1998 CanLII 4473 (BC S.C.) I recommend anyone purchasing a car print off this case to know what Canadian Dealers are OBLIGATED to do under warranty -------------------- > Interesting that Canadian Tire is prominently mentioned as a place > that a car can be taken to for the inspection and certification of > conformity with Canadian DOT rules. Makes sense. An independent cross Canada maintenance facility. OK for tire and battery changes, go elsewhere for anything else. > The one item that's interesting is the requirement on the US side to > fill out paperwork informing them of any motorized (self-propelled) > vehicles being exported from the country. There doesn't seem to be > any fee or cost for that, but there also doesn't seem to be any teeth > to it either. Wow! A government entity misssing an opportunity to collect some kind of processing fee. Woof! How could that happen! Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > "cavedweller" <jawnwil...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > This isn't a response to you, MoPar Man, but yours was the last post I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > We really had a nice conversation going here until you came along and ruined > it with FACTS. I apologize sincerely for that :). My 1994 Grand Caravan LE was originally sold in Southern California. It was imported into Canada about a year ago by the second owner (a Canadian who wintered in CA). Someone had to add a DRL module. > Pure speculation - and besides, when you're looking at saving between > $5k and $20, do you really care about future recall notices? And also > not a reason for the US dealer to deny the sale. I keep seeing these wild numbers thrown about and I have to admit to a certain confusion. There's a bit gap between 5K and 20K. Surely you have something more specific to relate these numbers to. Obviously, you are talking across a whole range of cars. Care to expound a bit? Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net Where have you been? Instances of where a savings of around $20,000+ can be realized are *hard not to find*. Nonetheless, here's an example to get you started: Canada: 2008 Lincoln Navigator base MRSP (incl. $1250 dlvry.) ------------------------- * $74,649 CAD United States: 2008 Lincoln Navigator base MRSP (incl. $900 lvry.) -------------------- * $48,655 USD You do the math. Ken * Sources: http://ford.ca/main/default.asp?language=en§ion=2&source=&sVehCategory=Linco ln&model=Navigator and http://www.lincoln.com/configurator/BuildAndPriceModel.aspx, respectively. >> Pure speculation - and besides, when you're looking at saving between >> $5k and $20, do you really care about future recall notices? And also [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > something more specific to relate these numbers to. Obviously, you are > talking across a whole range of cars. Care to expound a bit? > Where have you been? Instances of where a savings of around $20,000+ can > be realized are *hard not to find*. Nonetheless, here's an example to get [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Ken Where have I been? Right here in the US, where I don't see these big price differences - that's why I asked. Did not really have any idea what vehicles sell for in Canada and certainly did not realize that sort of difference existed. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >> Where have you been? Instances of where a savings of around $20,000+ can >> be realized are *hard not to find*. Nonetheless, here's an example to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > vehicles sell for in Canada and certainly did not realize that sort of > difference existed. Okay, fair enough. Ken > >"Ken Moiarty" <kmoiarty35@shaw.ca> wrote... > >>> "Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote... [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > that the computers will balk sending a USA spec car's warranty and > recall notices to a Canadian address... Could be but it isn't that. The Canadian dealers don't want to lose the sales to the US dealers. So they complained to the factory who then told the US dealers to not sell to Canadians. Which is a violation of NAFTA. A couple years back when the exchange rate was the opposite way, US dealers had no problems selling to Canadians. It has nothing to do with the rest of the BS your spouting. The motorcycle groups have been discussing this same topic, BTW. Both Honda and Harley are making it difficult for Canadians to buy in the US. However, people who have actually done it report that if they get a cashiers check for their opening offer and fill their pockets with Gypsy Travelers Checks ($100 bills) and walk into a US dealer, the sight of the ready cash melts away the objections and they buy their car or bike. Ted > A couple years > back when the exchange rate was the opposite way, US dealers > had no problems selling to Canadians. It has nothing to do with the > rest of the BS your spouting. Then Canadian dealers were selling to Americans, but they were under pressure from Canadian HQ not to sell to Americans. Same situation on the other foot. The vehicles which are made in low cost Mexico, such as the Neon, could easily be priced to the market. When the exchange rate was 1.5 Neons were about US$3000 less in Canada. > In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > When the exchange rate was 1.5 > Neons were about US$3000 less in Canada. Lest any Canadian feels discriminated against, please let me add my 2 cents. I am a U.S. citizen living in Canada on a 3-year work permit; need to replace my old Buick Rendezvous, and I, also, like any person of any nationality who has a (legal) address in Canada, cannot buy a new car in the U.S. It's not just