Lease return excess wear & tear

[larrycpa]

By signing below, Lucid: (i) acknowledges, accepts, and agrees to all of the terms and conditions of this Lease; and (ii) assigns all of its
right, title, and interest in and to this Lease and the Vehicle, including, in each case, all of the proceeds thereof, to Tryon Vehicle Titling
Trust. Lucid acknowledges that Lucid is not affiliated with Bank of America, N.A., or any of its affiliates, and nothing in this assignment
should be construed to make Lucid an agent of Tryon Vehicle Titling Trust or Bank of America, N.A. Tryon Vehicle Titling Trust does
not take assignment of any responsibilities of the manufacturer of the Vehicle or of the obligor on any ancillary products or services sold
or promised to the Lessee.
X ____________________________________________ _______________________________ _____________________________

 

[OutrightPace]

Just to follow-up on my own post, I just received a call from a manager at Lucid Financial, "Demetrius" who was very kind, patient, and sympathetic. He pulled up my inspection report and agreed the car was in excellent shape, but there was one VERY slight blemish on one wheel. I hadn't noticed it it was so tiny. That's the only thing they're wanting to charge me for - $200 for this wheel damage.

It's described in the report as a 1x7.0" gouge. I assume it's a typo and they meant to say 1.7" gouge, as shown in the photo, but calling this a "gouge" rather than a blemish seems a bit over the top to me, but you be the judge.

Here's the picture...
View attachment 30482


and the relevant report section:
View attachment 30483

OK, I guess if my agreement is to turn in the car pristine in every way, then I missed this one tiny thing. No idea if $200 is reasonable, but given all the other pictures backing up how perfect I've kept this car, you'd think they'd let that one go. Seems 100% legal and in accordance with what I signed, but in practice just seems petty. I've turned in probably 10 leased cars with FAR more nicks, true wheel curb rash and they have always just decided it fits in with reasonable wear and tear, especially if I'm buying or leasing a new one from the same company.

So, I've asked for an appeal, and Demetrius is going to work on it and get back to me, and I'll report back.
But let me add to the warnings and advice in this thread. Lucid (or their leasing partners) are unbelievably picky about anything at all wrong with the car and seemed determined to get money out of lease returnees. If this is the only thing they could find, they should celebrate how well I treated this leased car but instead, BOOM - $200 please or your account gets transferred to a debt collector.

AND, this is when i leased a new $100k Lucid from them the same day! No allowance for that either.

Be ready to get charged for incredibly minor things...

Exact same thing and charge for me, although my "gouge" was even smaller. This is also despite the fact that I leased another Lucid the same day.

 

[dingo]

If nothing else I appreciate the info here so I can be ready at my own lease return next September. Hopefully by then all of this will be better but going in ready is helpful.

I have leased BMW’s, Teslas and Mercedes with little to no issue on return. I also take extremely good care of my cars but this sounds excessive.

 

[TFCooper]

Just to follow-up on my own post, I just received a call from a manager at Lucid Financial, "Demetrius" who was very kind, patient, and sympathetic. He pulled up my inspection report and agreed the car was in excellent shape, but there was one VERY slight blemish on one wheel. I hadn't noticed it it was so tiny. That's the only thing they're wanting to charge me for - $200 for this wheel damage.

It's described in the report as a 1x7.0" gouge. I assume it's a typo and they meant to say 1.7" gouge, as shown in the photo, but calling this a "gouge" rather than a blemish seems a bit over the top to me, but you be the judge.

Here's the picture...
View attachment 30482


and the relevant report section:
View attachment 30483

OK, I guess if my agreement is to turn in the car pristine in every way, then I missed this one tiny thing. No idea if $200 is reasonable, but given all the other pictures backing up how perfect I've kept this car, you'd think they'd let that one go.

FWIW, I think that $200 charge is legit. They need to repair the wheel, and $200 to fix wheel rash is very reasonable. I paid $300 per wheel a few years back to fix an admittedly deeper rash.

 

[JoshG]

FWIW, I think that $200 charge is legit. They need to repair the wheel, and $200 to fix wheel rash is very reasonable. I paid $300 per wheel a few years back to fix an admittedly deeper rash.

I don't dispute that to repair that wheel should cost $200. Just look at that photo and see if you really think it NEEDS to be repaired to be saleable as a used car. Used cars, even from the manufacturer, or even CPO, are not necessarily cosmetically perfect and indistinguishable from a new vehicle. That's a tiny tiny almost invisible very light blemish.

I think they'd have just chosen to leave it as is. If I were buying that car used and saw this, I'd not be raising hell to get it fixed before taking delivery of it at $30k below the price of a new car.

And, as pointed out by other members here, it isn't even beyond their definition of "reasonable wear and tear".

