The end of the road is coming for thousands of Ford Explorers, Dodge Durangos and other so-called “clunkers” that were traded in during the federal government’s Cash for Clunkers program – but crushing day may not come as quickly as the Transportation Department initially required.
The Cash for Clunkers program, which gave federally-funded “rebates” of up to $4,500 to incentivize consumers to purchase new, more efficient vehicles, initially included a disclaimer saying that the vehicles must be crushed within six months of the end of the program. At the time, the American Recyclers Association readily agreed to the rules since it would guarantee salvage yards numerous vehicles waiting to have their parts scavenged.
However, when the program’s budget was expanded to $3 billion from the initial $1 billion and the number of cars traded in eventually approached 700,000, salvage yards saw too much of a good thing: Way too many vehicles to dismantle and, eventually, crush.
“True recycling is using something to its fullest potential and then recycling it over again by making it into steel and sending it out to become another engine or transmission or car,” Jeff Cantor, an auto recycler in Candia, New Hampshire, told the AP. “We’re breaking that circle here by crushing good quality parts. We can’t process them quick enough in six months.”
Numerous reports indicate some salvage yards possessing more than 5,000 vehicles each, mostly SUVs, trucks, minivans and large sedans, waiting to be crushed prior to the deadline early next year. The industry association has asked the Transportation Department to extend the terms of the program to one year, but the federal agency hasn’t officially announced any changes.
“We do have a lot of facilities that have two or three times the number of vehicles they could ever have imagined getting. They’re trying to process these in addition to their regular business,” said Michael Wilson, the American Recyclers Association’s executive director.
Some dealers have still not received payment from the government for clunkers they accepted as trade-ins, which has served only to further back up salvage yards.
Penske sued over refund; class-action suit possible
Westbury Toyota of Westbury, New York, a dealership owned by the Penske Automotive Group, has been accused of not passing on the money it received from scrapping a vehicle to the customer who traded it in. Dealers were supposed to pass along to consumers the trade-in vehicles’ scrap value, minus $50 per vehicle to cover administrative fees.
Automotive News reports that Philip Allegretti of Seaford, New York, received none of the $125 the dealership got when it scrapped a 2000 Chevrolet Astro traded in on a new Toyota Tacoma. Allegretti is seeking class-action status for the lawsuit, which would allow other consumers who purchased vehicles from a Penske-owned dealership to join the suit.
10/26, 6:05 PM
posted by:
A4
Sounds like they’re really MULLING it over.
10/26, 6:19 PM
posted by:
05Z88Path
Your sure the dealer didn’t get more then $125 LLN? I think you’re missing a zero, b/c suing for 125 bucks is ridiculous (the dealership would just give him that kind of money just to shut up), and the government was UNFORTUNATELY handing over much bigger checks then that…
10/26, 6:25 PM
posted by:
FSVT_ROCK
i don’t see this clunker program work, I drove 12 years vehicle and is not even qaulify for the program. They should re-use those parts, instead crush them.
10/26, 6:47 PM
posted by:
ktulu
Y?
10/26, 7:08 PM
posted by:
johngalt
I’m having a hard time following the logic, here.
We’ll subsidize new car purchases to help remove environmentally unfriendly vehicles from the highways. Then, to ensure they never see the roads again, we’ll have them crushed at “recycling facilities” nationwide. Of course, because we understand the environmental importance of “recycling,” we’ll allow said facilities to pull the parts from these vehicles. In turn, these facilities will sell parts to people who have similar models of environmentally unfriendly vehicles, so that they can run longer. Then, we’ll increase the budget for the subsidization of new car purchases, thereby flooding “recycling facilities’” inventories of parts, further driving down the price of said parts to make it easier still to keep the millions of remaining environmentally unfriendly vehicles on the road…
And, hey, why don’t we consider doing it all over again. Do I understand? Or am I just stoopid?
That’s it, johnnycanuck, I’m packing the last of my crap. Just gotta stop and buy more coats. See you in a few days!
10/26, 10:27 PM
posted by:
Smegley Wanxalot
johngalt, you forgot the part about C4C pulling good used lower cost vehicles off the market that could normally be there for lower income people to buy, thus making them pay more for a used car and often putting a car out of reach at all.
10/26, 10:36 PM
posted by:
chevymanc6
The automotive holocaust continues and proves that America has lost its way. Thanks for nothing Obama!
10/26, 10:40 PM
posted by:
Lawnchair88
LOL @ A4. Seems like something is either getting mulled over or shuttered every day on this site
10/26, 11:22 PM
posted by:
trantz
we only got $50 per vehicle from the salvage yard. $125 seems like a fortune.
10/27, 6:44 AM
posted by:
TransDesigner
This just pisses me off so bad. What a collassal WASTE. It would take less than half a brain to determine a better, more efficient way to re-use these creations that SOMEONE worked vary hard to birth. Wanna talk about conservation??!?? Start by USING WHAT WE HAVE. Not destroying it to leave a void that we will fill with all kinds of new factories, and deplete all kinds of new resources for, or at the very least, spew who knows what into the atmosphere as we crush these and melt them down. I have the utmost lack of respect for whatever “brains”spewed this flagellant program into our world. Shame- shame on the stupidity. Human beings should be held to higher standards. You deserve what you have coming.
10/27, 6:46 AM
posted by:
TransDesigner
*very hard. Sorry for the typo. Seeing too much red to spell check.
10/27, 6:48 AM
posted by:
TransDesigner
Idiots. Shame on anyone who took part in this.
10/27, 10:32 AM
posted by:
ajm11
This program is such a waste in many different ways. Recycling auto parts instead of crushing I think is a better way to improve the environment. The reason why I say this is because crushing perfectly good parts that could be used on a vehicle to make it perform better and run cleaner is a waste. Not to mention you are wasting all the engineering time and energy that was put into those parts. As well as the time and energy of the people that built parts. People always say that old cars are major reasons why the environment is the way it is. This is not necessarily the case. There is a growing trend of people installing engines such as the Chrysler Hemi, Ford Modular and the GM LSx motors into old vehicles to make them cleaner vehicles to drive, and more fuel efficient. Anyone who thinks this program was a good idea needs to give their head a shake.
And it was not only Chevy Astro’s, Dodge Durango’s and thankfully many Pontiac Aztec’s that got traded on this program. There were other cars that were actually desirable. One person traded in a 87 Buick GNX which was 1 of 500 built. One person also traded in a 1997 Aston Martin DB7 Vantage. While two people traded in a 2000 Jaguar XK8 Convertible on this program.
10/27, 10:41 AM
posted by:
eleven
I’m happier than Peter Griffin at a buffet! Now I’ll be able to get all kinds of parts for my 92 Cherokee for cheap. I’m thinking the interior from and grand cherokee limited… Seriously though, I’m really glad that we incentivised getting in debt. Without financial freedom we’re even more F*@#$%.
10/27, 11:30 AM
posted by:
injunraiv
Interesting how the lawsuit might work out. THe dealer did not have to give the owner of the vehicle the cash, but he did have to disclose the estimated scrap value at the time of delivery. $50 was all the gubment would allow the dealer to charge the customer for to participate in the clunker program, and that was not enough to cover the destruction of the engine, let alone the mountains of paperwork involved in the program itself. My feeling is the plaintif is a tool, but you never know how the judge is going to rule.
10/27, 1:04 PM
posted by:
03T4R
Government efficiency at its best.