Canadians who are being discriminated against--it's anybody with a Canadian address. >> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > new car in the U.S. It's not just Canadians who are being > discriminated against--it's anybody with a Canadian address. oh well that changes it... its obviously not discrimination then > >> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, > >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > oh well that changes it... its obviously not discrimination then How do you reach that conclusion? Obviously anyone with a CDN address is discriminated against. The car companies are really showing their greed on this issue. >>>> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Obviously anyone with a CDN address is discriminated against. > The car companies are really showing their greed on this issue. There was a couple on the news who went to maine from canada to visit family or whatnot ... tried to buy a new car and the dealer prohibited them from doing so. they are taking the dealer to court (Hope they have deep pockets). I wish more people would do this. >>>>> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >I wish more people would do this. Finding someone with a US address to buy the car could be an upcoming business opportunity. Some people have friends/family that can buy and then sell as a used car to their Canadian relatives. I don't know why the salesmen wouldn't offer this service to anyone who wants to buy a car in the US. How do those companies that buy cars for people work? Do they buy the car and then turn it over to you, or do they just get your name on the original purchase? Finding someone with a US address to buy the car could be an upcoming > business opportunity. Some people have friends/family that can buy and > then sell as a used car to their Canadian relatives. I don't know why > the salesmen wouldn't offer this service to anyone who wants to buy a > car in the US. Dealership, if they are smart enough to squeeze the juice out of the fruit, they can always open a seperate entity just to buy cars and do resale buiness with canadians. However, becuz canadian cross border buyers are still not common, and used car really depreciate alot, there is big risk for them to take. > There was a couple on the news who went to maine from canada to visit > family or whatnot ... tried to buy a new car and the dealer prohibited > them from doing so. they are taking the dealer to court (Hope they have > deep pockets). > > I wish more people would do this. You are likely referring to this: > Canadians sue auto makers over dealers' sale refusals > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > said. The couple claims that more than 80 car dealerships in New England > refused their business. You can join them and help out their pockets. Actually the USA Gov. should back the suit. >> October 27, 2007 >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > You can join them and help out their pockets. > Actually the USA Gov. should back the suit. It's a class action suit. They won't see diddly-squat for money. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net >> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > new car in the U.S. It's not just Canadians who are being > discriminated against--it's anybody with a Canadian address. 1. an act or instance of discriminating. 2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination. 3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination. 4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate. >>> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > chose the colors with great discrimination. > 4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate. What's your point? Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >>>> In article <newscache$2mo3qj$ff6...@news.ipinc.net>, >>>> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with the letter 'x') OK - since he's not going to answer the question, does anyone know what his point was? Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > > I'm sure if you walked in and paid cash, there would be no > > questions asked... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > For openers, there are US Federal banking rules on recording of > transactions over $10,000. Such rules do not prohibit or hinder a transaction between a prospective Canadian customer and a US new car dealer. > And I strongly suspect that Canada has similar laws if you > wanted to take the car in the other direction. The Canadian gov't publishes guides explaining how it's citizens can import a wide variety of items from the US into Canada. The Canadian gov't does not have the same level of "paranoia" regarding the tracking or reporting of the movements of assets owned by Canadians outside of Canada (or inside for that matter). The only requirement along those lines is that Canadians must report if they own more than $100k of non-Canadian real estate. Many Canadians own US real estate, and vice-versa. > The dealer needs a name and address to fill out the title > transfer paperwork for the car - even if the dealer doesn't > handle the titling and registration of the new car, they > still need to fill out and give the title form to the buyer > so the buyer can handle it themselves. Are there state or local laws that prevent US car dealers from selling NEW vehicles to Canadians? The sale of USED vehicles to Canadians happens all the time. So do US state or local laws differentiate between new and used vehicles - or (as I suspect) are there NO such state or local rules prohibiting sale based on Canadian residency? > And they have to apply in the state of sale for temporary > registration so the car can be driven away, unless the buyer > wants to have the car shipped across the border to it's > destination. That is a technicallity that is NOT used as the basis for denial of sale of NEW vehicles to Canadians. > The car maker has the right to find out those details, and if > the dealer made sales transactions that violated the franchise > agreements the car maker can choose to take action. The franchise agreements can not contain illegal clauses that constitute restraint of trade. If they do, they can (and should) be challenged by the dealers. > I'm sure if you walked in and paid cash, there would be no > questions asked... A Canadian would almost certainly have to pay in "cash" or equivalent (bank draft, cashiers check, etc) if they were to purchase a new vehicle from a US dealer. But as has been stated here MANY TIMES, US dealers are refusing the sale, on the grounds that their franchise agreements do not allow them to sell to Canadians - even if the transaction happens 100% within the dealer's showroom and the dealer is in no way involved in transporting the vehicle into Canada. (FYI - Currently, 1.00 Canadian dollar is equal to almost 1.03 US dollars). There are absolutely NO restrictions placed on Canadians by any level of Canadian gov't that prohibits Canadians from purchasing US vehicles (new or used) and bringing them back to Canada and licensing them for use in Canada. The Canadian gov't publishes pamphlets and guides explaining the process. There are also no US gov't (or state or local) restrictions that prohibits Canadians from purchasing new or used vehicles from any level of US vendor (dealer, private owner, etc) and exporting the vehicle back to Canada. There are laws in the US (restraint of trade) that prohibits contracts between parties that convey no benefit to either party. A clause in a dealer franchise that specifies a condition where a sale can not be made is an example of a contract that conveys no benefit to either the dealer or the manufacturer and technically violates US restraint of trade laws. "Contractual obligations not to trade are illegal agreements on public policy grounds unless they are reasonable in the interests of both contracting parties and of the public at large." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restraint_of_trade An agreement between a manufacturer and a dealer that specifies that a dealer can not do business with a subset of prospective customers is an example of "restraint of trade" and conveys no benefit to either the dealer or the public. And such an agreement does not benefit the auto manufacturer in question because auto makers operate separate US and Canadian companies, hence an entity like Ford USA does not benefit by placing restrictions on US dealers to sell only to US residents (irregardless of the fact that Ford Canada may benefit from such a restriction). >>>If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states >>>that the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Ok, what law trumps what other law then? Read Wes's reply - that is an example. There are many other examples in everyday life - some that shouldn't be, and many that are based on politics. For example - so-called affirmative action laws trump anti-discrimination laws. There might be a law that says I can't fire a weapon within town limits that might get trumped if I am forced to to save my or someone elses life. Almost infinite examples. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > "Who" has it wrong. I worked for DC in Western Canada during the Exporting > times in the mid 90's through early 2003. No dealer lost there franchise for [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > on the vehicle prrior to being reported exported, as well as all rebates > paid to the dealer. I got that info from two other Chrysler dealers we deal with. Did they lie? BTW the dealer DC faulted was in Richmond, BC. One dealer who told me this took over the dealership, they were my dealer! There were also some media reports on this situation. The dealer losing the franchise didn't export to the USA, they were actively advertising and selling to USA customers who came to Canada, picked up their car and did the export/import themselves. Now we have Honda Canada saying they will not honor the warranty on a new Honda purchased in the USA. The Honda CR-V is 35% higher in CDA! A go around I've heard is buying a slightly used USA vehicle. Some USA dealers are licensing them in the USA just to turn on the used switch. There are examples of this same anti free trade by manufacturers in other businesses, one being in computers where I have personal knowledge of manufacturers restrictive practices. Our Canadian Government does not restrict cross border trade, in fact they provide info on how to import a vehicle. On a related subject I've noticed in the last year some Canadian dealers (DC included) near me selling one year off lease cars at extremely low prices. They couldn't be costing those cars at their normal CDN retail price. IMO they are costing them at the significantly lower USA price factored by the CDN exchange rate, which is 1:1 now. Yes they did lie! Richmond was and is still run by a retard (Binkley). And Columbia was a brand new dealership which was an open point created as the dealer and DC wanted to close his New westminster dealership, because of his need for a new facility and lack of any semi-reasonable realestate to build a facility. So Columbia moved into the location of the former dealer, as that dealer turned his franchise over to us, as he was a retard at running a business and could not be profitable. His main reason for turning it over was the fact the unions controlled the dealership. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message |
|
|