Bought a model Y that I thought had clean title and found out it was salvage

[stopcrazypp]

Did your records check show it had an original title in Ohio? Or is it just the auction claiming it was there for a possible auction, but was never titled anywhere other than California? The former shows red flags for title washing, although even the latter is dubious.

 

[exxxviii]

That is exactly the same as saying someone CAN knowingly put false numbers in their tax return. Sure, they don't have to prove anything at the time they file it, but they are taking a risk, because if it gets audited, they can be caught and convicted of fraud for making known false statements in a legal document.

You keep saying people can just pay the $15 dollars and file a paper, so it's just a piece of paper. But filing that paper is putting yourself on the hook legally about the veracity of that statement that the cost of the repair is more than the worth of the car. If it's not, then that's breaking the law.

You are adding things that are not in the law. The law does not care if an owner declares his salvage that somebody else thinks is viable. All CA's law says in the context of these examples is a "Total loss salvage vehicle means... that the owner...considers it uneconomical to repair." That's all. The owner does not need to prove anything to anyone. An owner of the car is free to declare it salvage at their sole "consideration." There is no false statement or legal hurdle. This is simple freedom. Maybe the best answer is, when you own a country or state, you can dictate the law the way you wish it was - that the government alone has the authority to decide if a car is truly salvaged. But in the United States, it does not work your way.

And I also get the second thing you're saying, which is along the lines of:
This is common practice. This is just how it's done in the industry. Everybody's doing it. No one gets hassled about this. No one checks it. Etc. etc.
But those aren't relevant to the legality just because a lot of people get away with it and enforcement is lacking.

No, nothing I wrote is even remotely similar to that. I don't think this is common, and I don't know why Tesla would be doing it. When I was involved with wholesale remarketing, we did everything possible to maximize the value of the cars. And we would never run a car salvaged unless it was truly junk. As I wrote multiple times, if Tesla had run the cars at ADESA Los Angeles, Manheim California, or Manheim Riverside, all nearby auctions, they probably would have netted thousands more for the cars. Although none of us can make sense of it, I am saying that Tesla is absolutely free to do this.

Back to the core issue at hand. There is probably nothing nefarious in what Tesla did. The nefarious part is that a dealer bought a car, marked for salvage, at a salvage auction, and did not disclose its salvage status to the retail consumer.

 

[exxxviii]

You are probably right. We will be stuck with the car. IAAI can make mistakes and I am sure they know how to come out of such situation clean.

When I had run the VIN at Bumper,com it showed that first it was IAAI auctioned in NY. Later when we auctined the car at Norwalk before to even know that it was reported as Salvaged, they informed us on the next day that we can not sell it as clean title since is not and that on their records is shoes frist the car was in Ohio.
On the miles side it is 100% since when you open the software it is precise. Tesla Odometers can not be manipulated usually so it is still strange to me.

So, I am pretty sure that a record only shows up in Bumper/NMVTIS if the title is transferred. So, presumably it means the car auctioned and sold in NY. If it auctioned and sold, and then IAAI is auctioning it again, but with the same mileage, then one of three things probably occurred:

1. The new seller transported it to another auction for arbitrage
2. The deal unwound back to Tesla, and Tesla re-ran it at another auction (presumably with higher potential value for the car)
3. IAAI took ownership of the car after arbitration and then moved and re-ran it at another auction (ditto the value thing)

Who was your seller? If Tesla, then scenario 2 probably is what happened. Did it also show a title transfer in Ohio, prior to the NY IAAI auction sale?

When I investigated potential dealer fraud issues, we followed details like these. It was fun.

 

[Mrbrock]

You are adding things that are not in the law. The law does not care if an owner declares his salvage that somebody else thinks is viable. All CA's law says in the context of these examples is a "Total loss salvage vehicle means... that the owner...considers it uneconomical to repair." That's all. The owner does not need to prove anything to anyone. An owner of the car is free to declare it salvage at their sole "consideration." There is no false statement or legal hurdle. This is simple freedom. Maybe the best answer is, when you own a country or state, you can dictate the law the way you wish it was - that the government alone has the authority to decide if a car is truly salvaged. But in the United States, it does not work your way.


No, nothing I wrote is even remotely similar to that. I don't think this is common, and I don't know why Tesla would be doing it. When I was involved with wholesale remarketing, we did everything possible to maximize the value of the cars. And we would never run a car salvaged unless it was truly junk. As I wrote multiple times, if Tesla had run the cars at ADESA Los Angeles, Manheim California, or Manheim Riverside, all nearby auctions, they probably would have netted thousands more for the cars. Although none of us can make sense of it, I am saying that Tesla is absolutely free to do this.

