Pollen Car Ready for Delivery, But Bumper Repainted

[daniel]

Given your qualms about the car I'm very surprised you're buying and not leasing. Leasing takes care of many issues, including the one you've raised here.

That may be good advice. I've always figured that leasing is more expensive, the only advantage is that the hassle of selling it down the road is gone. Also, with leasing you're paying interest. I never pay interest. On anything. I pay cash or I do without.

But it may be a moot point because I have pretty much given up hope on this car anyway. If the electric Porsche comes through I'll probably let the Leaf slide. And lease or buy, I am incensed that they want to foist a damaged car off on me as new.

BTW, I've never leased, so I don't really know how it works, but I'm under the vague impression that at the end of the lease if you choose to turn the car in rather than buy it for residual value, they do an inspection and dock you for any damage. If the car has begun to rust early due to the pollen damage, or the batteries have deteriorated more than expected, due to having sat in port for two or three months without regular charging, you could find yourself paying unexpected fees.

At this point, the only way I'd accept this pollen car, or any of the two-month cars, would be if Nissan corporate gave me a deep discount on the price, or offered significant incentives, such as a guaranteed battery replacement in 3 to 5 years. Otherwise they'd have to offer me a post-pollen car that has not spent significant time in mysterious storage at port, and I think they're not likely to do that.

So I think the most likely outcome is that if the electric Porsche comes through and performs as hoped, I'll settle for that, with whatever shortcomings a conversion car is bound to have; and if it does not, then I'll keep driving my little Zap Xebra. After all the waiting and anguish, I doubt there's a Leaf in my future. Maybe a Tesla S in a few years. But we'll see what new excuse Nissan comes up with when my present June 17 estimated delivery passes.

And to think: As little as a month ago I'd almost certainly have accepted the car, grumbled against Nissan, but taken it. There's an old country western song from maybe three decades ago where the lady sings "Once my love for you was sooooooooo great, but it's to late to love me now."

 

[Coffee_Slurry]

I've always figured that leasing is more expensive, the only advantage is that the hassle of selling it down the road is gone.

Not just the hassle, but the risk of having to accept a low dollar value when you sell it.

they do an inspection and dock you for any damage. If the car has begun to rust early due to the pollen damage, or the batteries have deteriorated more than expected, due to having sat in port for two or three months without regular charging, you could find yourself paying unexpected fees.

They do dock you for any damage above normal wear. (They have a fairly formal definition of "normal wear" that is outlined in the booklet)

The battery is warrantied only against manufacturing defects, of which the only symptom is total failure or non-"gradual" loss. I don't see how any battery behavior could be a Lease return fee. It's either covered by warranty, or it's "normal".

And as much as I like the car, I have not 'forgiven' Nissan for the year-long miscommunication during purchase. I really hope someone else comes out with a better car in three years so that I don't have to buy another Nissan. Ever. And I tell them so in their surveys.

 

[daniel]

The battery is warrantied only against manufacturing defects, of which the only symptom is total failure or non-"gradual" loss. I don't see how any battery behavior could be a Lease return fee. It's either covered by warranty, or it's "normal".

I have not seen the "booklet," But it would not surprise me if "excessive" wear and tear on the battery is charged just as "excessive" wear on other parts of the car would be. For precisely the reason you mention: lack of warranty on battery life, the lease might dock you if the battery is too tired.

I wonder if anyone (especially a lawyer) has read the lease agreement in sufficient detail to be able to state whether an "excessively" weak battery would cause a lease return fee. Given Nissan's behavior so far, it would not surprise me if they tried to charge people for a new battery when they return their leased cars. Lots of people have given battery life uncertainty as a reason for leasing, but I don't think Nissan has ever stated that people who lease will be off the hook if Nissan decides that their battery was "improperly" treated, causing early degradation.

 

[SanDust]

BTW, I've never leased, so I don't really know how it works, but I'm under the vague impression that at the end of the lease if you choose to turn the car in rather than buy it for residual value, they do an inspection and dock you for any damage. If the car has begun to rust early due to the pollen damage, or the batteries have deteriorated more than expected, due to having sat in port for two or three months without regular charging, you could find yourself paying unexpected fees.

If you are leasing you can "rust easy" -- no charge for body rust. Normal wear and tear is exactly that -- the normal stains and dings you get when you own a car. Nothing to worry about unless you really abuse your vehicles, which I'm assuming you don't do.

As far a paying interest, think of it as an insurance policy. If the car doesn't fit your needs you can just walk without obligation. If you like it you can buy it (I suspect the battery capacity will be an issue). All for a small premium. Plus you have the use of the money which should be able to generate a decent return.

 

[daniel]

... Plus you have the use of the money which should be able to generate a decent return.

Money doesn't generate much of a return these days unless you're willing to tie it up in fairly long-term bonds, with the small but real risk of default, or put it in a junk bond fund, with the risks associated with that.

I see what you're saying about leasing being a kind of insurance policy. Of course, insurance is not free, and the leasing company wouldn't lease if they did not expect to make money, so the terms of the lease will always be favorable to the company.

Seems to me that Consumers Union recommends against leasing, as being more often unfavorable to the customer. But in the case of the Leaf, right now for me it's more a matter of outrage that they want to foist a damaged car off on me, assuming they ever do. I might actually be wrong about that: It's more likely they have no intention of ever sending me a car. And at the moment I don't really care. The glow has gone out of this car for me.