I sent my message directly to email@example.com
by fault. If you have recieved my message please post it on this
newsgroup so people can view my points ,
my points in brief, is that the population of Canada is just about the
population of California. Dealership won't dare ruin their
relationship with Manufacturer by selling cars to Canadian just for a
period of cross border shopping frenzy. Dealership cherish their good
relationship with the manufacturer, cuz they can make really better
profit by buying cars at bigger reduction on their whole sale value,
if they get a better rating from Manufacturer.
My suggestion to canadian is to keep their money in their pocket until
the Canadian retail market get starve, so the retails would lower they
already high profit margins. On the other hand, wait til the US
economy to crash, so the snobs would eventually fight for our loonies
in the pockets.
Very good suggestion, that's what I'm going to do.
Thank goodness Chrysler made my Concorde (CDN assembled car) very well
and parts are readily available. My dealer doesn't like it though, they
reminded me how old it is the other day when I bought a small part they
don't have in local stock.
Considering the very significant design changes now being made to cars
because of high and increasing fuel prices, it isn't a good time to buy
a vehicle for a long term keep anyway.
I can see the reluctance of manufacturers to reduce Canadian prices
until this currency situation levels out, however they could use rebates
quite effectively in this situation.
The more expensive vehicles have the biggest price difference and some
expensive car dealers, such as Porsche and BMW, have already announced
Unfortunately that is happening and the USA $ is dropping to levels even
the currency experts weren't expecting. (C$1 = US$1.048 now)
The USA is dropping interest rates and CDA needs to keep interest rates
where they are or even higher to avoid excessive inflation; this will
drop the USA $ even more.
As the USA economy and $ drop the Canadian economy is negatively
affected. The Canadian forestry industry has already been affected by
both the USA housing recession plus the falling USA $; many Canadian
lumber mills are shutting down. So many CDNs may soon not have jobs to
pay for the cars at any price.
We are not talking about restrictions on where (physically,
geographically) a dealer can operate from.
We are talking about a US dealer refusing to sell a new car to a
Canadian customer soley on the basis that the customer is Canadian.
There is no question as to the ability of the Canadian to produce
funds or sufficient payment. There is no issue as to how the Canadian
customer moves the purchased vehicle away from the dealership to it's
destination (where-ever that may be). The sale is not contingent on
the dealer delivering the car to the Canadian customer's place of
residence, or a responsibility to insure the car can be registered for
operation in the customer's jursidiction.
Restraint of trade laws say that it is illegal to have a contract
between two parties that restricts trade between them.
That would make it illegal for a car maker to have a clause in a
franchise agreement stating that the dealer is prohibited from selling
products to specified persons or groups.
If a GM franchise agreement with a Detroit car dealership states that
the dealership can't sell new cars to Canadian citizens, then couldn't
a MacDonald's franchise agreement have a clause saying that Big Mac's
can't be sold to blacks?
Are you saying there is no law that would make such a clause illegal?
A franchise agreement is a private contract. If the franchisor
stipulates a condition that the franchisee cannot sell across an
international boundary, then the franchisee has to choose to honour, or
defy the conditions of the agreement. If the penalty for breaching the
contract is loss of the franchise, then that is the result.
I believe that only discrimination that you can't include in a contract
would be areas protected by constitutional provisions, or by specific
legislation. Certainly here in Canada protection from racial
discrimination is provided by the Charter of Rights. Any service
business has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose, as long
as it does not violate Charter Rights.
Ford operates in Canada as a separate company, Ford Motor Company of
Canada, and that could lead to warranty restrictions if they so choose. ?
MoPar Man wrote:
There is no such cross-boarder selling in this case. The US dealer is
not doing the leg-work to import the car into Canada - the Canadian
Why is that concept so hard to understand?
The new car will leave the US dealer's car lot either by the Canadian
customer driving it off the lot himself, or with his own hired flatbed
May I refer you to the last line of the first paragraph in the OP's original
On September 27, Mopar wrote...
Now that the Canadian dollar has reached parity with the US dollar
USD = 1CDN), the media here in Canada is running many news items
pointing out that US car dealers are turning away Canadians who want
to plunk down cash to buy a new car.
The dealers say that their franchise agreements prevent them from
selling vehicles to people who live outside their territory. I
remember from a few years ago where there were moderate differences
prices in the Chicago area and all sorts of games were being played
(both by customers and dealers) to sell cars to people outside a
dealer's franchise area.
In any case, it seems like some of the off-brand vehicles (Hundai
Suburu sp?) are more likely to look the other way and sell to
But I'm wondering if franchise agreements that contain
geographic-based sales clauses are violating any trade laws that may
be on the books in the US, and hence could be used to break this
and open the floodgates to the many Canadians that are ready to save
$4k to $30k on a new vehicle.
In the mean time, can anyone point to entities called "independent
dealers" who buy new vehicles and turn around and re-sell them (as
used) even if they haven't been used?
Actually, there *would* have to be some questions asked and the
For openers, there are US Federal banking rules on recording of
transactions over $10,000. And I strongly suspect that Canada has
similar laws if you wanted to take the car in the other direction.
The dealer needs a name and address to fill out the title transfer
paperwork for the car - even if the dealer doesn't handle the titling
and registration of the new car, they still need to fill out and give
the title form to the buyer so the buyer can handle it themselves.