Not the end of the world, I didn't to make it a huge deal about this one blemish or the $200, just a warning about lease returns and how picky and petty they are being so new lessees can have expectations set.

 

[Temmrich]

Reasonable/ normal wear and tear is very well defined in the law. Imo that easily fits into the definition. You will probably find it easier under landlord tenant. Send them the definition, cite the case and as someone said well before me, "just say NO"

agree. there is nothing in the lease agreement that says that they have ultimate discretion in determining normal vs. abnormal "wear and tear". Note your original lease agreement and the amount you were charged for the depreciation of the vehicle over the term of the lease. "Depreciation" means that it is no longer new. Probably too late but i would fight them - as i am sure i will need to do in 5 months. In my case, Lucid never got the scale to put a Customer/Service center in NC so they are telling me i need to drive the car 5-6 hours to return it to them in Atlanta. They established the norm of service by delivering my car to my house and servicing it remotely over 2 years. but now i'm supposed to help them by driving the car cross states to return it to them. Absurd.

 

[blaferty]

Has anyone who has completed lease return been charged for scratches on panel(s) under front or rear bumpers?

 

[Jiminga]

I believe Bank of America handles the leasing. Hopefully they (Lucid) can reign in their financial partner cause this really sucks. I’d expect them to have a bit of wiggle room for minor cosmetic things that OP highlighted.

On a personal note that technician needs to cut his finger nails….

Lease culprit with expertise in consumer exploitation and internal corruption explains all the Lucid leasing issue to me: BofA

 

[Steveinarizona]

Lease culprit with expertise in consumer exploitation and internal corruption explains all the Lucid leasing issue to me: BofA

Hummh. Has anyone used a third party lessor for an Air and, if so, how has the return process gone? That might demonstrate whether the problem is B of A or Lucid.

 

[marsarbu]

Has anyone who has completed lease return been charged for scratches on panel(s) under front or rear bumpers?

Interested as well. I got a couple scratches under the belly.

 

[Batteryman]

I don't dispute that to repair that wheel should cost $200. Just look at that photo and see if you really think it NEEDS to be repaired to be saleable as a used car. Used cars, even from the manufacturer, or even CPO, are not necessarily cosmetically perfect and indistinguishable from a new vehicle. That's a tiny tiny almost invisible very light blemish.

I think they'd have just chosen to leave it as is. If I were buying that car used and saw this, I'd not be raising hell to get it fixed before taking delivery of it at $30k below the price of a new car.

And, as pointed out by other members here, it isn't even beyond their definition of "reasonable wear and tear".

Not the end of the world, I didn't to make it a huge deal about this one blemish or the $200, just a warning about lease returns and how picky and petty they are being so new lessees can have expectations set.

Damage is damage…..

 

[Andretex]

The biggest reason to lease EVs currently is the tax breaks. If you're shopping Lucid, you likely make too much money to qualify for the $7,500 tax credit if you purchase, but if you lease, you get that. It's the main reason we leased my wife's XC40 Recharge as well as my Lucid. We're almost definitely buying the Volvo once the lease is up, and I'm likely going to buy out the Lucid before its lease is over, too (because I'm about to go WAY over mileage)

I will go way over miles too. but I doubt it will be worth buying the car out at the end of the lease. BofA will not negotiate and the residual value will be much higher than the market price of the vehicle. say you are 10,000 miles above the lease return miles, that is (10,000x.25 cents=) $2,500. I expect to pay about that amount. I am sure the car will have a market value at least lower than $10k from residual on a 3 year lease.

 

[Justmurr]

Interested as well. I got a couple scratches under the belly.

I’m only 5months in and already have a few under belly scrapes & scratches. Plenty of depreciation ahead for me.

 

[kort6776]

I will go way over miles too. but I doubt it will be worth buying the car out at the end of the lease. BofA will not negotiate and the residual value will be much higher than the market price of the vehicle. say you are 10,000 miles above the lease return miles, that is (10,000x.25 cents=) $2,500. I expect to pay about that amount. I am sure the car will have a market value at least lower than $10k from residual on a 3 year lease.

this what used airs are being offered

Lucid Now Sells a 620 Horsepower EV for $45,000. It’s the Pre-Owned Air Touring. — Leasehackr

The Lucid Air has won every major accolade from the automotive press, and for good reason. This top-class luxury sedan marries Silicon Valley innovation with attributes that appeal to the traditional car enthusiast: blistering acceleration, graceful design, and engaging handling. Engineer

leasehackr.com

 

[fisheral]

this what used airs are being offered

Lucid Now Sells a 620 Horsepower EV for $45,000. It’s the Pre-Owned Air Touring. — Leasehackr

The Lucid Air has won every major accolade from the automotive press, and for good reason. This top-class luxury sedan marries Silicon Valley innovation with attributes that appeal to the traditional car enthusiast: blistering acceleration, graceful design, and engaging handling. Engineer

leasehackr.com

They'll definitely try to make up the 20k difference on my car from excess wear and tear.

