The battery replacement/buyback thread.

[Shamus]

Did you try negotiating on the 1st offer? I've seen some mention from others to negotiate with them to get a better offer. Some mentioned they said they couldn't replace their vehicle with the offered price and if you turn down the offer, they are required to get you a battery. If they don't have enough batteries they are going to want to make some deals to reduce the customers they need to provide batteries for.

Well, negotiation kinda relies on some sort of dialogue. My arbitration specialist is not particularly responsive. Since getting this offer, I have asked:

• How'd you calculate the usage? - no response
• When can I get that replacement battery that I was originally promised? - no response
• Hey can I get a loaner vehicle since my Leaf is currently unsafe to drive? - no response

 

[adavidw]

There’s a couple things going on here.

First, your state lemon law sucks. Nobody’s state lemon law actually applies to these situations, but Nissan has decided they’re going to use whatever formula is specified in each state’s lemon law for calculating valuation amounts. That’s both good and bad. If you were to bring a legal action in your state, and a buyback were to be awarded, I imagine a formula that’s already well enshrined in law would be used so that’s why Nissan wants to make sure they’re offering what the law would require. Problem is, the arbitration folks have been claiming to people that they have to go by the lemon law, and can’t actually offer any more than what the lemon law authorizes. That is complete and utter horseshit.

In your particular case, the Colorado lemon law doesn’t provide any formula for “reasonable allowance“ of usage, and also doesn’t provide any sort of cap on the amount. So, you’re not starting out on a great foot.

The two most common formulas that I’ve seen in state lemon laws are either a fixed amount per mile driven (like $.10 or $.12), or a fraction based on how much of the car is used, with a numerator of miles driven and a denominator of something artificially low for the present time, like 100k. In that method, driving 67,000 miles would mean your car is 2/3 “used up“ and so they are responsible for only giving you 1/3 it’s original value.

You’ve got a couple of points of leverage to go back to them with. First thing should be that you ask them for an explanation of how they arrived at that usage number. I am suspecting they’re using miles driven out of an expected lifespan of 100 K miles, but before you start argue with them that they shouldn’t use such a dumb calculation, you should be sure that that’s what they’re actually doing.

Since there isn’t a formula specified in Colorado state law, I would next insist that they use the mileage you had when the warranty claim was first made (59K?), and then try to convince them to use something way more reasonable like $.10 a mile. The law’s not on your side on that one, but it doesn’t support them really either, so that seems to be a point of negotiation.

The other thing that works against you is that rebate. If that was some actual
point of sale rebate from Nissan or something, then they’re probably right to exclude that from your calculation of your total outlay. However, if that’s a tax credit you had to file for or something, that’s bogus.

 

[adavidw]

Well, negotiation kinda relies on some sort of dialogue. My arbitration specialist is not particularly responsive. Since getting this offer, I have asked:

• How'd you calculate the usage? - no response
• When can I get that replacement battery that I was originally promised? - no response
• Hey can I get a loaner vehicle since my Leaf is currently unsafe to drive? - no response

The other thing I forgot to mention in my previous post, is that at this point you should probably open up a BBB Autoline claim. That has some difficulty, and you may have to call BBB a few times to get them to process the claim correctly, but once it goes to Nissan, Nissan will assign you a new rep specifically to deal with that claim.

 

[Shamus]

There’s a couple things going on here.

First, your state lemon law sucks. Nobody’s state lemon law actually applies to these situations, but Nissan has decided they’re going to use whatever formula is specified in each state’s lemon law for calculating valuation amounts. That’s both good and bad. If you were to bring a legal action in your state, and a buyback were to be awarded, I imagine a formula that’s already well enshrined in law would be used so that’s why Nissan wants to make sure they’re offering what the law would require. Problem is, the arbitration folks have been claiming to people that they have to go by the lemon law, and can’t actually offer any more than what the lemon law authorizes. That is complete and utter horseshit.

In your particular case, the Colorado lemon law doesn’t provide any formula for “reasonable allowance“ of usage, and also doesn’t provide any sort of cap on the amount. So, you’re not starting out on a great foot.

