<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Successful Dealerships</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com</link>
	<description>Driving Successful Dealerships: Commentary by the Somerset Dealership Team</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 04:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on High Marks for the 7th Digital Dealer Conference by Brian Pasch</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/11/12/high-marks-for-the-7th-digital-dealer-conference/#comment-288</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Pasch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:43:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=89#comment-288</guid>
		<description>Rex

I agree.  The 7th Digital Dealer Conference was a huge success.  I was one of the speakers and the response to the sessions was very positive.  Mike Roscoe did a great job.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rex</p>
<p>I agree.  The 7th Digital Dealer Conference was a huge success.  I was one of the speakers and the response to the sessions was very positive.  Mike Roscoe did a great job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Review Your Indirect Lender Agreements by Rex Collins</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/03/18/review-your-indirect-lender-agreements/#comment-143</link>
		<dc:creator>Rex Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=20#comment-143</guid>
		<description>Regulation Z is all about consumer disclosure of loan terms. GMAC is required to follow Reg Z when it discloses loan terms to consumers. Dealers are also required to follow Reg Z when disclosing loan terms to consumers. The contracts dealers prepare for consumers are between the dealer and the consumer until the dealer assigns (sells) the contract to GMAC. GMAC can set the terms for which it is willing to take assignment of (purchase) contracts from dealers, and, likewise, dealers are free to accept or reject those terms and choose to not assign (sell) contracts to GMAC. Reg Z does not govern the assignment of contracts. It governs loan-term disclosure to consumers.

Oh by the way --- GMAC is not the only lender that has this type of requirement. Almost every lender requires down payments to be made in cash and forbids any part of the down payment to be loaned to the customer from the dealer or any other party. Many banks intend these types of provisions to mean dealers cannot accept down payments on credit cards.
There are many other onerous terms and conditions in most lender agreements. Many such agreements hold the dealer responsible for the truth and correctness of all information and/or statements made by the dealer or customer and/or supplied to the lender regardless of whether the dealer knows the information or statement is untrue or incorrect.

Many lenders will negotiate terms of their agreements. Every dealer should have their lender agreements (and for that matter, all agreements) reviewed by their attorney.

None of the information herein is intended as legal advice. For specific legal advice, you should consult your attorney.
Mike Shanahan, Esq.
Stewart &#38; Irwin P.C.
317) 639-5454</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regulation Z is all about consumer disclosure of loan terms. GMAC is required to follow Reg Z when it discloses loan terms to consumers. Dealers are also required to follow Reg Z when disclosing loan terms to consumers. The contracts dealers prepare for consumers are between the dealer and the consumer until the dealer assigns (sells) the contract to GMAC. GMAC can set the terms for which it is willing to take assignment of (purchase) contracts from dealers, and, likewise, dealers are free to accept or reject those terms and choose to not assign (sell) contracts to GMAC. Reg Z does not govern the assignment of contracts. It governs loan-term disclosure to consumers.</p>
<p>Oh by the way &#8212; GMAC is not the only lender that has this type of requirement. Almost every lender requires down payments to be made in cash and forbids any part of the down payment to be loaned to the customer from the dealer or any other party. Many banks intend these types of provisions to mean dealers cannot accept down payments on credit cards.<br />
There are many other onerous terms and conditions in most lender agreements. Many such agreements hold the dealer responsible for the truth and correctness of all information and/or statements made by the dealer or customer and/or supplied to the lender regardless of whether the dealer knows the information or statement is untrue or incorrect.</p>
<p>Many lenders will negotiate terms of their agreements. Every dealer should have their lender agreements (and for that matter, all agreements) reviewed by their attorney.</p>
<p>None of the information herein is intended as legal advice. For specific legal advice, you should consult your attorney.<br />
Mike Shanahan, Esq.<br />
Stewart &amp; Irwin P.C.<br />
317) 639-5454</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Review Your Indirect Lender Agreements by Mike</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/03/18/review-your-indirect-lender-agreements/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=20#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Why does GMAC not have to follow REG Z definition of "down payment" which allows for a portion of down to be deferred as long as it is due before 2nd regular payment and is not subject to interest. GMAC says dealer must have all $down as of contract date or dealer can be reassigned contract if it defaults.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why does GMAC not have to follow REG Z definition of &#8220;down payment&#8221; which allows for a portion of down to be deferred as long as it is due before 2nd regular payment and is not subject to interest. GMAC says dealer must have all $down as of contract date or dealer can be reassigned contract if it defaults.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dealers Should Obtain Fair Value for Their GM Franchise by JamesD</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/05/15/dealers-should-obtain-fair-value-for-their-gm-franchise/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>JamesD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 07:04:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=58#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the useful info. It's so interesting</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the useful info. It&#8217;s so interesting</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Could This Happen to You? by Ray Boule</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/03/11/could-this-happen-to-you/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Boule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=16#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Rex,
We would be more than happy to provide you with referrals should our clientele inquire about this type of service. I could add your blog to our blogroll and vice versa.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rex,<br />
We would be more than happy to provide you with referrals should our clientele inquire about this type of service. I could add your blog to our blogroll and vice versa.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Could This Happen to You? by rexcollins</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/03/11/could-this-happen-to-you/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>rexcollins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=16#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Ray,
Thank you for your comment. We wholeheartedly agree with your statement that "Your CPA should be able to provide you with this service." We would just like to add that dealers should engage a CPA who is familiar with the industry.
All the best - Rex</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ray,<br />
Thank you for your comment. We wholeheartedly agree with your statement that &#8220;Your CPA should be able to provide you with this service.&#8221; We would just like to add that dealers should engage a CPA who is familiar with the industry.<br />
All the best - Rex</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Could This Happen to You? by Ray Boule</title>
		<link>http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/2009/03/11/could-this-happen-to-you/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Boule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:30:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dealership.somersetblogs.com/?p=16#comment-2</guid>
		<description>It is estimated that internal theft costs employers $9 per employee per day. This amounts to $280,000 a year for dealerships with 100 employees. 

