Lease Turn in - Excessive Wear and Tear... ?

[dapellegrini]

Hi all. I was a happy lessee of a 2023 Lucid Air Grand Touring. Great car. I just turned it in last week, after a short 18 month lease. Today I received my lease end bill. Curious what the crowd here thinks of these Lease Turn in fees... I've leased many luxury cars, and this is the first time I have seen what I would call petty / minor wear listed as Excessive Wear and Tear. Perhaps I need to adjust my expectations going forward?

First we have the windshield, which apparently has 3 very small chips from rocks. See three images attached of the "Excessive Wear and Tear" on the windshield. The charge $1,450. I have full glass coverage and if the windshield was truly cracked or damaged my insurance replacement would have been free. I am not sure though that anyone would call this true damage that merits either repair or replacement?

Then there are two photos of what looks like the passenger sun visor - "Left interior Qtr Trim Broken", for $375. I honestly don't even see what they are trying to show in the photos.

Total bill for Excessive Wear and Tear: $1,825.

I've asked for someone from Lucid to call me back and explain these charges to me. When I turned the car in, none of these were pointed out. I was not given an opportunity to remedy them. And honestly. IMO these seem very petty.

I doubt I will have any recourse, other than to pay their bill. I will update this thread with the final outcome once I hear back.

 

[HC_79]

Hmm….. does seem quite petty but I’ve also heard similar stories about BMW lease returns though. Wonder if they’re scrutinizing more because the lease was short but I’ve had worse than that on leases with Audi and have never walked away with a bill.

Having said that though, I’ve always jumped into a lease on a newer model when returning so maybe they’re absorbing it in the new deal. My last lease return with Audi was during Covid and they were so desperate for cars they let me return it 8 months early with no penalty which worked out well for me because my Lucid delivery was imminent.

 

[dapellegrini]

They typically do wipe out any lease end fees if they can get you into another lease. I've leased 6 BMW's and 3 Range Rovers, turned them all in with more wear than this and never had anything flagged. Not all of those ended with a new lease from the same brand. Also leased VW's and other cars for my kids - again no Excessive Wear and Tear fees - and all got used more than this one!

 

[jbawden]

Wow, that seems really petty. I too have no idea what is wrong with the visor. Hopefully this is just an isolated return story, but there should be plenty of data points coming on line soon (bubble of early lease returns).

We returned our Model 3 (without getting a new one) with at least this level of wear and tear, including some curb rash, and there was no bill.

 

[dapellegrini]

The final bill is actually higher, because they charge sales tax on these fees, so another $209.30 in tax, bringing us over $2k of excessive wear and tear in those photos. , Here's a screenshot of the claimed excessive wear with the fees before tax

 

[Ughwhy]

It's probably not too late to make a claim to your insurance company for that windshield. It's worth a try.

 

[fisheral]

The final bill is actually higher, because they charge sales tax on these fees, so another $209.30 in tax, bringing us over $2k of excessive wear and tear in those photos. , Here's a screenshot of the claimed excessive wear with the fees before tax

View attachment 29437

Are you shitting me. If I'd known they'd be like this on return I'd never have even considered leasing.

I've turned in leases with worse and not even a second glance from the manufacturers.

 

[Jfrittsjr55]

Hi all. I was a happy lessee of a 2023 Lucid Air Grand Touring. Great car. I just turned it in last week, after a short 18 month lease. Today I received my lease end bill. Curious what the crowd here thinks of these Lease Turn in fees... I've leased many luxury cars, and this is the first time I have seen what I would call petty / minor wear listed as Excessive Wear and Tear. Perhaps I need to adjust my expectations going forward?

First we have the windshield, which apparently has 3 very small chips from rocks. See three images attached of the "Excessive Wear and Tear" on the windshield. The charge $1,450. I have full glass coverage and if the windshield was truly cracked or damaged my insurance replacement would have been free. I am not sure though that anyone would call this true damage that merits either repair or replacement?

Then there are two photos of what looks like the passenger sun visor - "Left interior Qtr Trim Broken", for $375. I honestly don't even see what they are trying to show in the photos.

Total bill for Excessive Wear and Tear: $1,825.