The two most common formulas that I’ve seen in state lemon laws are either a fixed amount per mile driven (like $.10 or $.12), or a fraction based on how much of the car is used, with a numerator of miles driven and a denominator of something artificially low for the present time, like 100k. In that method, driving 67,000 miles would mean your car is 2/3 “used up“ and so they are responsible for only giving you 1/3 it’s original value.

You’ve got a couple of points of leverage to go back to them with. First thing should be that you ask them for an explanation of how they arrived at that usage number. I am suspecting they’re using miles driven out of an expected lifespan of 100 K miles, but before you start argue with them that they shouldn’t use such a dumb calculation, you should be sure that that’s what they’re actually doing.

Since there isn’t a formula specified in Colorado state law, I would next insist that they use the mileage you had when the warranty claim was first made (59K?), and then try to convince them to use something way more reasonable like $.10 a mile. The law’s not on your side on that one, but it doesn’t support them really either, so that seems to be a point of negotiation.

The other thing that works against you is that rebate. If that was some actual
point of sale rebate from Nissan or something, then they’re probably right to exclude that from your calculation of your total outlay. However, if that’s a tax credit you had to file for or something, that’s bogus.

Thanks adavidw - I really appreciate the well thought out answer. I did also put in a BBB Autoline claim today. We'll see what comes of that.

The $6k was taken off the top at the dealer when I made the purchase, so that's all fair. I'm just kinda surprised we're not seeing more complaints from Coloradans if this is the sort of offer that Nissan is peddling (there's a lot of Leafs around here).

At this point, I'll keep being the squeaky wheel and keep y'all posted, but it seems the only somewhat worthwhile option is to wait for a new battery while I hope mine doesn't completely die. The dealers seem to be completely in the dark regarding outlook. One of them told me the last replacement they got was almost a year ago - ouch!

 

[SageBrush]

The other thing that works against you is that rebate. If that was some actual
point of sale rebate from Nissan or something, then they’re probably right to exclude that from your calculation of your total outlay. However, if that’s a tax credit you had to file for or something, that’s bogus.

I think that is a CO tax credit, but IIRC it was offered as a POS.

As and aside, I've been skeptical of the POS tax credit angle as a consumer advantage since it just makes it too easy for the dealership (or manufacturer, in the case of Tesla) to adjust the car price to collect the tax credit themselves. People clamored for it because they did not understand/were too lazy to adjust tax payments during the year, and it is coming back to bite them.

Another case of 'beware what you wish for.'

 

[kansas]

Not true in my case. I am the original owner with all paperwork, etc. Buyback offer was ~$5k for a Leaf that was diagnosed with 8 bars at 59k miles and now have 67k miles.

 

[SageBrush]

In the case of a defect, the manufacturer can choose to either 1) repair, 2) replacement or 3) refund. That's the manufacturer's choice, not the customer's (although refund can't be the first choice).

• "Refund" can only be chosen when repair isn't possible or when the manufacturer and customer both agree to do that instead of repair.

This may explain why the 40 kWh LEAFs are more likely to get a pack than the older LEAFs. The Older models with warranty claims from excessive degradation do not have a defect, so Nissan is not required by Moss to first repair or replace.

 

[ebeighe]

@Shamus
Your deal sheet looks basically same as mine except
YIKES, yes that is hard to understand how they compute "usage"; my usage was ~ $3,000 for ~40,000 miles.
I also got a 1 day turnaround via email when i just asked for a better deal, they summarily cut the usage charge in half.
Other than talking on the phone once in the beginning to my assigned arbitration person, it was all email.

I'm in Arizona. hard to imagine our lemon law, even though they reference it in their letter, has anything to do with how they calculate the offer. From our arizona AG website: "The period covered by the Lemon Law is the term of the manufacturer’s warranty or two years or 24,000 miles, whichever is earlier. "

p.s. i know it's annoying, but the arbitration person more than likely has no info about, and no idea about battery replacements. I mean, sure you can ask but I wouldn't expect anything sensible.

