E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSMADISON, Wis. – One Wisconsin man’s idea of a test drive didn’t sit well with a Madison dealer after the 47-year-old motorist took the car on a 150-mile trip around Milwaukee – and didn’t bring it back, police said on Thursday.
“The driver maintained that ‘You just don't take it for a 15-minute test drive’,” Madison Police Officer Howard Payne said. “In my opinion, his explanation was not reasonable … because he did not bring it back.”
Madison police arrested Robert E. Clark on a charge of operating a motor vehicle with consent of owner on Dec. 30, Payne said.
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel was first to report the story
The dealer, A to Z Auto in Madison, called police after the man failed to return the silver 2000 Nissan Altima he picked for a test drive, Payne said.
What happened in this case was the dealer was interrupted by customers and was unable to accompany Clark on the drive, Payne said.
“From our standpoint, we don’t get involved in an agreement with two parties,” Payne said. “But off course, this person did not have consent to do what he did.”
Police said Clark drove the car to Milwaukee and returned to his home and not the dealership, both in Madison. His "test" drive was about 150 miles, Payne said.
Clark told officers that he took the Nissan to Milwaukee to secure funds to actually pay for the car, and did have every intention of returning the vehicle the following day, according to the police report released Thursday.
But, police got to him first and spotted the Nissan parked outside his home.
Telephone messages left by msnbc.com at the dealership were not returned Thursday. Two phone listings for Clark had been disconnected; he could not be reached for comment.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Who knew you can't do that ??? His test drive was just a wee bit longer than most lol
Did he buy it? Inquiring minds want to know!
If he bought the car then, maybe he gets out of the jam.....................!
Las Vegas, baby! Las Vegas!
Another shining (or is it tarnished?) example of people in America and their poor and sometimes selfish choices. Maybe he drove it over to hang out at an OWS protest.
47 year old Robert Clark....sounds more like Tea Party rally goer.
he took the Nissan to Milwaukee to secure funds to actually pay for the car
does this mean that he robbed a bank, too?
This is a good story , good for that Clark guy , most of us know how used car dealers are , it's OK for them to screw you a little.......Clark , you gave me a big smile from this one......
Yeah, but his excuse was a little "cheesy"!
amen brother, amen
Big bad dealerships, down to the 1%, we are the 99% we are idiots.We need protection mainly from ourselves.
bigbenalaska, did you ever stop to think that buying a car is the epitome of the free market. You go can negotiate the price or choose to walk away. If you get screwed it is your own ignorant fault. But it looks like you have a disciple
I don't know if what Clark did was right or wrong. All I know is that if you have to travel 150 miles to acquire the necessary funds to secure ownership of a 2000 Nissan Altima, then perhaps you should stick to public transportation.
Awesome idea! Next time I need to rent a car I'll just test drive one instead.
Did that already. I needed a bigger car to take a bunch of bags to the airport. So I 'test drove' a nice mini-van to the airport, dropped everyone off, then took the car back. Nope, not interested in the car. Thanks.
The only thing is that they check your credit before the test, so it ends up as a credit check on your report.
Wow Colorado, you should write a book How to be a Scumbag
Maybe a weekly syndication Gaming the System
Hey demarco, don't forget Jett! Their show could be called "The Eastern Mountain Screw Crew"!
Madison police arrested Robert E. Clark on a charge of operating a motor vehicle with consent of owner on Dec. 30, Payne said.
I didnt know it was illegal to operate a vehicle with the consent of the owner. lol. I would test drive that thing for 150 miles too. Sometimes problems don't show up until a vehicle has been driven a while. He should have called the dealer at some point, though. But yeah, it's ok for a dealer to screw you over, but as soon as they get a taste of their medicine they cry foul....well, looks like they lost a customer!
If he was telling the truth about intending to go back the next day and pay for the car, they've probably lost the sale after having him arrested, as he will have to use his money to pay for a lawyer. The story implies he gave the dealer his name and address. Seems a little unlikely for someone who intended to steal their car.
Jett -
You would be surprised at the number of customers that already have that very idea. OTH- it wasn't unusual for my former dealership to allow overnight test drives to select customers.
I've done just that a couple of times. Of course, the dealership was aware....
When I was a teenager, I knew a man that owned a used car lot..when I went to check out a car he told me drive all the way to Atlanta and back to test it if you want...that would have been a 5 hour test drive!!
Yep, if they think you are on the fence, the longer they have you in that car, the more obligated some folks feel, and dealers will exploit that. They won't allow you to abuse it usually, but they can be pretty lenient when trying to move $20-40,000 worth of merchandise....and you are trustworthy.
Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer test drives the car on his normal errand run through New York City, then wants to see how far it will go on "Empty".
In related news.. recent Volkswagan Commercials in which people did the exact same thing, even driving the dealer to their house with them have been made private on you tube.
150 mile test drive, Bull@!$%# should have charged him with grand theft auto.
It sounds like you are one of those auto dealers, WeldDem.
Your bull%@%#@. Are you a nanny? Sounds like it.
I once test drove a car for 100 miles, just to give the mpg a test. I bought the car.
Vegas baby... vegas!
So if it had been a VW it would have been OK?
