I am in california.
I recently purchase a upscale use car from a local porsche dealer. The purchase was as is. This vehical can be consider a collector item.
Here are my question regarding my legal position.
1. During the purchase of the vehical. Before we talked about prices. The sales person and the sales manager represented that the vehical had a 1 year drive "train" warrentee on it. So we agree on a price based party on this representation. So I spend a total of 6 hours at the dealer ship in addition I got a friend to help me look at the vehical. I wrote them a check for the deposit.
When I was finally was about the sign the contract. They first they said that the warrentee was not avaliable any more because of the age of the vehical. I said very clearly that the warentee was represented to me multiple time during the purchase, and represented to my freind independently. The salesman said he was mistaken. They took to their vp (something of something) and they said the warrentee could be purchase for $1500 dollars but I have to paid for it. I said our orginal agreement included the warentee. At first I want them to whole to their orginal agreement. Got no where, I even offer to spit the differencd with them (lower the price of the purchase vehical by $750). I talk a while with the saleperson saying this was not want was represented to me orginally he keep saying he is sorry. Finally, he said he was instructed to give me my deposit check back and show me the door. Considering after spending more than 6 hourse at the dealership and getting my friend out there to look at the vehical (we both went out to the dealership twice) and the car may be a hard to find one. After calculating the cost of my and my freinds time spend and the dealership and the cost of finding another vehical, I relunctely purchase the vehical.
Frist do you folk think under these circumstances I have a legal recourse. To me there was an oral agreement to purchase deposit given and at the end the terms were changed by one party and the other party was force to accept to minimise lose (more costly to walk away from the deal). I don't think this pratice by auto dealerships are uncommon.
2. When I was test driving the vehical. I notice that it pulls to the right and was unstable. I mention this to the salesman he apparently talked to his manager. His manager suggested that they do a alignment their cost would be $150 by will only charge me $75. I agree. The problem is that after taking it home the problem is not fixed. I call them about this about two weeks after the purchase. First the salesperson said just talk to our service department. The service person said they need a o.k. from the saleperson. I ask the sales person for the o.k. (then I went on vacation for 2 weeks). When I cam back from vacation I got a message from the saleman saying they did the alignment initically, and it should be correct. And don't know what else could be wrong so I would need to pay to have it check again.
And I notice one of the tires bulging (so it was defective). It has been about a month after purchase but I have put only 200 miles and I have been on vacation for two weeks.
Given this situation do the dealer have a legal obligation to replace the tire, can't sell a car with defective tires. Also the alignment. Are they obligated to redo the alignment? If something else is wrong tires, suspension ect that cause the initicial problem (pulling to one side unstable car) are they obligated to fix it.
p.s how should I proceed.