 

[macgyver33]

Got my first offer back which was only $10k after knocking off $14k for usage. Have a 2017 30kWh SL that was bought new for $37k with about 38k miles today. I think they used the (miles/100k) * purchase price usage deduction formula.
Seems absurd to assume the useful life is only 100k miles.

We are going to argue for a better offer for a few reasons:

1. CO lemon law states they need to include registration costs which we estimate to be $3300 in total so far.
2. A comparable vehicle at the dealership we are working with is $22k. The law says if they replace your vehicle it has to be comparable. I take that to meaning similar features like the 360 camera, heated steering wheel, navigation and Bose sound system with similar range to what we would have with at least a 9 bar battery. This basically means only a 1st Gen 30kWh SL with at least 9 bars which are near impossible to find or a 2nd Gen SL Leaf which are $20k+ locally.

If they don't at least give us over $20k, we are going to grill them more on the usage deduction considering others are only reporting a few thousand for similar miles. AZ lemon law doesn't appear to list a specific usage deduction formula so it seems different agents are using different methods. I'd be fine with the $0.10/mile which would be about $3800 in our case. Will report back when I hear what they counter with.

 

[Ibby]

Got my first offer back which was only $10k after knocking off $14k for usage. Have a 2017 30kWh SL that was bought new for $37k with about 38k miles today. I think they used the (miles/100k) * purchase price usage deduction formula.
Seems absurd to assume the useful life is only 100k miles.

We are going to argue for a better offer for a few reasons:

1. CO lemon law states they need to include registration costs which we estimate to be $3300 in total so far.
2. A comparable vehicle at the dealership we are working with is $22k. The law says if they replace your vehicle it has to be comparable. I take that to meaning similar features like the 360 camera, heated steering wheel, navigation and Bose sound system with similar range to what we would have with at least a 9 bar battery. This basically means only a 1st Gen 30kWh SL with at least 9 bars which are near impossible to find or a 2nd Gen SL Leaf which are $20k+ locally.

If they don't at least give us over $20k, we are going to grill them more on the usage deduction considering others are only reporting a few thousand for similar miles. AZ lemon law doesn't appear to list a specific usage deduction formula so it seems different agents are using different methods. I'd be fine with the $0.10/mile which would be about $3800 in our case. Will report back when I hear what they counter with.

May I ask how your offer was calculated to $10k? If your purchase was $37k and they subtracted $14k for usage, shouldn't the offer have been more like $23k?

 

[macgyver33]

May I ask how your offer was calculated to $10k? If your purchase was $37k and they subtracted $14k for usage, shouldn't the offer have been more like $23k?

Here's my breakdown. We had a big incentive of $15k between our local utility and a Nissan incentive that was taken off the purchase price.

 

[ebeighe]

Got my first offer back which was only $10k after knocking off $14k for usage. Have a 2017 30kWh SL that was bought new for $37k with about 38k miles today. I think they used the (miles/100k) * purchase price usage deduction formula.
Seems absurd to assume the useful life is only 100k miles.

We are going to argue for a better offer for a few reasons:

1. CO lemon law states they need to include registration costs which we estimate to be $3300 in total so far.
2. A comparable vehicle at the dealership we are working with is $22k. The law says if they replace your vehicle it has to be comparable. I take that to meaning similar features like the 360 camera, heated steering wheel, navigation and Bose sound system with similar range to what we would have with at least a 9 bar battery. This basically means only a 1st Gen 30kWh SL with at least 9 bars which are near impossible to find or a 2nd Gen SL Leaf which are $20k+ locally.

If they don't at least give us over $20k, we are going to grill them more on the usage deduction considering others are only reporting a few thousand for similar miles. AZ lemon law doesn't appear to list a specific usage deduction formula so it seems different agents are using different methods. I'd be fine with the $0.10/mile which would be about $3800 in our case. Will report back when I hear what they counter with.

But it's weirder than that for AZ, right? AZ lemon law expired years ago; as it's capped at 24 months/24,000 miles.So, like you said, they seem to be using somewhat arbitrary usage calculations. i got lucky but i don't know why.

 

[Snargleblarg]

I agree - something does seem to be off.