 

[chork]

No call back after 48 hours now.

Also a bit off putting, the letter they send you says you can pay online or by phone. You cannot pay online, as the lease account has been removed when I login. I had to call the number three times, on hold each time for 10-30 minutes until finally someone picked up. It goes to a collection agency, with the aggressive messages about this is an attempt to collect a debt, etc etc. WTF?

Here's the letter they sent with personal info redacted. Note: I was expecting the lease end fee, and they had billed me one extra lease payment which they owe me back. I did a zero drive off lease, so the monthly number was higher in exchange for a lower drive off.

Q: Does anyone have a copy of the lease agreement, specifically the sections 9 and 16C concerning Excess Wear and Tear?

View attachment 29472

View attachment 29473

If you go here: https://lucidmotors.com/knowledge/ownership/financial-services/vehicle-lease-end it gives more info on the excessive wear than 16C in the Contract. Notice the Exterior section especially the Chips: 11 or more..., Glass and Lenses section and Tires and Wheels. I poked around to find this as I was curious about the chips section. I clear wrapped the front bumper and 1/2 hood as I was given a loaner that was 2 years old with 20K miles on it and the front section was all pitted, plus I have heard that these paint jobs on the front are not all that good. Anyway thanks for posting all this (everyone).

 

[fisheral]

If you go here: https://lucidmotors.com/knowledge/ownership/financial-services/vehicle-lease-end it gives more info on the excessive wear than 16C in the Contract. Notice the Exterior section especially the Chips: 11 or more..., Glass and Lenses section and Tires and Wheels. I poked around to find this as I was curious about the chips section. I clear wrapped the front bumper and 1/2 hood as I was given a loaner that was 2 years old with 20K miles on it and the front section was all pitted, plus I have heard that these paint jobs on the front are not all that good. Anyway thanks for posting all this (everyone).

BoA has completely ignored the Lucid guidelines so far.

 

[BenTexas]

They'll definitely try to make up the 20k difference on my car from excess wear and tear.

I fully agree this is the most likely reason for this maximum effort to claw back as much as they can. I just receive my invoice as well after returning my 23 Air Pure AWD (one of the first ones delivered in Texas) with 9700 miles. Got a $5,800 invoice. Cant see the reason yet as I cant log in with the credentials I was given and no one has answered my calls yet. The Lucid rep taking in the lease even said it was one of the cleanest lease returns she'd seen and I didn't do a lease return inspection because I went off their guidelines thinking at worst it would be a couple hundred bucks for one wheel scrape. I fully expected to order a Gravity Touring once those became available but now I'm buying a Cadillac Vistiq and saying goodbye to the brand.

 

[marsarbu]

I fully agree this is the most likely reason for this maximum effort to claw back as much as they can. I just receive my invoice as well after returning my 23 Air Pure AWD (one of the first ones delivered in Texas) with 9700 miles. Got a $5,800 invoice. Cant see the reason yet as I cant log in with the credentials I was given and no one has answered my calls yet. The Lucid rep taking in the lease even said it was one of the cleanest lease returns she'd seen and I didn't do a lease return inspection because I went off their guidelines thinking at worst it would be a couple hundred bucks for one wheel scrape. I fully expected to order a Gravity Touring once those became available but now I'm buying a Cadillac Vistiq and saying goodbye to the brand.

Are you going to pay?

 

[kort6776]

I fully agree this is the most likely reason for this maximum effort to claw back as much as they can. I just receive my invoice as well after returning my 23 Air Pure AWD (one of the first ones delivered in Texas) with 9700 miles. Got a $5,800 invoice. Cant see the reason yet as I cant log in with the credentials I was given and no one has answered my calls yet. The Lucid rep taking in the lease even said it was one of the cleanest lease returns she'd seen and I didn't do a lease return inspection because I went off their guidelines thinking at worst it would be a couple hundred bucks for one wheel scrape. I fully expected to order a Gravity Touring once those became available but now I'm buying a Cadillac Vistiq and saying goodbye to the brand.

if it can be shown that Bof A is ignoring the implied contract and acting arbitrarily with their imposing excessive wear and tear and not having any sort of means of arbitration we might be entering the world of class action lawsuits. I am not a lawyer and I am only expressing an opinion. maybe someone who is more well versed on legal matters could offer an opinion on this. the fact that Bof A is issuing these "fines" without any ability for disputing the charges and then rushing to a collection phase does not seem to be proper and could be in violation of consumer protection laws.