How to Avoid the ‘Cash for Clunkers’ Snarl

August 19, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (13)

When car dealers start doing business with the federal government, whaddya expect? Perfect harmony?

Of course not. Several weeks into the "cash for clunkers" program it turns out that delivering a couple of billion dollars worth of rebates to hundreds of thousands of car buyers can generate a few flat tires. The Department of Transportation's latest update on the Car Allowance Rebate System shows that the government has received applications for about 412,000 rebates totaling $1.7 billion. But so far, the feds have approved only a fraction of those, leaving dealers furious.

[See which carmakers have been hurt most and helped most by the recession.]

The Transportation Department won't say exactly what the rejection rate is, but in an Automotive News survey, some dealers said up to 80 percent of their rebate applications had been rejected. Some dealers are waiting for payments totaling as much as $200,000, the survey found. About 13 percent of dealers said they've suspended clunker deals because of red tape and concern about getting paid by the government.

Prediction: They'll be back. Buyers, meanwhile, should make sure the dealer isn't putting the burden of obtaining a rebate on them. And those still looking for a clunker deal should be able to find plenty of dealers continuing to play along.

It's obvious that the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, the agency administering CARS, has been overwhelmed by the popularity of a program that has surprised just about everybody, including the masterminds in Congress who had to triple the funding a week after clunkers kicked in. NHTSA initially detailed 225 people to processing those 400,000 claims; it's in the process of assigning 1,000 more to the program to help speed up the rebates.

To put this in context, there are only about 635 full-time workers at the entire agency, and their principal job is to set safety standards, perform crash tests, conduct research, and regulate the automakers. So NHTSA is swelling to nearly twice its regular size—by borrowing workers from other agencies—to manage a program that will come and go within six weeks. I guess they'll get back to worrying about safety after Labor Day, when CARS expires.

[See 5 downsides to the cash for clunkers program.]

NHTSA also has to make sure nobody's claiming that a rusty tricycle constitutes a clunker worth $4,500 toward a new ride. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that anybody would ever attempt to take advantage of wanton congressional spending and defraud the U.S. government. But do we trust car dealers and their customers enough to go by the honor system? Many of the rejected clunker claims are being sent back to dealers because of paperwork snafus like unsigned sales agreements, mismatched serial numbers, and forms that fail to include the make, model, and year of the clunker being traded in. Hmmmm. Those are all harmless mistakes, no doubt. But if people at NHTSA weren't eyeballing every application, chances are that there would be a newspaper headline somewhere declaring "Man Gets Clunker Rebate for Matchbox Car." It still might happen.

Dealer groups have been meeting with NHTSA to straighten out the foul-ups and make sure their own members are following procedures and playing by the rules. Odds are this will all get sorted out soon, the pace of rebates will pick up, and dissident dealers will quiet down and rejoin the program.

Meanwhile, delayed rebates have caused tension between some dealers and their customers. Just like money to ruin a beautiful relationship.

[See 8 industries that will sit out a recovery.]

The government has gotten complaints about a few dealers who seem to be putting their customers on the hook in case there's a problem with the CARS rebate coming through. Now, in a negotiated deal it's always a good idea to put the financial risk on the other guy. Except that in the CARS program, dealers aren't allowed to do that. Banned practices include forcing the buyer to leave a deposit for the amount of the clunker rebate, in case the government doesn't cough it up, and forcing the buyer to sign an agreement to pay the dealer the rebate amount if the government rejects the application. In general, the burden is on the dealer, not the car buyer, to dicker with the feds and make sure the paperwork is correct (unless you lie on the application, which could invalidate the whole deal). Consumers can see the complete list of rules at Cars.gov (look under the FAQ), and buyers can report suspicious dealer activity to the government by calling 866-CAR-7891.

The popularity of the program has also caught manufacturers by surprise, one reason they've run short of some vehicles that clunker traders want to buy. Some dealers have sold out of models like the Jeep Patriot and the Ford Focus, for instance. Buyers were left wondering whether they can still get a clunker deal when the next shipment arrives or should pick another vehicle. So the government has tweaked the rules to include new cars that aren't on dealer lots but are in the production pipeline. As long as the dealer can identify an actual vehicle and its vehicle identification number, or VIN, the clunker deal can go through, even if the car is delivered after the program expires. Buyers need to make sure the VIN of the car they ultimately take home is the same as the VIN on the original sales agreement and watch out for any other kind of bait-and-switch.

[See why GM is ready to rebound.]

If the nearest dealer has bailed out of the program, look for another. Despite the problems, there are plenty of reasons for dealers to stay involved with CARS until it expires. With the government subsidizing the cost of so many new cars, the program is obviously boosting sales. But it's also drawing other shoppers who end up buying a car even though they don't qualify for a clunker deal, and it's generating business in dealers' service departments as well. And with many buyers who qualified for a clunker deal already enjoying their new ride, the frenzy is starting to subside. That should give the government time to catch up and placate the dealers. A little haggling is just part of the process.

Tags:
recession,
car manufacturers

Reader Comments Read all comments (13)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

To Jason AZ:

Stop trying to be a heroic Dealer Basher.

Once again, as others, your information is not factual.

There is NO Specific Rule in the 136 page law nor the 20 Page amendment that forbids a contingency agreement. READ THE ENTIRE RULE on the cars.gov website.

We contacted legal counsel for assurance, and, in the Q and A on their site it states that contingency agreements can be made between the Consumer and the Dealer.

