By MICHAEL RUKAVINA

OBSERVER Staff Writer

Was it a success, or wasn't it? The "Clash for Clunkers" or Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS) program is one week since expired and across the nation mixed feelings have been expressed by customers, auto manufacturers and dealerships.

Locally, three dealerships shared their experiences with the program and much like national opinions, they differ.

"It's a phenomenal program," said finance and insurance consultant Terry Eckman with Robert Basil Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac of Fredonia. "We sold a lot of cars from it and it really boosted our sales."

"The program brought in a lot of customers and it was very successful for us," said general sales manager Larry Spacc of Larry Spacc Pontiac-GMC Truck of Dunkirk.

But those sentiments were not shared by associate Chris Sausaman of Farrell Chrysler Dodge and Jeep Sales, of Fredonia. he said the program had a few flaws and had incredibly poor timing.

"Right from the beginning it was administered with flaws. It was a poorly executed program from the start. The very first day the program was available, none of the information was available on their Web site. They'd mail you some stuff that tells you to go to this Website for more details and you go there and there's nothing on it 'coming soon' it would say, and it continued throughout the whole time," said Sausaman. "Many days when you tried to submit all of the data for your refund this site wouldn't work, even up to the last days, so much so they had to extend the submission time to the next day and it still didn't work properly."

According to the cashforclunkers.com, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was indeed having Web site issues. Dealers were originally told that their deadline for submitting all CARS sales transactions for Monday, Aug. 24 at 8 p.m. Due to the delays, the NHTSA had granted an extension until Tuesday Aug. 25 at noon when the program officially ended.

According to Sausaman, Chrysler dealerships were also put in a tough spot having a program that drove customers in, however, no inventory for the demand.

"We had about three trade-ins," he said. "Our situation was made by a lack of inventory ... Chrysler went bankrupt for two months prior to this program which took two months of production away from dealers. We didn't have that many cars in that category for people to purchase."

Under the program, certain requirements had to be met by dealerships and by customers making the trade-in. Cars had to be registered and insured for a year prior to the day of the purchase and the new car being purchased had to have an increased fuel efficiency over their trade-in. The rub, and the national criticism on the program has been, for a struggling domestic product, the types of vehicles purchased through the program.

According to the CARS Web site, the top 10 new vehicles purchased included makes from Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and Nissan. Ford managed to break into the top 10 at number four with the Ford Focus FWD and at number 10 with the Ford Escape FWD. Ironically enough, the top 10 list of most traded-in vehicles included makes from Jeep, Dodge, Chevrolet and Ford which took number one and two with the Ford Explorer 4WD and Ford F150 Pickup 2WD respectively.

"You could trade a truck in and buy another truck, and a truck in of itself is not very fuel efficient, but you couldn't trade a car on a truck or a car and another car," Sausaman said. "Most cars were too fuel efficient to be traded. You had to get 18 mpg or less; most get better than that. We had one gentleman who traded in a truck, and on the truck side you only had to move up 2 mpg more, so he purchased a new truck. In my estimation, if you're encouraging people to purchase fuel efficient vehicles while you trade one in that gets 12 mpg I don't think the eligibility should been on a trunk. It should have been on something a lot more fuel efficient. We're glad it's over."

Each of the three dealerships said they had an equal return for the most part with car trade-ins for cars or truck trade-ins for trucks.

"We had an equal amount of cars and truck sales," Spacc said. "All of the new pick up trucks that we received in the last four weeks were actually pre-sold before they even came in. Every single pick-up truck I got from the end of July through August was pre-sold before they even came in. If I would have known I would have ordered 30-40 more cars. We sold just about everything we had on the lot."

"Clunkers" that were traded in under the program, in some cases cars that would have simply been a trade-in for a new car and then placed in the used car lot, were required to be decommissioned. For some dealers that requirements sat well, for others it did not.

"It takes away from that sector of people who need the $500, $1,000, $2,000 cars. Those were the clunkers we were taking in," Sausaman said. "This population won't be able to purchase those cars. If not for the clunkers program they would still be able to be sold to the part of the population who can only afford this type of car, maybe your child's first car or something like that. A lot of those cars were taken off the road now."

"As trade-ins, yes and no," Spacc said as to whether the program affected his used sales. "Honestly a lot of the cars we took in the trade were clunkers and pretty rough. I would say with the exception of one or two vehicles I wouldn't have considered selling the rest. They were pretty rough and they fit the program well."

According to Eckman, used sales and purchase of used cars never faltered while the program was operational.

