A question for the legal hive mind.
A franchised motor dealer quotes a customer on a new vehicle. The customer has a “fleet” so gets decent discount terms, which are agreed by the manufacturer. The terms on this occasion come to 5 figures, so a not insubstantial amount. These terms are included in the quote.
On most occasions, an invoice is given to the customer with the terms/discount shown. These extra terms are then paid by the manufacturer to the franchised dealer.
On some occasions the invoice will not show the discount and the terms are paid back directly by the manufacturer, to the customer.
It is the sales manager’s responsibility to check where the terms are to be paid.
On this occasion (you’ve probably guessed), the discount was shown on the invoice, which was paid in full by the customer. The terms were then subsequently paid back to the customer NOT the franchised dealer, by the manufacturer - effectively a double discount.
The customer is refusing to pay this money back to the franchised dealer, basically saying it was their mistake, not his. However, wording it to say “the invoice was paid in full, what money we got back is irrelevant as what’s on the invoice is what was owed”.
I know there will be paid for legal advice taken but wondered with this little amount of information (I don’t have the full stack myself) what people’s thoughts were? Is this pecuniary advantage? Or something else? Or just gross negligence/misconduct by the sales manager? The customer has “apparently” admitted (to the offending sales manager) that they knew there was a mistake but haven’t worded it that way in any recorded correspondence...
Reply With Quote