Back to the core issue at hand. There is probably nothing nefarious in what Tesla did. The nefarious part is that a dealer bought a car, marked for salvage, at a salvage auction, and did not disclose its salvage status to the retail consumer.

How is @Rocky_H adding things that are not in the law? Let’s make this as simple as we can. Laws use words to define how we can and can’t act without breaking those laws. The words used to define the laws have legal meanings otherwise the laws don’t mean anything. In this case, SALVAGE means that the owner/insurer has decided the cost to fix the car is more than the car is worth. Period. Full stop. This is the definition of salvage from the CA Vehicle Code. If ANYONE pays $15 and signs the form claiming the vehicle is now salvaged, they are accepting the legal definition of Salvage as defined by the CA Vehicle Code. There is no arguing that. You however, seem to think the piece of paper and $15 don’t mean anything and aren’t legally binding. If that is the case, then why pay the money and file paperwork at all? And in this case, that pears to be what Tesla actually did. There is no evidence that Tesla filed any paperwork to change the title. They seemed to have internally decided the car is salvage and removed warranties and supercharging for no reason other than they think they can.

 

[exxxviii]

How is Rocky_H adding things that are not in the law? Let’s make this as simple as we can. Laws use words to define how we can and can’t act without breaking those laws. The words used to define the laws have legal meanings otherwise the laws don’t mean anything. In this case, SALVAGE means that the owner/insurer has decided the cost to fix the car is more than the car is worth. Period. Full stop. This is the definition of salvage from the CA Vehicle Code. If ANYONE pays $15 and signs the form claiming the vehicle is now salvaged, they are accepting the legal definition of Salvage as defined by the CA Vehicle Code. There is no arguing that. You however, seem to think the piece of paper and $15 don’t mean anything and aren’t legally binding. If that is the case, then why pay the money and file paperwork at all? And in this case, that pears to be what Tesla actually did. There is no evidence that Tesla filed any paperwork to change the title. They seemed to have internally decided the car is salvage and removed warranties and supercharging for no reason other than they think they can.

Lots to unpack here, so I may miss one or two of your questions...

The part that Rocky_, you, and others added is that there is no legal standard for what qualifies as a salvage car. That is solely up to the owner's consideration, and nothing else. CA absolutely does not say "salvage means that the owner/insurer has decided the cost to fix the car is more than the car is worth" anywhere in CA vehicle code. Not even insurance companies follow that standard. Insurance companies typically have some threshold, like estimated cost of repairs is more than 50% of the estimated value of the vehicle. But even insurance companies have different methods for estimating values and percentage thresholds. There is no legal standard for salvage. The law merely says that salvage means it is "uneconomical to repair." There is no definition of uneconomical to repair, it is solely up to its owner's consideration, and that is all. There is nothing in the law that obligates an owner to justify or document their consideration that a car is uneconomical to repair.

I agree that CA's law has words with legal meanings. But look further at the pattern of those words. Law is basically a list of rules and the penalty for non-compliance of those rules. You need both for it to be law. Every clause pretty much distills down to: if you have a salvage car, then you must report it; if you do not report it, you are guilty of a misdemeanor. It is all oriented around consumer protection to prevent salvaged cars entering the marketplace with undocumented salvage history. Nowhere is there a rule clause for how someone would determine salvage and a penalty for not following that determination method.

To your second question, the $15 is a reporting fee to declare your car salvage. It is kind of a ripoff and in insult, to be honest. But owners are legally required to pay that $15 fee to declare a car salvage. You are not accepting a legal definition of salvage by filing that $15 form. You are forced to pay their fee to complete a legal obligation. There is a massive chasm between those too.

Finally, we do not yet know if Tesla and IAAI met their reporting requirements. But it is looking like they did. I do not think that either owner here has their title yet. The second owner said that his title will be branded salvage. And if so, then Tesla (assuming Tesla was his seller) met their reporting obligation according to VEH §11515(d). If the first owner eventually gets his title, and it is not branded salvage, than the auction did not properly report the salvage brand during title transfer and Tesla or IAAI would be guilty of a misdemeanor violation. But we do not know yet. We do know that IAAI properly reported the salvage status to NMVTIS, and for at least one owner, is branding the title, so it appears IAAI is following the rules as Tesla'a agent in these vehicle sales.

 

[Rocky_H]

How is @Rocky_H adding things that are not in the law? [...] This is the definition of salvage from the CA Vehicle Code.

Where? Citation needed. You kept quoting that, but I tried to go back through and find it, and I couldn't.