I've asked for someone from Lucid to call me back and explain these charges to me. When I turned the car in, none of these were pointed out. I was not given an opportunity to remedy them. And honestly. IMO these seem very petty.

I doubt I will have any recourse, other than to pay their bill. I will update this thread with the final outcome once I hear back.

I think they’re trying to point out that the battery that powers the vanity light on the visor is dead by showing a photo of where battery goes and that the light doesn’t come on when cover is flipped up. Petty.

 

[Leftlane]

.1” chips? Oh man - that is next level petty - if they are expecting showroom condition on lease return then everyone is getting a big bill. Those aren’t even measurable chips for most people - I don’t think a glass repair shop would even bother with those.

 

[tonybot]

This is really petty and I have never seen anything like this getting charged! Hopefully they will adjust their approach going forward as they gain more experience with lease returns or else it is a strong caution not to lease from Lucid. As a person currently holding a lease, I am very much concerned.

 

[borski]

I think they’re trying to point out that the battery that powers the vanity light on the visor is dead by showing a photo of where battery goes and that the light doesn’t come on when cover is flipped up. Petty.

The three batteries definitely don't cost $375. They might be trying to make the case that even with new batteries it is broken, and they have to replace the entire visor. But I have no idea - I'd ask for clarification on that one too.

I'd have gotten those rock chips filled, but I agree that seems excessive. I'd also push back on this.

 

[FA14]

This is Pure B.S on Lucid’s part. Unacceptable

 

[David2025]

Hi all. I was a happy lessee of a 2023 Lucid Air Grand Touring. Great car. I just turned it in last week, after a short 18 month lease. Today I received my lease end bill. Curious what the crowd here thinks of these Lease Turn in fees... I've leased many luxury cars, and this is the first time I have seen what I would call petty / minor wear listed as Excessive Wear and Tear. Perhaps I need to adjust my expectations going forward?

First we have the windshield, which apparently has 3 very small chips from rocks. See three images attached of the "Excessive Wear and Tear" on the windshield. The charge $1,450. I have full glass coverage and if the windshield was truly cracked or damaged my insurance replacement would have been free. I am not sure though that anyone would call this true damage that merits either repair or replacement?

Then there are two photos of what looks like the passenger sun visor - "Left interior Qtr Trim Broken", for $375. I honestly don't even see what they are trying to show in the photos.

Total bill for Excessive Wear and Tear: $1,825.

I've asked for someone from Lucid to call me back and explain these charges to me. When I turned the car in, none of these were pointed out. I was not given an opportunity to remedy them. And honestly. IMO these seem very petty.

I doubt I will have any recourse, other than to pay their bill. I will update this thread with the final outcome once I hear back.

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"

 

[dapellegrini]

No doubt. Those considering a lease, and those preparing for a lease return.... beware! I'll give them the chance to make it right when they call me to explain. I may also include a link to this thread. The outcome will be public. Fingers crossed we are just dealing with an overzealous employee (in Scottsdale, AZ).

 

[jbawden]

Could just be an over zealous inspector (may be new to the task?) and this will get sorted. But man alive this sort of "fine" at lease end would turn A LOT of people off of considering a Lucid product. This is like a cop giving you a ticket for 1mph over; technically a fine but its doing way more damage to goodwill and the LEO/civilian relationship than it is a productive speed deterrent.

 

[PureJoy77]

Only thing excessive is that bill. Your wear and tear is minimal and normal.

 

[knewman]

That's nuts. I'm so curious what the deal is with the sun visor.

Never experienced this kind of nickel-dime with a lease turn in. If this becomes a trend with Lucid then there's no way I'm recommending these cars to people.

 

[JoshG]

watching this also... i sure hope they change their mind about these charges.

 

[translux]

I’ve leased many cars from all the usual suspects-BMW, Mercedes, Porsche and Cadillac…-and not once have I ever been charged for anything upon return. Clearly Lucid is trying to claw back some $ anyway they can. What a terrible decision. My plan was to lease another. However if this is the game they want to play this will be my last Lucid.

 

[HC_79]

My plan was to lease another. However if this is the game they want to play this will be my last Lucid.

If you lease another Lucid I don’t think you’d be issued a bill in the first place. A new sale is worth well more than quibbling over $2K