The dealerships that are most vulnerable to this type of theft are those with fewer than 100 employees. 

50% of all dealers experienced theft during a 5-year period during the 90’s and that percentage has been growing at an alarming 5% annually. This means that the majority of dealers can expect to be victimized by theft of some type every year.

Reports indicate that 80% of all dealership employees have been involved in some sort of theft from the dealership where they work during the last 5 years.

Theft or fraud is most likely to occur in departments where cash or other valuable assets are handled but there is significant risk in all departments.

It is reported that the risk of loss is greater where poor or nonexistent internal controls are in place.

95% of all losses paid by insurance carriers results from actions taken by employees. 

$100,000,000 worth of vehicles is stolen from dealerships every year. $50,000,000 worth is recovered and $50,000,000 is paid for by insurance.

Good loss prevention programs and internal control systems have been proven to halt loss experience growth of 10-15% annually and actually reduce losses by 30% 

Theft schemes have been discovered in virtually all departments of dealership operations. The ingenuity of perpetrators is the ONLY limit on the manner in which dealers are being defrauded.

Dealership size isn’t a reliable indicator of the potential risk. Large dealerships with many employees offer a crowd for the dishonest to hide in while small dealerships don’t have the personnel and systems in place to prevent fraud. Theft and fraud rates grow in good economic times because less attention is focused on losses when times are good and they increase in hard economic times because thieves work harder at their craft when the need is the greatest.

You can take steps to reduce your exposure to employee theft by having a risk assessment of your dealership done. Your CPA should be able to provide you with this service, reviewing all aspects of your dealership operations and providing you with an assessment of the risk as well as some recommendations, which should include some type of demo plate control system, for managing and reducing those risks. Imagine eliminating losses of $9 per employee per day. Nice addition to the bottom line don’t you think? </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is estimated that internal theft costs employers $9 per employee per day. This amounts to $280,000 a year for dealerships with 100 employees. </p>
<p>The dealerships that are most vulnerable to this type of theft are those with fewer than 100 employees. </p>
<p>50% of all dealers experienced theft during a 5-year period during the 90’s and that percentage has been growing at an alarming 5% annually. This means that the majority of dealers can expect to be victimized by theft of some type every year.</p>
<p>Reports indicate that 80% of all dealership employees have been involved in some sort of theft from the dealership where they work during the last 5 years.</p>
<p>Theft or fraud is most likely to occur in departments where cash or other valuable assets are handled but there is significant risk in all departments.</p>
<p>It is reported that the risk of loss is greater where poor or nonexistent internal controls are in place.</p>
<p>95% of all losses paid by insurance carriers results from actions taken by employees. </p>
<p>$100,000,000 worth of vehicles is stolen from dealerships every year. $50,000,000 worth is recovered and $50,000,000 is paid for by insurance.</p>
<p>Good loss prevention programs and internal control systems have been proven to halt loss experience growth of 10-15% annually and actually reduce losses by 30% </p>
<p>Theft schemes have been discovered in virtually all departments of dealership operations. The ingenuity of perpetrators is the ONLY limit on the manner in which dealers are being defrauded.</p>
<p>Dealership size isn’t a reliable indicator of the potential risk. Large dealerships with many employees offer a crowd for the dishonest to hide in while small dealerships don’t have the personnel and systems in place to prevent fraud. Theft and fraud rates grow in good economic times because less attention is focused on losses when times are good and they increase in hard economic times because thieves work harder at their craft when the need is the greatest.</p>
<p>You can take steps to reduce your exposure to employee theft by having a risk assessment of your dealership done. Your CPA should be able to provide you with this service, reviewing all aspects of your dealership operations and providing you with an assessment of the risk as well as some recommendations, which should include some type of demo plate control system, for managing and reducing those risks. Imagine eliminating losses of $9 per employee per day. Nice addition to the bottom line don’t you think? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