The part that Rocky_, you, and others added is that there is no legal standard for what qualifies as a salvage car. That is solely up to the owner's consideration, and nothing else. CA absolutely does not say "salvage means that the owner/insurer has decided the cost to fix the car is more than the car is worth" anywhere in CA vehicle code.

Yeah, I may have to owe you an apology on this. That VEH section 11515 has references all throughout it using a term of art "total loss salvage vehicle". Whenever a law is going to use a specific term like that, they define it somewhere in the law too. That definition section isn't in 11515, and I tried some searching, but I can't locate another section where it is defined.

It does seem like this is where the disagreement lies. @Mrbrock keeps referring to that term defined with specific conditions, but @exxxviii seems to be saying it's defined by if the owner simply feels like designating it as that. I haven't found where the definition is spelled out or who gets to define it, so I don't know anymore. Sorry for sounding so certain earlier.

 

[MP3Mike]

Yeah, I may have to owe you an apology on this. That VEH section 11515 has references all throughout it using a term of art "total loss salvage vehicle". Whenever a law is going to use a specific term like that, they define it somewhere in the law too. That definition section isn't in 11515, and I tried some searching, but I can't locate another section where it is defined.

@exxxviii referenced the code section 544 in one of his posts. Here that is: 2021 California Code :: Vehicle Code - VEH :: DIVISION 1 - WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED :: Section 544.

544.
“Total loss salvage vehicle” means either of the following:



(a) A vehicle, other than a nonrepairable vehicle, of a type subject to registration that has been wrecked, destroyed, or damaged, to the extent that the owner, leasing company, financial institution, or the insurance company that insured or is responsible for repair of the vehicle, considers it uneconomical to repair the vehicle and because of this, the vehicle is not repaired by or for the person who owned the vehicle at the time of the event resulting in damage.

(b) A vehicle that was determined to be uneconomical to repair, for which a total loss payment has been made by an insurer, whether or not the vehicle is subsequently repaired, if prior to or upon making the payment to the claimant, the insurer obtains the agreement of the claimant to the amount of the total loss settlement, and informs the client that, pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 11515, the total loss settlement must be reported to the Department of Motor Vehicles, which will issue a salvage certificate for the vehicle.

So it really just says it is up to the responsible party to make the determination. There is no mention of the vehicle value, or a percentage of what the repairs must cost. That goes against what @Mrbrock says is the legal definition which of course they don't site:

Ugh, the LEGAL definition of salvage (which since we are talking about titles means legal) is that there is damage to the car that will cost more to repair than it is worth.

Insurance companies often total vehicles way before the repair costs get to the value of the vehicle. Some reasons are: time to repair and cost for a rental car, diminished value claim on top of repair costs, unavailability of parts, etc.

 

[stopcrazypp]

@exxxviii referenced the code section 544 in one of his posts. Here that is: 2021 California Code :: Vehicle Code - VEH :: DIVISION 1 - WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED :: Section 544.



So it really just says it is up to the responsible party to make the determination. There is no mention of the vehicle value, or a percentage of what the repairs must cost. That goes against what @Mrbrock says is the legal definition which of course they don't site:



Insurance companies often total vehicles way before the repair costs get to the value of the vehicle. Some reasons are: time to repair and cost for a rental car, diminished value claim on top of repair costs, unavailability of parts, etc.

Yeah, there is no set standard. Insurance companies can send estimators and even they may not necessarily be consistent.

I think the main question remains is if the OP's Tesla was marked as totalled by Tesla Leasing internally prior to or coinciding with the auction or if they relied on a third party database that automatically marked it as such. The supercharging being restored seems to suggest the latter.

 

[Mrbrock]

@exxxviii referenced the code section 544 in one of his posts. Here that is: 2021 California Code :: Vehicle Code - VEH :: DIVISION 1 - WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED :: Section 544.



So it really just says it is up to the responsible party to make the determination. There is no mention of the vehicle value, or a percentage of what the repairs must cost. That goes against what @Mrbrock says is the legal definition which of course they don't site:



Insurance companies often total vehicles way before the repair costs get to the value of the vehicle. Some reasons are: time to repair and cost for a rental car, diminished value claim on top of repair costs, unavailability of parts, etc.

“Uneconomical to repair”? How else are you suppose to interpret that? I can’t imagine it’s good business for Tesla to take a $5000 hit on every small dent that happens during transport. I don’t think there is any way that they could argue in court that a $500 dent would be considered “total loss salvage” per CVC. Which is my point. They are not required to sell these cars at auction as salvage. Exxxviii has ASSUMED that Tesla filed paperwork on these vehicles as salvage yet has no proof of that and the auction house they went through does not require the vehicles to be salvage to sell there.