If one party disagrees, then, there is no sale and the customer can go somewhere else.

It is the CONSUMERS responsibility to supply the documentation to insure they qualify, then, the dealers responsibility as to accuracy upon submission.

When you submit proper documentation and still get rejects, there's a problem with the system, NOT the dealer.

As to your inventory statement, dealers intentionally reduced their inventories a year ago when the economy started tanking and interest rates soared, if there is a shortage of inventory now, its not due to this so called huge spur in sales, it's pent up demand catching up with existing small inventories.

If you truly are a business man, then you try waiting for thousands and millions of dollars to operate your business, when your product has been delivered, and no guarantee you'll get paid. I think NOT!

So you try and "SIMMA DOWN" when you've got thousands/millions of dollars outstanding and no way to get it back.

Your statement that the dealer could just take the car back is a real joke. The dealer has no legal recourse to take the car back without the contingency agreement, then if he's already destroyed the customers trade, as was initially required by the rule, what happens to the consumer?

Your statement "the way car dealers treat their customers" is a broad statement branding the entire industry when in fact shoddy practices are done by only a few, the majority of all New Car Franchise Dealers make every effort at customer satisfaction as their Manufacturers tie their incentives to it. Customers need to fill out their surveys rather than pitching them, as they DO have impact.

For every horror story you hear of a dealer mistreating a customer, I can tell you one of a customer attempting to defraud a dealer. So lets get real here!

The facts are still the same, this program is a mismanaged joke, played against the taxpayer, for the sole purpose to make it appear the government is doing something about the economy.

The actual rule, under the Costs and Benefits section, specifically states, there will be NO ECONOMIC BENEFIT to this program, to the economy or the manufacturer.

So, if you would read, rather than assume, you could stop broadcasting false information.

Get off of your soap box, stop beating your chest as to how knowledgeable you are, and go promote your horror story website somewhere else!

philr of FL 10:43AM August 21, 2009

Let's see, dealers have been sitting on tons of inventory, then the fed goes ahead and gives the industry a shot in the arm. Great!

But what happens? Dealers resort to stupid sales tactics like they always do. There is a specific rule in the CARS program that forbids the dealer from requiring any kind of contingency contract for the amount of the CARS rebate in case the claim is denied. It is the dealer's obligation to ensure the vehicle and the owner qualify for the rebate. Worse case: the dealer has to take the new car back and eat the difference.

Look, I'm a businessman too, and if I treated my customers the way car dealers treated their customers, I'd be out of business. So, please, eat your cheese and quit whining. Customers are back in the dealerships, and at least some cash is flowing for you. In another month, expect the customers to disappear, because the incentive to get tortured and lied to will be gone.

If anyone here has a story to tell about their cash for clunker experience, tell it to the world at www.cardealerhorrorstories.com/reader-story.

Jason of AZ 4:08AM August 21, 2009

Rick Newman needs to get his facts correct. Obviously he did little research into this article before he wrote it and just spewed propaganda as fact, as much of the media is doing.

First, there is no law preventing a dealer from requiring a contigency agreement in case they do not receive the funds from the government. That is an agreement between the consumer and the Dealer. No Federal law can prevent any business from protecting itself in contract fashion. Second, most dealers are now on the hook for much more than he wrote in his article. The math is simple based on sales.

Having had first hand experience in processing 138 of these transactions, I can state as fact this is one of the poorest executions of any program I have ever seen. (Govt Healthcare? HA!HA!)

Applications are being rejected for undisclosed errors, its called error &&X with no reason given for the error.

Applications are being rejected for lack of insurance for 1 year, when the actual proof is given and DOES provide proof of continuous coverage. Therefore the customers application goes back to the bottom of the pile for another 20 days, and yes I said 20 days. The dealers were assured they would have payment in 10 when they entered this program. We along with many other dealers have not even had a response on 93% of our claims which were submitted on July 30th after 2 days of trying to just log in to the government website. I have documentation to prove everything I am saying as do most of the dealers out there, yet Lahood and the government continue to rant about how successful this program is.

The governmet refuses to state how much has actually been paid out under this program. Everything they state is conjecture.

When a dealer applys for the rebate, he enters the data into an Oracle database. That's an application that holds all of the information for the transaction. It would be very simple for the government to run a query on the database as to how many applications they have received, how much they have paid out, and how much is rejected. Do a little math and you have the total. To date, they have refused to do this. They took the running counter off their website the second day it was up, so no one had any idea how much money was left, nor what had been paid. The dealer is expected to deliver vehicles in the dark, not knowing if they will get paid and being told that when the money runs out, they are out the dollars if they have delivered the car. What recourse does a dealer have other than returning to the customer for the car or the money. That's where the contigency agreement comes into play. Sure traffic in the dealerships rose, partly because of the pent up demand and mainly because of the offer for basically free money to the consumer. If any retailer advertised FREE money, their traffic would increase dramatically.

You want to know the facts, go sit in a dealers accounting office and watch the replys and paperwork.

C4C is a joke & failure

Phil R of FL 11:15PM August 20, 2009

Rick Newman

Rick Newman

The global economy is mysterious, even scary. Chief Business Correspondent Rick Newman connects the dots. In addition to his writing for U.S. News, Rick is the co-author of two books: Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11, and Bury Us Upside Down: The Misty Pilots and the Secret Battle for the Ho Chi Minh Trail.


Read Rick's latest blog entries here.

advertisement

advertisement