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.
Wow... guess I shouldn't complain then about my $200 repair due on my Touring lease return for the tiniest single blemish on one wheel.
But it remains clear that there are enormous risks leasing from Lucid, and they are the pickiest and most greedy leasing company I've ever dealt with in decades of pretty flawless experience across German, American, and Japanese brands.
I'd caution all buyers to avoid Lucid Leasing as people like OP and
@BenTexas and me are getting unexpected bills at the end of the lease for hundreds or thousands of dollars that other companies would not have assessed.
My car was perfect after just 9100 miles at my lease return. But still they found this:
(their photo, not mine, from the official inspection)
and decided despite everything else being perfect, that this "gouge" (I'd say blemish) on one wheel needed "replacement" according to their report (more likely refinishing) and I must pay $200. That's their photo, and it's the ONLY thing wrong on my car that they're claiming is excess wear and tear. Kinda petty.
I appealed, and have pointed out to them that this doesn't even come up in their definition of "excess wear and tear"... and if it's literally the ONLY thing they could find on my car, then shouldn't my car fit the definition of "expected wear and tear"? There's not a door ding, hairline scratch, or windhield chip on the car, nor any interior damage.
They came back to me yesterday and said my appeal is denied and the photo is their justification.
It's only $200 and I'll pay it just to be done, but I'll be sure to spread my warnings about the way Lucid is operating here. Some will point out it's BofA, not Lucid, but Lucid picked them as their partner and we as consumers have no other options to choose for leasing, so Lucid must accept responsibility of their partner's treatment of their customers.
In the interest of fairness and complete disclosure, they
did agree to waive my $450 lease termination fee saying it was because I leased a new Touring at the same time as this return. They said it has nothing to do with this damage. That's nice, and pretty standard in repeat-brand leasing. So my total bill at the end of this is just $200. I'll be fine with it.
To be honest, I think they made a tactical mistake with me... they should have said they accept my appeal and are going to waive the $200 fee on the tiny wheel blemish and they're also reducing my lease end fee from $450 to $200 as a goodwill gesture. Same overall cost to me, but a better explanation. For some reason, I'd have been happier with that explanation than what they said to me.