All we know is that Tesla blacklisted this vehicle and claimed salvage. There has been no paperwork produced from the CA DMV showing this. When you buy a car you sign the title over. Said title would need to be branded as salvage which the OP should have noticed. If it was branded as salvage and they just missed that, then there is nothing they can do and we’ve had this discussion for naught. If it wasn’t, Tesla can’t claim it after the fact, thats fraud.

I admit getting caught up in minutiae of legal documents is not my thing and may have missed some things. I apologize. Legal definitions aside, there is one thing we are all speculating on but do not know and that is what the title that the OP signed said.

 

[exxxviii]

“Uneconomical to repair”? How else are you suppose to interpret that? I can’t imagine it’s good business for Tesla to take a $5000 hit on every small dent that happens during transport. I don’t think there is any way that they could argue in court that a $500 dent would be considered “total loss salvage” per CVC. Which is my point. They are not required to sell these cars at auction as salvage. Exxxviii has ASSUMED that Tesla filed paperwork on these vehicles as salvage yet has no proof of that and the auction house they went through does not require the vehicles to be salvage to sell there.

All we know is that Tesla blacklisted this vehicle and claimed salvage. There has been no paperwork produced from the CA DMV showing this. When you buy a car you sign the title over. Said title would need to be branded as salvage which the OP should have noticed. If it was branded as salvage and they just missed that, then there is nothing they can do and we’ve had this discussion for naught. If it wasn’t, Tesla can’t claim it after the fact, thats fraud.

I admit getting caught up in minutiae of legal documents is not my thing and may have missed some things. I apologize. Legal definitions aside, there is one thing we are all speculating on but do not know and that is what the title that the OP signed said.

I think you have missed a lot of details. Most of the first paragraph has been addressed ad nauseam in the posts above.

I did not assume that Tesla filed the paperwork to declare the vehicles salvage. In fact, I assumed the opposite - that Tesla did not file the paperwork. I did assume that if Tesla had the cars sent to a salvage auction as salvage, that the auction would have been the one to file the appropriate paperwork to declare them salvage. Based on the information shared by the two with the cars, this appears to be the case. Both cars were flagged as salvage in the NMVTIS database at day of sale by the salvage auction. And the auction told the second owner that his title would be branded salvage. If the auction follows the same process for both buyers, it is not a huge leap to assume that the first car's title is branded salvage, but the owner just does not know it yet.

The thread starter has not shared his title status. It is incorrect to assume that he saw the title at time of purchase. I’m pretty sure that when you buy a used car from a retail dealer, you don’t sign it. If the buyer financed the car, he would never see the title until he paid off the loan. If he paid cash, it is more likely that he will receive the title weeks later, because first IAAI has to do the title transfer from Tesla to Prime Sales, and then Prime Sales has to do the title transfer to the thread starter. Due to IAAI and DMV processing timelines, it is possible that Prime Sales did not even have the title yet at time of retail sale.

It does not look good for the thread starter's car. It looks a like Prime Sales likely misrepresented the car. His likely best course of action is to pursue an unwind with Prime Sales.

Owner #2's case is lost. He is stuck with his salvaged car unless he arbitrates it with IAAI. He said he declined their offer to unwind the car because he paid for the repairs already.

The likely best case outcome for both is that Tesla restores Supercharger access (#1 got it back already) but no warranties. If Tesla decided to salvage the cars and the salvage auction processed them as salvage, then it seems unlikely that Tesla would restore the warranties. (Actually, the best case for the thread starter is that Prime Sales unwinds the sale and he gets all his money back.)

 

[Mrbrock]

I think you have missed a lot of details. Most of the first paragraph has been addressed ad nauseam in the posts above.

I did not assume that Tesla filed the paperwork to declare the vehicles salvage. In fact, I assumed the opposite - that Tesla did not file the paperwork. I did assume that if Tesla had the cars sent to a salvage auction as salvage, that the auction would have been the one to file the appropriate paperwork to declare them salvage. Based on the information shared by the two with the cars, this appears to be the case. Both cars were flagged as salvage in the NMVTIS database at day of sale by the salvage auction. And the auction told the second owner that his title would be branded salvage. If the auction follows the same process for both buyers, it is not a huge leap to assume that the first car's title is branded salvage, but the owner just does not know it yet.

The thread starter has not shared his title status. It is incorrect to assume that he saw the title at time of purchase. I’m pretty sure that when you buy a used car from a retail dealer, you don’t sign it. If the buyer financed the car, he would never see the title until he paid off the loan. If he paid cash, it is more likely that he will receive the title weeks later, because first IAAI has to do the title transfer from Tesla to Prime Sales, and then Prime Sales has to do the title transfer to the thread starter. Due to IAAI and DMV processing timelines, it is possible that Prime Sales did not even have the title yet at time of retail sale.

