Posted on 10/08/2012 5:14:50 AM PDT by billorites
The president of Priority Chevrolet apologized Wednesday for the arrest of a customer in June whom the dealership mistakenly undercharged for an SUV and who resisted the company's efforts to get him to sign a new, costlier contract.
Dennis Ellmer said he's heard from Chesapeake police that one of his managers told an officer that Danny Sawyer of Chesapeake had stolen a 2012 Chevrolet Traverse.
"I owe Mr. Sawyer a big apology," said Ellmer, who manages the entire Priority Auto Group - which includes 11 dealerships in Virginia and North Carolina.
He said his staff erred when they sold the SUV to Sawyer for about $5,600 too little and erred again when they went to police. He said Sawyer should not have been arrested and definitely should not have spent four hours in jail.
"It is my plan to let him keep the $5,600 and to make Mr. Sawyer right. I can't tell you how I plan to fix it, but it is my intention to make it right," said Ellmer, adding that he would like to sit down and talk with Sawyer.
Rebecca Colaw, Sawyer's attorney, said she appreciates that Ellmer is taking responsibility for what happened. But she said he will have to do more than say he's sorry and let Sawyer keep the SUV.
"An apology is not enough," she said.
Earlier this month, Sawyer, 40, a registered nurse, filed two lawsuits against the dealership accusing it of malicious prosecution, slander, defamation and abuse of process, among other things. The lawsuits seek $2.2 million in damages, plus attorney fees.
Ellmer and his vice president, Stacy Cummings, said they were unaware of the lawsuits until they read about them Tuesday on the front page of The Virginian-Pilot. Two managers at Priority Chevrolet declined Monday to comment on the lawsuits, and two phone calls and an email to an attorney for the dealership were not returned.
According to the lawsuits, Sawyer test-drove a blue Chevrolet Traverse on May 7 but ultimately decided to buy a black one. He traded in his 2008 Saturn Vue, signed a promissory note and left in his new SUV.
The next morning, Sawyer returned and asked to exchange the black Traverse for the blue one.
The lawsuit claims Wib Davenport, a sales manager, agreed to the trade without discussing how much more the blue Traverse would cost. Cummings disputed that, saying Davenport told Sawyer it would cost about $5,500 more than the black one and that Sawyer orally agreed to the higher price.
Regardless, the final contract Sawyer signed did not reflect the higher price, which Cummings said should have been in the area of $39,000. He blamed a clerical error.
"We definitely made a mistake there. There is no doubt about it," said Ellmer.
After signing the contract - which listed a sale price of about $34,000 - Sawyer immediately left the dealership and returned with a cashier's check covering what he owed after dealer incentives and his trade-in.
A week later, Sawyer came back from a vacation to find numerous voicemails and a letter from the dealership, the suit said. In a phone conversation, Davenport explained they had made a mistake on the contract and sold the car for too little. He asked Sawyer to return to the dealership and sign a new contract.
The lawsuit claims Sawyer refused. Cummings said Sawyer initially agreed but never followed through.
When Sawyer did not return to the dealership, Priority staff continued their attempts to contact him via phone, text message and hand-delivered letters. They eventually contacted police.
On June 15, three Chesapeake police officers arrested Sawyer in his front yard and took him before a magistrate judge. He was released on bond after about four hours at the Chesapeake jail, the suit said.
Commonwealth's Attorney Nancy Parr said her office dropped all charges Aug. 23 after speaking with representatives of the dealership and determining there was insufficient evidence to pursue the case.
In an interview Tuesday, Ellmer and Cummings said their staff never reported the SUV stolen and never asked for Sawyer to be arrested. They said they called police only for help locating the SUV while they pursued the civil action.
After speaking with police Wednesday, however, Ellmer said he'd learned one of his managers, Brad Anderson, had indeed said the SUV was stolen.
Kelly O'Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the Chesapeake Police Department, said the officer told Anderson in advance he was going to secure a warrant for Sawyer's arrest.
Ellmer described what happened to Sawyer as an isolated incident. He noted that his dealerships sell about 13,000 cars a year.
"This shouldn't have happened," he said.
Contract was signed, bank terms agreed to, sucks to be the dealer! I hope the customer enjoys his 2.2 million dollars!
How did he get arrested. Couldn’t he have just showed the contract to the police? (In before the “cops were busy shooting the dog” comment, in 3 ... 2 ...)
How come this was not treated as a civil suit issue? Last time I complained of a dealer stealing my money I was told by the cops that it was a civilian court issue. Whatever.
Cops were probably doing rock, paper, scissors to make the bust. Surprised they didn’t tazer him....and his dog
Hmmmm, seems the buyer knew they screwed up but was tight lipped. What would you have done? I have to believe the buyer knew what his final price was supposed to be. You don’t sign a contract for a vehicle without knowing the bottom line. Would you sign it if it was $5600 too much? Doubt it....
Looks like some of the sales staff at the dealership stepped in it also...BIG TIME.
Ahhh, but Comrade. This is Government Motors.
Yep, A contract is a contract, and Brad Anderson needs to do time for a false police report.
According to the story, an employee reported the SUV as stolen. That's a specific criminal offense.
I agree that the cops dropped the ball here, but that's how it became a criminal case.
He was arrested because the dealership swore to an arrest warrant for a stolen vehicle. It is not the job of the officers to determine the validity of a piece of paper but only to serve the warrant.
Say all you want about out of control cops, but in this case, they were doing exactly what their job spelled out, legally and ethically.
I would wager that this dealership was allowed to keep their Chevrolet franchise because of politics and that in itself leads to far bigger questions of those who survived the the GM bailout and rapes of the investors. It was the local people who lost their jobs and the GM and Chrysler Bond Holders who lost everything in that payoff to the unions, not to mention the non-union workers for Delphi.
At that point it doesn't matter. The cops don't do legal decisions. Once the warrant goes out, that is what they execute.
I wondered about that as well. But, apparently he didn't get the opportunity. The article said he was "arrested in his front yard".
Under those circumstances, I presume that the guy said: I have a signed contract, they simply claim they undercharged me and want more money. The cops should have stepped back at that point and given him the opportunity to clear up the issue. But, I guess that independent thought isn't a requirement for them.
If nothing else, the judge should have dismissed the charges immediately. But, my guess is that everyone is going to claim they were just following orders.....
Sawyer should make them buy him a Ford.
“It is my plan to let him keep the $5,600 and to make Mr. Sawyer right.”
You’re going to LET him keep the $5,600?? LOL! That’s mighty nice of you, you swine. It isn’t yours in the first place!
But you ARE going to make it right, whether you like it or not, hopefully about $2.2 million right.
'Come on down to Bob Smith Ford, where the prices are low and customers are not arrested.'
It was a criminal case because of the stolen vehicle warrant. The employee was management. You know, the buck stops here kinda thing like who authorized the company attorney to file the charges or if the attorney was even consulted. The bottom line, it was the name of the dealership on the warrant, not a personal issue not implicating the dealership.
In any case, if I were the management who supposedly made that decision, I would have naturally elevated it to the owner to handle along with my acknowledgement and apologies that a huge mistake was made to the ownership, along with my immediate recognition that my salary would be docked for the error and accepting whatever else the ownership thought was appropriate.
The dealership was insane for thinking that ANYONE would come back and sign another, more expensive contract. I certainly wouldn’t. They messed up on the price. Happens. Maybe they could have fired the salesman. But to get the police involved is absurd. I hope this hurts them.
The only thing Mr. Ellmer needs to say to Mr. Sawyer is “Hello, partner.”
is it an easier decision when the checker at the store accidently gives you $20 bucks too much change? You raise a good point....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.