• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Was this lease a ripoff?

madoka

Diamond Member
I saw this on another site where this seller claims he now wants to save for a home. But I'm getting the sense that he got ripped off on this lease and just wants to get out.

http://www.leasetrader.com/2015_Mercedes-Benz_C250_Coupe_237095.xhtml

His residual is $30,225.00.

It seems used cars with similar mileage can be bought for less.

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-...&mmt=[MB[C250[]][]]&listingId=422262685&Log=0

Is there something I'm missing, or did this guy get screwed on his lease? I'm not interested in the car, but I am curious if you can get this ripped off on leases.
 
to hard to tell if he got ripped off, for example, it could have been a great lease, but he traded in something upside down.

Overall, the monthly payments are far too high for what this car costs.
 
So guys that trade in something upside down can try to pass off their leases to others?

Doesn't that mean someone else is paying for their debt? Sounds crappy if that's possible.
 
So guys that trade in something upside down can try to pass off their leases to others?

Doesn't that mean someone else is paying for their debt? Sounds crappy if that's possible.

Well, you can be upside down on a car you bought, too - and try to sell it for more than market value. 😛
 
High residual is GOOD if you are leasing a vehicle. Lease payments are based upon the difference between (purchase-residual). You are financing the difference with the lease payments.

But to answer your question "is this lease a ripoff"? Is Pope Catholic??
 
So guys that trade in something upside down can try to pass off their leases to others?

Doesn't that mean someone else is paying for their debt? Sounds crappy if that's possible.

This thread reminds me, in October we were looking for a car and drove a BMW we like, but new was out of our price range. The dealer said he had a used one coming in, it should be 40K. When he looked the price was 42.5K. He explained that the car had 2.5K worth of damage.

Now wait, you want me to pay for damage someone else did to the car? I don't think so.
 
You could lease a new Mercedes-Benz C250 Coupe for $454/mo with $4000 down according to my local dealer (36 month lease).

you don't want to put any money down on a lease.

your 'deal is really more a $565 per month lease.

Which is without tax, with CA tax its very close to the price the car in OPs link is.
 
So guys that trade in something upside down can try to pass off their leases to others?

Doesn't that mean someone else is paying for their debt? Sounds crappy if that's possible.

Its possible. If you find a stupid enough buyer to take that lease over.
 
$4000 down on a lease? Ive done a few and wouldn't put more than one payment down...

Lots of people look at the monthly payment for some reason. As long as you maintain the 0 or near 0 money factor, it doesn't matter if you put 4K down or 0 down, you'll pay the same by the end. The ones that put the money down put them at extreme risk of cash loss when a month later an uninsured driver in a beat up 89 plymouth with bald tires skids through an icy intersection and t-bones you.
 
I looked up 2015 lease residuals and it appears to have held around 60%, so a sticker of about $50,000 would seem likely.

Running these numbers:

MSRP - $50,000
Sale Price - $49,000
Fees - $1000
Tax - 6%
36/10k
MF - .00109

I get $650/mo which is very close. He either paid sticker for the car at a discounted rate, or he got ripped on the MF, or he traded something in that was upside down.
 
This is within $50/mth of the expected lease rate for this, and 4500 'bonus' miles available over the remainder of the lease.

It's not a screaming deal, or a rip-off. Assuming the car itself is in good shape, and acceptable other terms of the lease, it's a reasonable 2-year lease.
 
I looked up 2015 lease residuals and it appears to have held around 60%, so a sticker of about $50,000 would seem likely.

Running these numbers:

MSRP - $50,000
Sale Price - $49,000
Fees - $1000
Tax - 6%
36/10k
MF - .00109

I get $650/mo which is very close. He either paid sticker for the car at a discounted rate, or he got ripped on the MF, or he traded something in that was upside down.

He doesnt list options for the car, the base c250 is ~40k, the read seats make it look like at least leather was added and some extended coverage, makes the msrp 43k.
 
I've never been a lease guy. I don't trade in every 3 years either, so it wouldn't work out well. I wouldn't want to live with the prospects of always having a car payment forever. I tend to pay more per month to get it paid off earlier.
 
Get a new one for the same payment or less. The only time I'd take over someone else's lease is if there's only a few months remaining on it and I intend to purchase the car at the end of the lease.
 
This is within $50/mth of the expected lease rate for this, and 4500 'bonus' miles available over the remainder of the lease.

It's not a screaming deal, or a rip-off. Assuming the car itself is in good shape, and acceptable other terms of the lease, it's a reasonable 2-year lease.

See what I don't get is this: If you take over his lease, you'd have to make $15,675 in payments and then have a residual of $30,225 before you can own the car.

Or you can just straight buy a similar mileage used C250 coupe for $27,800.

So why on earth would anyone want to take over this lease?
 
Because most of the people who lease the cars are morons or at least are mathematically challenged. In general purchasing at the end of the lease is a stupid idea. The only way lease is attractive is if the residual price is estimated to be artificially high. The entire advantage of a lease is the ability to walk away from the car at the end of the lease. Once again only a moron will purchase the car at the end of the lease if he could buy similar cheaper on the open market.
 
Because most of the people who lease the cars are morons or at least are mathematically challenged. In general purchasing at the end of the lease is a stupid idea. The only way lease is attractive is if the residual price is estimated to be artificially high. The entire advantage of a lease is the ability to walk away from the car at the end of the lease. Once again only a moron will purchase the car at the end of the lease if he could buy similar cheaper on the open market.

Purchasing for the residual price is dumb. The price can be negotiated, though.
Leasing is dumb in general, IMO.
 
He doesnt list options for the car, the base c250 is ~40k, the read seats make it look like at least leather was added and some extended coverage, makes the msrp 43k.

I got the MSRP from the buyout price of $30,225. The residual on the car hovers around 60% on a 36/10k so working backwards you can get MSRP from the residual.
 
Because most of the people who lease the cars are morons or at least are mathematically challenged. In general purchasing at the end of the lease is a stupid idea. The only way lease is attractive is if the residual price is estimated to be artificially high. The entire advantage of a lease is the ability to walk away from the car at the end of the lease. Once again only a moron will purchase the car at the end of the lease if he could buy similar cheaper on the open market.

I think this speaks to the mentality of a lot of people that shop cars. they get fixated on a monthly payment and see what they can get for that monthly. then they say if I purchase, it's in the 800's/month? but a lease is in the 600's? I'll lease it...

for some it makes sense, for others, it's a way to drive a car well beyond their budget
 
Back
Top