It does not look good for the thread starter's car. It looks a like Prime Sales likely misrepresented the car. His likely best course of action is to pursue an unwind with Prime Sales.

Owner #2's case is lost. He is stuck with his salvaged car unless he arbitrates it with IAAI. He said he declined their offer to unwind the car because he paid for the repairs already.

The likely best case outcome for both is that Tesla restores Supercharger access (#1 got it back already) but no warranties. If Tesla decided to salvage the cars and the salvage auction processed them as salvage, then it seems unlikely that Tesla would restore the warranties. (Actually, the best case for the thread starter is that Prime Sales unwinds the sale and he gets all his money back.)

I am missing where this auction is strictly salvage? IAAI doesn’t only sell salvage vehicles so why would they automatically title all cars as salvage? That is the leap that you have made that isn’t documented anywhere. Also, I don’t think it is their ability to do that. They are auctioning them on behalf of tesla so Tesla would still be doing the title changes right? Or does Tesla sell them to IAAI and IAAI auctions them?

 

[exxxviii]

I am missing where this auction is strictly salvage? IAAI doesn’t only sell salvage vehicles so why would they automatically title all cars as salvage? That is the leap that you have made that isn’t documented anywhere. Also, I don’t think it is their ability to do that. They are auctioning them on behalf of tesla so Tesla would still be doing the title changes right? Or does Tesla sell them to IAAI and IAAI auctions them?

I am not sure if you are reading and not understanding, not reading, or or simply ignoring the information. I have covered these questions multiple times. I could point back to prior posts, but I will give it one more try...

• An auction is known by the predominant type of inventory it runs. IAAI predominantly runs salvage cars. Therefore, it is known as a salvage auction.
• An auction does not automatically brand a title as salvage, even if it is a salvage auction. They only do what the seller instructs them to do.
• The auction does the title transfer. The seller gives the auction limited power of attorney to handle the sale, title transfer, and administrative tasks related to consigning a vehicle.

Maybe this illustration from my personal experience will help... Manheim has 11 auctions in Florida; I have been to 8 of them. Each auction has a distinct personality - the type of inventory they run and the types of buyers and sellers present. I have consulted with auction leadership, buyers, and sellers in every location I visited. Manheim Lakeland is less than an hour away from Manheim Orlando, but there is little buyer and seller crossover. The dealers I spoke with in Lakeland would rarely go to Orlando and vice versa. Lakeland runs low-end cars - not salvage, but older, high mileage, and run down. The buyers are a mix of people shopping for repair shops, salvage yards, and low quality used car lots. Orlando, on the other hand, is known for high quality, late model, low mileage cars. Those buyers are shopping for franchise dealerships and tier-one non-franchise lots. If you had a nice 3 YO Honda Accord, you would never run it at Lakeland. But, if you had a 15 YO Honda Accord with 150K miles, you would never run it at Orlando. If you had a Rolls, Bentley, BMW 7 Series, etc. you would run it at Manheim Palm Beach, which is known to run highline cars. If you had an mid-age and condition Honda Accord, you might take it to Manheim Ft. Lauderdale or Manheim Tampa.

A salvage auction (a location that predominately runs salvage cars) has a very distinct character. There are few buyers for expensive or good-condition cars in the lanes, so those kinds of cars would get low values relative to what they could get at a regular auction. It would be unusual for a seller of a good quality car to run it at a salvage auction, especially when multiple other regular auctions are close by. Tesla could have run the cars at ADESA Los Angeles, Manheim California, or Manheim Riverside and commanded top dollar. Instead, Tesla elected to run the cars at an IAAI salvage auction, and the auction reported the cars as salvage. IAAI would not have reported the cars as salvage unless that was Tesla’s will for the cars.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I am not sure if you are reading and not understanding, not reading, or or simply ignoring the information. I have covered these questions multiple times. I could point back to prior posts, but I will give it one more try...

• An auction is known by the predominant type of inventory it runs. IAAI predominantly runs salvage cars. Therefore, it is known as a salvage auction.
• An auction does not automatically brand a title as salvage, even if it is a salvage auction. They only do what the seller instructs them to do.
• The auction does the title transfer. The seller gives the auction limited power of attorney to handle the sale, title transfer, and administrative tasks related to consigning a vehicle.