The VW commercial does give one that impression. Perhaps a good defense lawyer will see it that way.
Would have made it more interesting.
Side note.. the address on google maps for the dealership shows you a curb on the side of the road. The nearest cars you can see is a different dealer. Strange stuff in wisconsin I say. (was curious if he had a VW sign or was affiliated in anyway, seeing as he doesn't even have a lot I would say no. The fact that his address doesn't even show any places for a business at all. With all businesses located on a side road really makes me say hmmmm)
Sounds like maybe he tried to return the car and couldn't find the dealership. Maybe they operate out of a Postal Box?
no, @!$%# writer. He was operating it WITHOUT consent of the owner.
Mr Eous you're wrong he had consent, just not to go 150 miles and not return the car. I call that grand theft auto.
mreous - Calm down the man was making a major purchase and just wanted to make sure this was the car for him. I have had a new car dealer loan me a car for a couple of days in an effort to make a sale.
VERY worst case is operating a vehicle without permission.
Your honor my client .... queue VW commercial.... Here is the loan doc/withdrawal for the purchase....
Judge... Vegas baby Vegas.
Joyce--you had prior consent of the dealer. I also had a dealer give me a new car I was considering purchasing, to go to the beach with family for the weekend--a 250 mile round trip. I brought the car back when expected, and closed the deal a couple days later.
Who do you think gave him the keys. no real harm done. and I'll bet he had to buy the gas.
that's what we get for putting those stupid commercials on TV that actually show this happening.
You're absolutely right this is not the buyers fault, it's the fault of a TV commercial. Really?
Because every thing on TV is true and real! Are you COO COO for COCO PUFFS?
Most TV commercials are geared toward a third-grade mentality. This seems to validate the reason why.
There is something in the water up there......I was born and raised in WI and finally escaped.
The dillweed had no intention of returning the car.......until he got caught.
Yea, Still a car and park it in the drive way. I think not.
"Madison police arrested Robert E. Clark on a charge of operating a motor vehicle with consent of owner on Dec. 30, Payne said."
'With' consent of owner? What the zombie christ?
Surely this is a typo or something?
As long as he's paying for it, just think of it like delayed payment. He owns it as soon as he drives it for over 5 miles or so and he just need to pay what he owes, that would be reasonable. Now that he got charged by the cops, does it mean he don't have to pay for it and can walk away from the dealer? I think the dealer lose out on this one.
Sounds like the man is having a mid life crisis and needed to act like a child again.
The article didn't tell us the type of car he was testing. Maybe it was one of those new fancy electric cars and he just wanted to test the battery life?
"The dealer, A to Z Auto in Madison, called police after the man failed to return the silver 2000 Nissan Altima he picked for a test drive, Payne said."
Did you read the article? Just sayin.................
From the original story but omitted from this report
Who's at fault? We may never know.
I'm more amused that the VW commercials are hidden from public view now. (maybe coincidence but amusing none the less)
if he didn't intend to take it for that long and just wanted to test it the only thing he is guilty of is destroying the value of what probably was a low mile car that at some point would have been sold pretty soon after.
Yeah! The value plummeted $3,000 when the odometer went from 10,000 to 10,150!
Depreciation = $20 a mile! That dealer definitely got the screwing this time! He might as well give the car away!
Come On Man! Really!
Sounds like it may have been a "Buy Here, Pay Here" dealer. Depreciation would not really be a factor, as they make more $$$ on the payments than the sale price of the car.
He was going to audition for the Jerry Springer show
you just can't fix stupid...
This will be interesting to see at trial, hopefully they wont plead out.
Rental car companies can file charges if you dont return the vehicle at the agreed upon and documented time of return on your contract.
Private parties can file stolen auto reports if they did not give a person consent to take the vehicle.
But if the seller allowed the person to leave with the vehicle for a test drive then thats consent. If the driver attempted to hide the vehicel or dismantle the vehicle it would be proof of no intentions of returning it to rightful owner.....
But if there was no stipulation or contractual agreement on the lenght or limits of the test drive, and no attempts were made to keep the vehicle, hide the vehicle or dismantle and decrease its value from the seller/owner I would be hard pressed to see how a conviction can be made here......
I would even go so far as to offer up evidence in current auto sales commercials where it shows (humerously) people taking cars home on test drives with the salesman still inside the vehicle.......as establishing a buyer mindset ......
This will be interesting, I hope to hear how it turns out.
its sign then drive ! looks like he should have went for a VW instead of nissan
it was a used auto dealer, not a Nissan dealer.
Mark never used the word dealer. All that was stated was that he should have went for a VW instead of Nissan. You do know that you can get a Nissan from a used car lot as well as from an actual Nissan Dealer, right?
Name that dealer.
I ain't no narc sucka!
way funny!
Believe it or not, dealers frequently "farm out" vehicles overnight or even over a weekend. It may be possible this person was just expecting to be able to come back the next day to finish the deal, maybe. Granted, one would think that a person would be intelligent enough to clarify that before going on an overnight "test drive", but overnight test drives are not at all uncommon.
For those calling for GTA charges, can't do that without proving intent to permanently deprive the owner of possession, since he started the deal and gave enough information to be easily found I seriously doubt they would ever be able to prove intent.