Purchased in Colorado - still in Colorado. Financed at 0% and fully paid off. Here's the calculation I got (hopefully this comes through OK):

View attachment 2864

They don't show how the "Usage" value is determined. If it's a % of the original value then they're doing you a huge disservice by subtracting the $6k rebate after the usage calculation. If, instead, you subtract the rebate first and then proportionally discount for usage, your calculated refund would be almost $4k higher.

 

[macgyver33]

They don't show how the "Usage" value is determined. If it's a % of the original value then they're doing you a huge disservice by subtracting the $6k rebate after the usage calculation. If, instead, you subtract the rebate first and then proportionally discount for usage, your calculated refund would be almost $4k higher.

I'm fairly certain they are using this formula in the cases with bigger usage deductions because this is listed in the BBB Autoline documents.

(miles driven/100,000) * purchase price

You can check lemon laws for each state and some have defined the usage formula but if not, they seem to be using the above as a default or in the case of some of the better offers they might be using a simple $0.10 per mile deduction.

https://bbbprograms.org/programs/all-programs/bbb-autoline/how-bbb-auto-line-works/nissan

 

[Ibby]

Here's my breakdown. We had a big incentive of $15k between our local utility and a Nissan incentive that was taken off the purchase price.

Thanks that makes sense now. And wow! That's $15k incentives at POS. And then (I assume) $7.5k federal and $5k Colorado tax credits. Pretty darn good initial purchase!

 

[macgyver33]

Thanks that makes sense now. And wow! That's $15k incentives at POS. And then (I assume) $7.5k federal and $5k Colorado tax credits. Pretty darn good initial purchase!

The $15k already included the $5k from Colorado as the dealership took the credit. The other $10k was an Xcel credit that the dealership also took off the top. Still was a pretty good deal at the time though.

 

[macgyver33]

Here's my breakdown. We had a big incentive of $15k between our local utility and a Nissan incentive that was taken off the purchase price.

Got our second offer back. They waived half the usage deduction so now we're at $17k for the offer. No mention of the registration fees being included which is listed in the Colorado lemon law so we asked for that to be added. Hopefully they accept which will bring us over $20k which also should be close enough to replace with a comparable vehicle.

 

[macgyver33]

Got our second offer back. They waived half the usage deduction so now we're at $17k for the offer. No mention of the registration fees being included which is listed in the Colorado lemon law so we asked for that to be added. Hopefully they accept which will bring us over $20k which also should be close enough to replace with a comparable vehicle.

The arbitration specialist called me and explained she waived half the usage deduction to cover the registration fees. If we wanted the registration fees included they would have to charge the full usage deduction so it's a better deal according to her. She did confirm they use the standard usage of (miles/100k)*purchase price. I reiterated it's still not enough to get a comparable vehicle but she said the last offer is as much as she can give us. She also was not able to offer any additional incentives if we were to purchase another Nissan from a dealer. She said that's all up to the dealer.

 

[1fireguy]

Waiting on the fourth bar to drop anytime now. Read the last hundred replies and updates. Has anyone asked Nissan to pay them the equivalent price of a battery price so they can purchase their own battery for install? There’s a shop in Oregon that has batteries, and will even retrofit a larger battery into an older Leaf. My plan has been to replace the battery through Nissan and then swap it with that shop and add cash to ‘upgrade’ to a larger capacity (newer battery).

I’m curious if Nissan will buy a battery in cash instead of buying the car back.

 

[macgyver33]

Waiting on the fourth bar to drop anytime now. Read the last hundred replies and updates. Has anyone asked Nissan to pay them the equivalent price of a battery price so they can purchase their own battery for install? There’s a shop in Oregon that has batteries, and will even retrofit a larger battery into an older Leaf. My plan has been to replace the battery through Nissan and then swap it with that shop and add cash to ‘upgrade’ to a larger capacity (newer battery).

I’m curious if Nissan will buy a battery in cash instead of buying the car back.

I believe the replacement batteries still carry some warranty so they need to make sure it meets spec and is done by Nissan techs. They also want to make sure you actually get the battery replaced and don't just pocket the money like someone involved in a minor fender bender that doesn't actually get the body work repaired.