The CARS program is expecting to reimburse upwards of $3 billion to dealerships across the country. New York dealerships are due back $156,292,000. That is third only to Texas, $183,776,500 and California, $326,822,000. Local dealers have been reassured they will be receiving their reimbursements, they just don't know when.

"Every dealer is having an issue with getting money from the government," Sausaman said.

"Obviously, it's known that there has been a delay in payments and we are dealing with that," Spacc said. "We have a large amount of money outstanding, but we've been reassured it will come."

Eckman from Robert Basil said they have already received payment for some of their submitted rebates, but continue to wait for others.

According to the cashforclunkers.com, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was indeed having Web site issues. Dealers were originally told that their deadline for submitting all CARS sales transactions for Monday, Aug. 24 at 8 p.m. Due to the delays, the NHTSA had granted an extension until Tuesday Aug. 25 at noon when the program officially ended.

According to Sausaman, Chrysler dealerships were also put in a tough spot having a program that drove customers in, however, no inventory for the demand.

"We had about three trade-ins," he said. "Our situation was made by a lack of inventory ... Chrysler went bankrupt for two months prior to this program which took two months of production away from dealers. We didn't have that many cars in that category for people to purchase."

Under the program, certain requirements had to be met by dealerships and by customers making the trade-in. Cars had to be registered and insured for a year prior to the day of the purchase and the new car being purchased had to have an increased fuel efficiency over their trade-in. The rub, and the national criticism on the program has been, for a struggling domestic product, the types of vehicles purchased through the program.

According to the CARS Web site, the top 10 new vehicles purchased included makes from Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and Nissan. Ford managed to break into the top 10 at number four with the Ford Focus FWD and at number 10 with the Ford Escape FWD. Ironically enough, the top 10 list of most traded-in vehicles included makes from Jeep, Dodge, Chevrolet and Ford which took number one and two with the Ford Explorer 4WD and Ford F150 Pickup 2WD respectively.

"You could trade a truck in and buy another truck, and a truck in of itself is not very fuel efficient, but you couldn't trade a car on a truck or a car and another car," Sausaman said. "Most cars were too fuel efficient to be traded. You had to get 18 mpg or less; most get better than that. We had one gentleman who traded in a truck, and on the truck side you only had to move up 2 mpg more, so he purchased a new truck. In my estimation, if you're encouraging people to purchase fuel efficient vehicles while you trade one in that gets 12 mpg I don't think the eligibility should been on a trunk. It should have been on something a lot more fuel efficient. We're glad it's over."

Each of the three dealerships said they had an equal return for the most part with car trade-ins for cars or truck trade-ins for trucks.

"We had an equal amount of cars and truck sales," Spacc said. "All of the new pick up trucks that we received in the last four weeks were actually pre-sold before they even came in. Every single pick-up truck I got from the end of July through August was pre-sold before they even came in. If I would have known I would have ordered 30-40 more cars. We sold just about everything we had on the lot."

"Clunkers" that were traded in under the program, in some cases cars that would have simply been a trade-in for a new car and then placed in the used car lot, were required to be decommissioned. For some dealers that requirements sat well, for others it did not.

"It takes away from that sector of people who need the $500, $1,000, $2,000 cars. Those were the clunkers we were taking in," Sausaman said. "This population won't be able to purchase those cars. If not for the clunkers program they would still be able to be sold to the part of the population who can only afford this type of car, maybe your child's first car or something like that. A lot of those cars were taken off the road now."

"As trade-ins, yes and no," Spacc said as to whether the program affected his used sales. "Honestly a lot of the cars we took in the trade were clunkers and pretty rough. I would say with the exception of one or two vehicles I wouldn't have considered selling the rest. They were pretty rough and they fit the program well."

According to Eckman, used sales and purchase of used cars never faltered while the program was operational.

The CARS program is expecting to reimburse upwards of $3 billion to dealerships across the country. New York dealerships are due back $156,292,000. That is third only to Texas, $183,776,500 and California, $326,822,000. Local dealers have been reassured they will be receiving their reimbursements, they just don't know when.

"Every dealer is having an issue with getting money from the government," Sausaman said.

"Obviously, it's known that there has been a delay in payments and we are dealing with that," Spacc said. "We have a large amount of money outstanding, but we've been reassured it will come."

Eckman from Robert Basil said they have already received payment for some of their submitted rebates, but continue to wait for others.

Comments on this article may be sent to mrukavina@observertoday.com