Scratch and Dent

Appliances in Sullivan's Island

Ask Us Anything!

843-970-8033 1992 Old Trolley Rd. Summerville, SC 29485

Quick Quote

Your First Choice for Scratch and Dent Appliances in Sullivan's Island

In a day and age where big box stores sell overpriced appliances to hardworking men and women, droves of Americans are flocking to scratch and dent retailers. At Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair, we understand that money doesn’t grow on trees. That’s why we offer our customers the largest selection of overstock and scratch and dent appliances in South Carolina.

Finding a reputable, clean discount appliance store can be challenging. Unfortunately, companies in our industry get a bad rap. Sometimes, they earn it with dingy, poorly-lit stores, empty shelves, and mediocre customer service. At Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair, we are proud to give our customers the “big box” structure of major chains mixed with personable service and affordable pricing of a discount appliance business. Our store is clean, our shelves are stocked, and our staff is ready and waiting to exceed your expectations.

The surge in popularity of scratch and dent appliances might be new, but we are far from a “fly by night” appliance store. As a locally owned and operated appliance store, we have worked very hard to build trust with our customers. We have years of experience selling quality scratch and dent appliances in South Carolina, from washers and dryers to outdoor grills and everything in between. Whether you know the exact brand and appliance you’re looking for or need the assistance of a friendly sales associate, we are here to make your shopping experience seamless and enjoyable!

Customers love Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair because:

  • All of our scratch and dent or overstock appliances are in great condition, giving you years of reliable use
  • We only sell the best name brand scratch and dent appliances
  • We offer a one-year warranty on many products
  • We have the most competitive prices in South Carolina
  • Our customers always come first!

When you visit our showroom, you will see a large selection of the following products:

Service Areas

Service Areas

Scratch and Dent Appliances

Ask yourself this: Why should you pay top-dollar prices for brand new “in the box” appliances when you can have them out of the box with the same warranty for a significant amount less? When you begin to think about buying scratch and dent appliances in Sullivan's Island, it begins to make all the sense in the world.

Don’t let the term “scratch and dent” scare you – all of our appliances are high-quality, name-brand products that are in great condition. You won’t ever have to worry about an inoperable oven or a faulty dryer when you shop at Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair. Our appliances are all unused and shipped to use straight off the assembly line. That’s right – you’re paying bottom-of-the-barrel prices for brand new products that your family and friends will love.

You might be asking yourself, “What’s the catch?” It might sound too good to be true, but there isn’t any catch. Our scratch and dent appliances are sold at deep discounts because a minor cosmetic issue developed somewhere along the line. A few common reasons why appliances are labeled as scratch and dent include:

  • The product’s external packaging was slightly damaged
  • The product has a small scratch that is barely visible
  • The product has a slight dent that is hard to see
  • The product has a tiny “ding” from being moved around in the warehouse
Service Areas

Unlike some of our competitors, our skilled technicians perform rigorous multi-point examinations on all our appliances. That way, you can rest easy knowing that your out-of-the-box appliance is ready for regular use as soon as it arrives at your home. With a one-year warranty on most scratch and dent items, our customers leave our showroom with a smile on their face knowing their purchase is protected.

And that, in a nutshell, is the Preferred Appliance Sales and Repairs difference: quality appliances, helpful customer service, and real warranties that you can feel good about.

refrezarator

Scratch and Dent Appliances – Are They Right for You?

Here’s the truth: Nobody wants an old, beat-up appliance with huge dents and scratches. Fortunately, we’re not talking about a banged-up dishwasher that barely works. Scratch and dent appliances are just like brand new, except they have a small nick that’s barely noticeable. The question is, are you OK with a small dent if it means you could save 25% off your purchase? What about 50% off? If you were to do a Google search on a name-brand appliance and compare its price to the same item in our showroom, you would see just how cost-effective scratch and dent shopping can be.

The majority of our customers are savvy shoppers who don’t mind tiny imperfections if it means that they will get a great deal. In many cases, these imperfections are paint-based, which are easily fixed with a little elbow grease. If you’re in the market for a fully functional, nearly-new appliance and don’t mind a small blemish, buying scratch and dent appliances is a great choice that won’t break your bank.

