Has anyone sold their leases Model 3 to a dealer? [as of 10/28/21 not possible any longer]

[CapeOne]

I am still trying to figure out why folks want to pay more for used M3P vs. just buying a new one? Tesla site says delivery in a month.

I think some people are mistakenly under the impression that there are long waiting times for new M3s and don't bother to check. There have actually even been new M3s available in existing inventory for quick delivery.

I think some people like to see and drive the actual car before buying and may not have a Tesla store nearby.

CarMax (or others) may give much better trade values thereby making the net price better, especially after factoring in sales tax advantage from buying/trading at same dealer.

Some of these used M3Ps may have pricey options like FSD. While a new M3P starts at $60,190, the price can climb to $73,190 with red multi-coat paint, white interior, and FSD.

 

[jjrandorin]

I am still trying to figure out why folks want to pay more for used M3P vs. just buying a new one? Tesla site says delivery in a month.

View attachment 738108

They are paying more for used LR than new Performance, I think. New Model 3P wait times are like a month. I got a quote from these same sources people are talking about (carmax, carvana) of like 45k for my 2018 Model 3P with 26k miles. People are getting quotes of 50k+ for SR+ vehicles to sell them to these sources so people must be buying these cars from carmax for similar pricing as Model 3Ps new.

It makes zero sense. Model Y Performance was available in december delivery about 3 weeks ago, but LR model Ys were like next july. The difference in price between the two right now is like 3-4k or something, new.

I was looking at model Ys because I was trying to decide what to do with my wifes 2019 X3 M40 that was coming off lease. If I could have simply gone down and traded it in on a model Y LR I probably would have. I am not paying over list price, and we need 2 cars (our neighborhood is not walkable for shopping, etc, I live in the 'burbs).

So, we just bought the X3 out. The residual on the X3 is like 38, and we could sell it for 53 very easily to carmax or givemethevin etc. I just cant replace it with something without dumping all that back in there, so its "paper money" atm.

 

[raptor5244]

They are paying more for used LR than new Performance, I think. New Model 3P wait times are like a month. I got a quote from these same sources people are talking about (carmax, carvana) of like 45k for my 2018 Model 3P with 26k miles. People are getting quotes of 50k+ for SR+ vehicles to sell them to these sources so people must be buying these cars from carmax for similar pricing as Model 3Ps new.

Same here, I sold my 2019 M3P, Black with white interior with only 7k miles, no FSD for $48k to Carmax about 5 months ago. They had the same offer as Carvana, a little less than Vroom but I didn't want to deal with Vroom. 6 months earlier the highest offer from Carvana was only $42,500. Crazy swings in prices for sure but not all of them make sense.

 

[raptor5244]

I think some people are mistakenly under the impression that there are long waiting times for new M3s and don't bother to check. There have actually even been new M3s available in existing inventory for quick delivery.

I think you are right and maybe some folks rely on the financing of a Carmax type dealer.

CarMax (or others) may give much better trade values thereby making the net price better, especially after factoring in sales tax advantage from buying/trading at same dealer.

True with Tesla for sure but it seems like all dealers right now are willing to pay top dollar but like you mentioned you have to calculate the sales tax savings.

Some of these used M3Ps may have pricey options like FSD. While a new M3P starts at $60,190, the price can climb to $73,190 with red multi-coat paint, white interior, and FSD.

Agreed, however Carmax only offered me $500 more on my trade if it had FSD. Now you can get it via subscription so not a big deal. Ext color and interior net little return on trade but to the right buyer it could represent good value.

 

[Scrannel]

Hey DiamondM, any further info on this? Thanks

 

[Scrannel]

There is currently a class action suit against Tesla for, essentially, altering purchase and lease contracts (specifically in the suit it was for a bait-and-switch on a car order). However, the crux of the matter is a legal challenge to the alteration of contract terms (for purchase AND lease contracts) without notice or -- apparently -- compensation. If Tesla is found liable for both, this might affect the ability of a lessee to sell their car to a 3rd party dealer. Which is what this thread is all about.

 

[jjrandorin]

Unless you have something in your contract that says that you were specifically allowed to sell the car to a third party dealer, its not the same thing at all. I believe this thread established there is no such language in the contract?

In any case, I see them as separate, unless the above is true, so will continue to separate them.

 

[Scrannel]

The question is "what" is considered contract? I am not a lawyer and do not know the existing case law, and in fact that definition may vary state-to-state. But... Tesla's (and others, BTW), had as a stated policy that one could transfer ownership to a dealer. Is that considered contract? I don't know and am not going to pretend I do, but just because something is or isn't in the exact lease contract does not automatically mean that's the last word. Under consumer law often the question is: "What would a consumer naturally expect in their deal?" The written contract is almost never the last word. For instance, when I discussed lease with my Tesla agent, they specifically pointed out I could sell to a third-party dealer. AND those terms were on their site.

