Cash4Clunkers (a.k.a. CARS): Bait and Switch?

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Last night, I watched a Flood Automotive Group TV ad touting “Cash for Clunkers.” The message was simple: Uncle Sam’s got $1 billion for clunkers. Come get $4500 for your clunker. Not a single word about which vehicles qualify for the money. It didn’t even refer viewers to a website for details— like this ad for C4C “designated” dealer Phil Fitts Ford. A quick ring ’round twenty dealers nationwide shows a definite “reluctance” to discuss the particulars of the CARS program over the phone. “I’m sure your vehicle will qualify,” a Chrysler dealer told me re: my theoretical 2005 Chrysler 300. “Bring it down and we’ll have a look.”

“We haven’t received the guidelines yet,” a Chevy dealer said, in response to “how much money can I get for my 2002 Honda Civic?” Only one dealer said my non-applicable vehicle was non-applicable. In other words, thousands of car dealers are ready, willing and able to commit the sin of omission; luring old cars owners to the dealership with the prospect of “free” government cash—for which the customer’s vehicle doesn’t qualify.

Then there’s the other “danger.” What’s to stop dealers from saying “Well, your wreck doesn’t qualify for the government program, but I tell you what, WE’LL give you $5000 towards a new Enclave”? I heard those very words from the mouth of a mid-Western Buick dealer.

The DOT is making sure that traded-in clunkers qualify for the federal rebate. They’re doing their level best to ensure that the culled clunkers are disabled. But who’s watching dealers at the sharp end, protecting consumers against the same old fraud and misrepresentation? The same people doing it now. And look what a great job they’re doing.

While I applaud the DOT for their Herculean efforts to create a new, effective, efficient and ethically-administered federal program, and I’m a firm believer in Caveat emptor, CARS puts some of America’s most economically challenged consumers in the dealer crosshairs. Again.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 20 comments
  • Steven Lang Steven Lang on Jul 17, 2009

    You're right. We got the GC when my wife was 8 months pregnant with kid #2. It averaged around 20 mpg which is more than the Windstars and Freestars my wife drove once I started selling cars on the side.

  • Donpbenz Donpbenz on Jul 27, 2009

    Massachusetts law prohibits merchants from using "bait and switch" tactics. They may not advertise one product and then try to steer consumers to another product by refusing to show the advertised item, dispariging it or it's warranty or failing to provide a legally sufficient quantity. Under MA general Laws Chapter 93A and 940 CMR 6.06 a seller may be guilty of false advertising ( or of bait and switch tactics) if it advertises a particular item and then fails to provide sufficient quantity to meet reasonable demand. The ad must clearly state limited supplies and that no rain checks are available. It can offer a comparable substitute or it can prove shipping delays. This is precisely what happened to me today at a KIA dealership. When I purchased the Boston Herald that afternoon the ad still appeared. It is dissappointing that NONE of the dealers were able to produce a vehicle at the advertised price.

  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
  • TheEndlessEnigma Poor planning here, dropping a Vinfast dealer in Pensacola FL is just not going to work. I love Pensacola and that part of the Gulf Coast, but that area is by no means an EV adoption demographic.
Next