Joined
·
12 Posts
hello everyone
Just want to make sure I'm not missing anything in comparing a lease/rent to own contract to a standard car rental..
Let me state upfront that I plan on driving full time for Uber for 3-4 years as I complete school. It is the most flexible option and I've committed to this..
Let's say a 2015 camry rents at $425/weekly at $0 down at signing
And a new 2016 Camry is available under a lease/rent to own contract but at $0 down at signing plus $339 for 3.5 years
Assuming you don't have the credit or down payment for conventional financing, and also assuming you are looking to work full time for several years to come (not just trying this out) the only obvious advantage to renting is that you are able to opt out at usually 2 weeks notice and maintenance and plates/insurance are included in the price?
The $339/week for 182 weeks equates to a steep $61,698 on a car that retails for less than $25k. I understand insurance, TLC plates etc come at a cost, but If my only other choice is renting, the lease/rent to own option still seems most beneficial because its less per week and you will own a car in 3.5 years (even though it will most likely be beat to all hell)
Am I missing something?
Thanks everyone
Just want to make sure I'm not missing anything in comparing a lease/rent to own contract to a standard car rental..
Let me state upfront that I plan on driving full time for Uber for 3-4 years as I complete school. It is the most flexible option and I've committed to this..
Let's say a 2015 camry rents at $425/weekly at $0 down at signing
And a new 2016 Camry is available under a lease/rent to own contract but at $0 down at signing plus $339 for 3.5 years
Assuming you don't have the credit or down payment for conventional financing, and also assuming you are looking to work full time for several years to come (not just trying this out) the only obvious advantage to renting is that you are able to opt out at usually 2 weeks notice and maintenance and plates/insurance are included in the price?
The $339/week for 182 weeks equates to a steep $61,698 on a car that retails for less than $25k. I understand insurance, TLC plates etc come at a cost, but If my only other choice is renting, the lease/rent to own option still seems most beneficial because its less per week and you will own a car in 3.5 years (even though it will most likely be beat to all hell)
Am I missing something?
Thanks everyone