Maybe this illustration from my personal experience will help... Manheim has 11 auctions in Florida; I have been to 8 of them. Each auction has a distinct personality - the type of inventory they run and the types of buyers and sellers present. I have consulted with auction leadership, buyers, and sellers in every location I visited. Manheim Lakeland is less than an hour away from Manheim Orlando, but there is little buyer and seller crossover. The dealers I spoke with in Lakeland would rarely go to Orlando and vice versa. Lakeland runs low-end cars - not salvage, but older, high mileage, and run down. The buyers are a mix of people shopping for repair shops, salvage yards, and low quality used car lots. Orlando, on the other hand, is known for high quality, late model, low mileage cars. Those buyers are shopping for franchise dealerships and tier-one non-franchise lots. If you had a nice 3 YO Honda Accord, you would never run it at Lakeland. But, if you had a 15 YO Honda Accord with 150K miles, you would never run it at Orlando. If you had a Rolls, Bentley, BMW 7 Series, etc. you would run it at Manheim Palm Beach, which is known to run highline cars. If you had an mid-age and condition Honda Accord, you might take it to Manheim Ft. Lauderdale or Manheim Tampa.

A salvage auction (a location that predominately runs salvage cars) has a very distinct character. There are few buyers for expensive or good-condition cars in the lanes, so those kinds of cars would get low values relative to what they could get at a regular auction. It would be unusual for a seller of a good quality car to run it at a salvage auction, especially when multiple other regular auctions are close by. Tesla could have run the cars at ADESA Los Angeles, Manheim California, or Manheim Riverside and commanded top dollar. Instead, Tesla elected to run the cars at an IAAI salvage auction, and the auction reported the cars as salvage. IAAI would not have reported the cars as salvage unless that was Tesla’s will for the cars.

But IAAI says explicitly they sell lightly damaged non-salvage cars, so Tesla can easily put the car there for auction with for example a deep scratch on the bumper they don't want to send to the body shop to fix. I think the point being made is the car just being at IAAI does not necessarily mean Tesla wants the car titled as salvage. The OP's car have not been branded or marked as a salvage, and by CA law it must be marked as such within 10 days of totaling it. So either the car was there as a non-salvage or Tesla/IAAI violated the law.

The car is in NMVTIS, however, it is not clear if IAAI reports all cars that participate in their auctions there or if only the subset that they are selling as salvage title. They say in their disclaimer "INCLUDING THAT VEHICLES SOLD WITH A CLEAR TITLE MAY APPEAR AS “JUNK/SALVAGE” IN SUBSEQUENT REPORTS DUE TO NMVTIS REPORTING", which suggests they report even clean title vehicles.

 

[exxxviii]

But IAAI says explicitly they sell lightly damaged non-salvage cars, so Tesla can easily put the car there for auction with for example a deep scratch on the bumper they don't want to send to the body shop to fix. I think the point being made is the car just being at IAAI does not necessarily mean Tesla wants the car titled as salvage. The OP's car have not been branded or marked as a salvage, and by CA law it must be marked as such within 10 days of totaling it. So either the car was there as a non-salvage or Tesla/IAAI violated the law.

The car is in NMVTIS, however, it is not clear if IAAI reports all cars that participate in their auctions there or if only the subset that they are selling as salvage title. They say in their disclaimer "INCLUDING THAT VEHICLES SOLD WITH A CLEAR TITLE MAY APPEAR AS “JUNK/SALVAGE” IN SUBSEQUENT REPORTS DUE TO NMVTIS REPORTING", which suggests they report even clean title vehicles.

I get it... for some reason, you want Tesla to be the bad guy. But they are probably not, and that is a false faith that will not help these two car owners and others like them that come along. The information I have shared above is an abridged master class of wholesale automobile auction operations and the wholesale auto industry. I am happy to continue as long as we make progress, because I like this stuff.

I already addressed everything in your first paragraph multiple times, including in the prior post. So, I will just deal with the new stuff: "Buyer accepts all risks associated with purchasing vehicles at IAA arising out of or related to any NMVTIS reporting by IAA or IAA’s vehicle providers, including that vehicles sold with a clear title may appear as “junk/salvage” in subsequent reports due to NMVTIS reporting."

• This is a general disclaimer protecting IAAI, because they are a salvage auction that mostly sells salvage cars. Regular auctions do not have this general disclaimer, and those buyers can assume cars are good unless told otherwise. IAAI is the opposite - they are explicitly telling buyers to assume all cars are salvage.
• There may be a time lag from when an insurer reports a car as salvage to when the status appears at DMV, AutoCheck, CARFAX, NMVTIS, etc. records, so cars could show clean data while in the lanes.
• If IAAI is tasked to report a car as salvage on behalf of the sellers at time of sale, the cars will show clean data while in the lanes.
• This disclaimer does not mean that IAAI automatically reports all sales as salvage; they would only do that when requested by the seller.
• It is likely that most cars are already branded salvage before they arrive at IAAI (cars coming from insurance companies who already handled salvage reporting).
• IAAI may only be handling salvage reporting and branding on a handful of cars at the sellers' requests.

