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.