And they have to apply in the state of sale for temporary
registration so the car can be driven away, unless the buyer wants to
have the car shipped across the border to it's destination.
The car maker has the right to find out those details, and if the
dealer made sales transactions that violated the franchise agreements
the car maker can choose to take action.
--<< Bruce >>--
And for three easy cash payments of $9999 this car can be yours!
Don't be silly, every one of these can be worked around if the dealer wants
to make the sale. It is not much different that here in New England where
people register in Vermont.
It is different. Selling across state lines is different then selling
across national boundaries. The US is one big market, the US and Canada
are two separate markets even with NAFTA. I live in MA and bought my car
in Nashua NH. The dealer registered my car in MA for me because there is
nothing to stop someone from NH registering a car in MA on behalf of
someone from MA, the US constitution expressing prohibits the states from
erecting trade barriers between each other. As a MA resident I'm bound by
MA law so even though I bought the car in NH I had to pay MA sales tax
(NH has no sales tax). MA cleverly insures that the sales tax on cars is
paid by requiring that it be paid to the Registry of Motor Vehicles at
the time that the car is registered, my dealer took my sales tax check to
the Registry for me just like they would if they had been a MA dealer.
I'm also required to buy a car that meets California emission standards,
NH residents aren't, so even though my dealer is in Nashua most of the
cars on their lot all have the California emissions package because a
substantial portion of their customers are from MA. If I had wanted to by
a diesel from them I couldn't unless I had a NH address because diesels
don't meet MA emissions standards.
Restrictive sales agreements are very hard to enforce without the
cooperation of governments. State governments aren't allowed to make
trade policy so there is no one to give a company cover if they wanted to
restrict their dealers from engaging in interstate trade. National
governments are always torn between free and restricted trade policies.
On the one hand almost all economists favor free trade so we have
agreements like NAFTA. On the other hand politicians don't like free
trade because they are more sensitive to the jobs that are lost, which
are more visible, then to jobs that are gained which don't make
headlines. So the US and Canadian governments aren't going to do anything
to help their consumers do cross border shopping, quite the opposite they
are going to erect as many barriers as they can. For example when US
consumers tried to by pharmaceuticals from Canada, where there is price
fixing, the FDA forbade it on the grounds that these drugs might be
unsafe as if Canada was some third world country with no drug
The US new car dealer IS NOT SELLING INTO CANADA.
The US new car dealer is selling to a Canadian resident. The US
dealer is not authorized to collect Canadian taxes. The Canadian
customer must show proof to the relavent Provincial department of
Transportation that applicable provincial sales taxes were paid before
the vehicle can be licensed for operation on public motorways. Such
taxes are uaually paid at the boarder when the vehicle is brought into
The Canadian federal gov't and the various Provincial gov'ts do not
prohibit the importation of vehicles (new or used) by Canadian
citizens from the US into Canada, and they do not employ restrictive
or onnerous tactics to prevent the lawful registration and use of
those vehicles in Canada. To the contrary, the Canadian gov'ts
publish guides explaining how to perform such importation and
The US and relavent State gov'ts have no rules or mechanisms in place
to prevent or hinder the sale of new or used cars to Canadians by US
Hence this is not an issue of trade policy or trade law between
This is a restraint-of-trade issue which makes such clauses in
franchise agreements illegal if not unenforcible.
It's like most the people responding to your question didn't read your
question.... strange.. it must frustrate you.
To answer your question; it's illegal for the dealerships not to sell
you a car on the basis of your race - that violates the civil rights
you can enjoy while in the jurisdiction of the states. (You do not
have to be a US citizen but instead just be in the states to have
rights.) Having a policy not to sell to Canadians is no different as
having a policy not to sell to Jews or Blacks. When I say Jews or
Blacks, people can automatically see the point more clearly.
The agreement between the manufacture and the dealership is mute and
has no merit. Your problem is NOT with the manufacture but instead the
dealership that is breaking the law and pulling the trigger so to
speak. Of course, the franchise agreement is illegal however that's
not for you to dispute but the dealership. You must make your claim
against the dealership.
3 main points to prove in a discrimination complaint / law suit:
1. Is the discrimination intentional = yes, the dealership/manufacture
state it's their policies NOT to sell to Canadians that are in their
stores and buying their products within the USA. This isn't an export
issue or tax issue (there is procedures already in place for both of
those issues so they are mute.)
2. Motive = their motive is profit: their policy is to protect their
dealerships on both sides of the border.
3. To prove that this policy exists. This is usually the hardest to
prove. You can always scream discrimination however who in the world
is going to admit it? Well, the dealerships will every time.
You'd think with the 1, 2, 3 covered people would line up and take the
dealerships to court. The problem is, people are don't understand they
have the right to and they are lazy and assume the worst.
Canuk is not a race. Race is a protected class. Nationality is not a
> ...- that violates the civil rights
No - it clearly does not.
Yes it is (though your *conclusion* on restraint of trade may be right,
but not for the reason you cite).
Your conclusions may be right, but for the wrong reasons - civil rights
(as defined by U.S. federal law) is not the issue. Races and religions
are protected classes (civil rights as defined by federal law).
Nationality (i.e., being Canadian) is not a protected class.
(Currently, protected classes are race, color, sex, creed, and age.)
Like I said, you may or may not be right that trade restrictions across
borders are illegal, but if it is illegal, it would not be illegal for
the same reason that not selling to blacks or to jews would be illegal.
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.