Edit: I thought of one more thing to add... you and Mrbrock both wrote that you believe the OP's car title is not branded salvage. The reality is that the OP probably does not know and probably has not even seen the title. The members of the forum definitely do not know. All we know is that the car was reported to NMVTIS as salvage, probably by IAAI. If Prime Sales floor planned the car and Hormold financed the car, then it is possible Prime Sales never saw the title and neither has Hormold.

 

[zoomer0056]

I get it... for some reason, you want Tesla to be the bad guy. But they are probably not, and that is a false faith that will not help these two car owners and others like them that come along. The information I have shared above is an abridged master class of wholesale automobile auction operations and the wholesale auto industry. I am happy to continue as long as we make progress, because I like this stuff.

I already addressed everything in your first paragraph multiple times, including in the prior post. So, I will just deal with the new stuff: "Buyer accepts all risks associated with purchasing vehicles at IAA arising out of or related to any NMVTIS reporting by IAA or IAA’s vehicle providers, including that vehicles sold with a clear title may appear as “junk/salvage” in subsequent reports due to NMVTIS reporting."

• This is a general disclaimer protecting IAAI, because they are a salvage auction that mostly sells salvage cars. Regular auctions do not have this general disclaimer, and those buyers can assume cars are good unless told otherwise. IAAI is the opposite - they are explicitly telling buyers to assume all cars are salvage.
• There may be a time lag from when an insurer reports a car as salvage to when the status appears at DMV, AutoCheck, CARFAX, NMVTIS, etc. records, so cars could show clean data while in the lanes.
• If IAAI is tasked to report a car as salvage on behalf of the sellers at time of sale, the cars will show clean data while in the lanes.
• This disclaimer does not mean that IAAI automatically reports all sales as salvage; they would only do that when requested by the seller.
• It is likely that most cars are already branded salvage before they arrive at IAAI (cars coming from insurance companies who already handled salvage reporting).
• IAAI may only be handling salvage reporting and branding on a handful of cars at the sellers' requests.

Edit: I thought of one more thing to add... you and Mrbrock both wrote that you believe the OP's car title is not branded salvage. The reality is that the OP probably does not know and probably has not even seen the title. The members of the forum definitely do not know. All we know is that the car was reported to NMVTIS as salvage, probably by IAAI. If Prime Sales floor planned the car and Hormold financed the car, then it is possible Prime Sales never saw the title and neither has Hormold.

A flawed system of morally wrong legal butt covering at best. Buyer beware.

 

[Hormold]

I get it... for some reason, you want Tesla to be the bad guy. But they are probably not, and that is a false faith that will not help these two car owners and others like them that come along. The information I have shared above is an abridged master class of wholesale automobile auction operations and the wholesale auto industry. I am happy to continue as long as we make progress, because I like this stuff.

I already addressed everything in your first paragraph multiple times, including in the prior post. So, I will just deal with the new stuff: "Buyer accepts all risks associated with purchasing vehicles at IAA arising out of or related to any NMVTIS reporting by IAA or IAA’s vehicle providers, including that vehicles sold with a clear title may appear as “junk/salvage” in subsequent reports due to NMVTIS reporting."

• This is a general disclaimer protecting IAAI, because they are a salvage auction that mostly sells salvage cars. Regular auctions do not have this general disclaimer, and those buyers can assume cars are good unless told otherwise. IAAI is the opposite - they are explicitly telling buyers to assume all cars are salvage.
• There may be a time lag from when an insurer reports a car as salvage to when the status appears at DMV, AutoCheck, CARFAX, NMVTIS, etc. records, so cars could show clean data while in the lanes.
• If IAAI is tasked to report a car as salvage on behalf of the sellers at time of sale, the cars will show clean data while in the lanes.
• This disclaimer does not mean that IAAI automatically reports all sales as salvage; they would only do that when requested by the seller.
• It is likely that most cars are already branded salvage before they arrive at IAAI (cars coming from insurance companies who already handled salvage reporting).
• IAAI may only be handling salvage reporting and branding on a handful of cars at the sellers' requests.

Edit: I thought of one more thing to add... you and Mrbrock both wrote that you believe the OP's car title is not branded salvage. The reality is that the OP probably does not know and probably has not even seen the title. The members of the forum definitely do not know. All we know is that the car was reported to NMVTIS as salvage, probably by IAAI. If Prime Sales floor planned the car and Hormold financed the car, then it is possible Prime Sales never saw the title and neither has Hormold.