I am only pointing out to those who have been discussing this that Tesla contracts -- as whole -- are now being challenged in court. That's all.

 

[Scrannel]

So, an update: There is now a class action suit in California -- brought by a car dealer -- against BMW and Mercedes SPECIFICALLY for not allowing lease holders to sell their cars to third party dealers. (This dealer being one). They are saying this violates California law.

"In the suit, Calabasas Luxury — the dealer in question — is claiming that BMW and Mercedes have “cornered the used vehicle market by refusing to allow lessees to trade-in their vehicles with anyone other than Defendants’ affiliates.”"

"It will be interesting to see how this case plays out and if other dealers that stand to benefit from removing these restrictions also take legal action against the automakers, as a win for the dealers would also be a win for consumers."

Bullseye for our thread.

Came from here (though there are several sites with this info): California Car Dealer Sues BMW And Mercedes Over Lease Buyout Restrictions

 

[MP3Mike]

Bullseye for our thread

Not really. Those leases allow trade ins. The Tesla 3/Y leases don't.

 

[Scrannel]

Not with 3rd party dealers. Purpose of the lawsuit. Purpose of this thread.

 

[Scrannel]

More on this and why the lawsuit.

Automakers Are Screwing Consumers Out Of The Equity In Their Leases

Several automakers are restricting your ability to use the current market to make money on your lease.

jalopnik.com

 

[Deep Purple]

Worst part of this? Tesla is giving it to you up the behind because you can't buy out the car either.

It's a brilliant move by Tesla, but it also means I'm probably going to have to swap a lease soon than later. I'm not interested in paying down depreciation that doesn't exist.

 

[Scrannel]

It's not just Tesla, many makers are doing this. There seem to be two issues on the table: First, is this even legal at all (especially in California), and second, is this a contractual issue for people who leased when the company policy allowed them to sell to a dealer. In other words, can they just change the lease terms because the market changed (or for any reason)? And just because the basic lease contract is mute on this, means nothing. Consumer law is "bigger" than the simple contract, especially in California. So. let's see what happens.

 

[whenryb]

It is really getting ridiculous. I ordered a M3P to replace an Audi Etron. The buyout vs. market value were about the same. $72K trade in quote from Tesla as well as CarMax. Audi quoted a "market" value buyout to both Tesla and Carmax at $86K which is ridiculous since its above MSRP for the 1 year old Etron with 10K miles. So I have been through the ringer with Audi to buyout the lease. Took 2.5 weeks after I sent a check for $72K to Audi to get the title. Covid was the excuse. Now I have to wait another 2 to 3 weeks to get the title from the county because of Covid. I had to delay my M3P and now scheduled for Feb 24-28. I will be lucky if I'm able to offload the Etron in time.

The experience from Audi Financial has been atrocious to say the least.

 

[blakenstine]

There is currently a class action suit against Tesla for, essentially, altering purchase and lease contracts (specifically in the suit it was for a bait-and-switch on a car order). However, the crux of the matter is a legal challenge to the alteration of contract terms (for purchase AND lease contracts) without notice or -- apparently -- compensation. If Tesla is found liable for both, this might affect the ability of a lessee to sell their car to a 3rd party dealer. Which is what this thread is all about.

Can you provide us with information on where we can become involved in this class action law suit? @Scrannel

 

[240vPlug]

Im interested to know more about the legal proceeding. I have said all along I believe these leasing policies are harmful to consumers, Tesla, and it’s investors.

 

[jjrandorin]

Can you provide us with information on where we can become involved in this class action law suit? @Scrannel

Unless you are talking about BMW Or Mercedes, this is not going to help you.

So, an update: There is now a class action suit in California -- brought by a car dealer -- against BMW and Mercedes SPECIFICALLY for not allowing lease holders to sell their cars to third party dealers. (This dealer being one). They are saying this violates California law

 

[jjrandorin]

Im interested to know more about the legal proceeding. I have said all along I believe these leasing policies are harmful to consumers, Tesla, and it’s investors.

There is no way to argue that this is harmful to tesla and its investors, because the cars are worth more to tesla now so they make more money keeping them, which is helpful to tesla and its investors, not harmful.

 

[240vPlug]

There is no way to argue that this is harmful to tesla and its investors, because the cars are worth more to tesla now so they make more money keeping them, which is helpful to tesla and its investors, not harmful.

Your correct if your looking short term. I think longer term it’s harmful to Tesla and investors. The short term harm to customers will harm Tesla and investors in the long term.

I’m not going to continue to argue my points here. It should be obvious to Tesla what the implications of this are long term. We will just have to wait and see I guess.

I just ordered another Tesla so I love the vehicles. I will never deal with Tesla finance or leasing again though.