I seen the original title and it's clean. It signed by Tesla and Prime Sales (seller and buyer before me). I held original in hands and used photo of title near car vin in communication with Tesla.

 

[exxxviii]

I seen the original title and it's clean. It signed by Tesla and Prime Sales (seller and buyer before me). I held original in hands and used photo of title near car vin in communication with Tesla.

This is a huge piece of news... If that is the case, then IAAI could have reported your car in NMVTIS as salvaged in error. I would contact IAAI directly and ask them if they can remove the salvage record. You can show them the picture of the clean title that they processed as supporting information to restore the clear status in NMVTIS. If they do that, and you have a clean title, then you can probably build a case to have Tesla restore the warranty.

 

[MP3Mike]

I seen the original title and it's clean. It signed by Tesla and Prime Sales (seller and buyer before me). I held original in hands and used photo of title near car vin in communication with Tesla.

Of course the original title was clear. (As that just sounds like signing over the original title, and that Prime Sales never got a new title issued to themselves.) So, if it was sold as salvage at the auction Prime Sales bought it at that title wouldn't reflect it.

The question is: Is the title you received, in your name, branded or not?

 

[Mrbrock]

And this is why assuming that it going through IAAI means it is salvage because 95% of cars that do is wrong. Until we have all the facts, we don’t know what really happened and there are many potential possibilities.

As far as the title from Tesla to Prime Sales, if IAAI is handling that on Teslas behalf and report the car as salvage, it is fraud to sign over a clear title. If they file the salvage paperwork after signing the clear title over, that paperwork isn’t valid because they are no longer the owner and can’t legally file it. This is what doesn’t make sense with this timeline of events as we know them.

 

[exxxviii]

And this is why assuming that it going through IAAI means it is salvage because 95% of cars that do is wrong. Until we have all the facts, we don’t know what really happened and there are many potential possibilities.

As far as the title from Tesla to Prime Sales, if IAAI is handling that on Teslas behalf and report the car as salvage, it is fraud to sign over a clear title. If they file the salvage paperwork after signing the clear title over, that paperwork isn’t valid because they are no longer the owner and can’t legally file it. This is what doesn’t make sense with this timeline of events as we know them.

I think your confusion here is that you are assuming that I am assuming. And you are hung up on this concept of a salvage auction, when I am assuming (see what I did there) that you have no experience in the wholesale automobile industry. These are not assumptions:

• Going to market as a salvage auction is something very meaningful in the wholesale industry. It segments buyers and sellers and it defines the pricing for all of the cars in the lanes. A good car in a salvage auction would fall well short of its potential value. It would be very unusual for a seller to send a good car to a salvage auction.
• IAAI's blanket disclosure is explicitly telling every buyer to assume any car is salvage.
• There are not many possibilities - there are only a few. But the key piece of information we do not have, and will not have, is why did Tesla send seemingly good cars to a salvage auction.
• You are assuming it is fraud to sign a clear title if the car has an NMVTIS salvage record. You would have to ask the IAAI and DMV title clerks. In my experience, auction title clerks are on a first-name basis with state title clerks and are super-experts in title management. I don't know CA DMV, but it is possible that there is a direct path for title branding that auctions use because they do it in high volume.
• You are also assuming that a car with a salvage NMVTIS record must also have a salvage brand on the CA title. Seems odd to me too, but I am not going to assume that both are necessary. CA explicitly calls out NVMTIS as a legal requirement for dealers to show retail buyers.

See the last point in my post above. If @Hormold saw a signed title (but it is critical to remember, as @MP3Mike pointed out, that this title was not the new title issued by the DMV), then one of 4 things is likely:

1. The car was not meant for salvage and IAAI reported the salvage record to NMVTIS in error
2. The car was meant for salvage, and the IAAI sent the salvage processing paperwork to CA in parallel with IAAI signing the title over to Prime Sales
3. The car was meant for salvage, but the auction made a clerical error with the title
4. The car was meant for salvage and IAAI instructed Prime Sales to handle the salvage processing with CA

The key to all of this is to give the two affected people the best possible guidance in how to get to their best possible outcomes. So, giving them bad guidance and false faith could set them back. With the new (to me) info about Person #1's title, I advise that his best path is to go directly to the selling auction and ask them if the NMVTIS salvage record was reported in error, then depending on the answer, ask if the title is to be branded salvage. IAAI is the one source of truth in what happened or should have happened.

Before writing this note, I was be listening to and analyzing a recorded presentation of a company's title management and processing team to help them improve. They handle 10,000 titles a day for all 50 states + US territories. I am not a CA title expert, and we will not get into the weeds of each individual state, but I am familiar with this space.