Scratch and Dent Quick Facts

  • Scratch and dent doesn’t mean “damaged.” You could save as much as 50% or more off brand new appliances with minor scrapes or dents.
  • We have a huge selection of scratch and dent appliances for sale, including washing machines, dryers, refrigerators, stoves, and much more.
  • Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair offers customers all major name brands in our industry, including Samsung, LG, Whirlpool, Kenmore, Speed Queen, Maytag, Bosch, Frigidaire, and more.
  • Each of our scratch and dent appliances is examined before you buy to ensure they work properly.
  • We offer customers a one-year warranty on most scratch and dent appliances in Sullivan's Island, so you can shop with confidence.
  • There is no credit needed to make a purchase at Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair. In fact, we offer up to $5,000 in approvals and can make arrangements for 90-day payment options.
  • We offer appliance delivery and repair options. We only charge $99 for in-home service calls!
Scratch and Dent Quick Facts

How to Get the Most Out of Your Scratch and Dent Appliances

Appliances can be a big investment, even if you’re buying them at significant discounts. Of course, you want to keep your appliances in
good shape, so they continue working properly for years. Once you buy one of our scratch and dent appliances, keep in mind these tips
to keep your new merchandise in great working order:

Clean Inside and Out

All appliances need to be cleaned, even washing machines. As an example, cleaning the coils of your new scratch and dent refrigerator will keep it running efficiently.

baby-solid
Only Use Appliances as They Were Intended

If your kids love to play near your appliances, be sure they aren’t standing or sitting on them. If you’re using a scratch and dent dishwasher or clothes dryer, don’t overload them. If your appliance requires specific products, like a high-efficiency laundry detergent, only use the recommended products.

Change filters

You probably know that clothes drying machines have filters that must be changed. However, other appliances like dishwashers and ice makers can also have filters. Read your appliance’s manual to see if your product has a filter, and if so, how often it needs to be changed.

home appllience

Overstock Appliances in Sullivan's Island

Much like our scratch and dent merchandise, overstock appliances have become incredibly popular in recent times. While many savvy shoppers already know about the deals associated with overstock items, others hear “overstock appliances” and immediately think something is wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth!

There’s a simple explanation for overstock appliances in South Carolina, and it’s right in the name. Overstock items are products that manufacturers have made too many of or have a surplus of stock that needs to be sold. This is great news for shoppers who can get new, brand-name appliances at a fraction of their original cost.

There are many reasons why a manufacturer might need to sell their merchandise as overstock:

  • A retail store closes its doors, and its appliances and other stock must be liquidated
  • A retail store has an item that doesn’t sell as well as they had hoped
  • The manufacturer or their partners overestimated the amount of stock that they needed

While overstock items are perfectly normal, some customers think they aren’t worth purchasing because of a perceived “expiration date.” The fact is, overstock and surplus appliances are common in every industry because inventory management isn’t an easy job. Sometimes people make errors, but those mistakes can turn into amazing opportunities for high-quality appliances at great prices.

Overstock Appliances Explained

Retailers have to deal with surplus merchandise all the time because older stock must be removed to make room for newer appliances. When a retailer has a surplus of a particular appliance, they will typically reach out to the manufacturer to see if they can return their overstocked appliances. Because these manufacturers charge retailers to restock these surplus items, many retailers choose instead to off-load their stock at a discounted price, and that’s where Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair steps in.

The bottom line? Overstock appliances in Sullivan's Island are common, brand new, and waiting for you to check out at our showroom. We carry all the major appliance brand names, like Whirlpool, LG, Bosch, Maytag, Kenmore, and even Samsung. Unlike our scratch and dent products, you aren’t going to find any minor dings or scratches on our overstock appliances. It sounds too good to be true, but it isn’t – when manufacturers make too much, you’re in luck.

At Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair, we have a vast selection of overstock appliances for you to choose from, including:

  • Microwaves
  • Washers
  • Dryers
  • Refrigerators
  • Stoves
  • TVs
  • Dishwashers
  • Much More!
Overstock Appliances-Explained
Help Save the Environment

Buy Scratch And Dent Appliances, Help Save The Environment

Buying overstock or scratch and dent appliances in South Carolina is not just a way to get a great deal on a name-brand product – it’s also a great way to help protect our environment. As you might have guessed, unused scratch and dent merchandise usually end up in a landfill to sit and rot. When these appliances are brought to landfills, they release toxic greenhouse gases and harmful substances as their chemical and metal composition deteriorate.

When you buy a scratch and dent appliance from Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair, know that you are doing your part to help protect our environment. When you break it down, buying products and appliances that would otherwise go to a landfill is a win-win. You’re getting an incredible discount on a high-quality appliance and you’re diminishing the harmful greenhouse gases that harm our precious environment.

The Premier Provider of Overstock and Scratch and Dent Appliances in Sullivan's Island

If you’re still on the fence about giving scratch and dent products a chance, we encourage you to visit our discount appliance store in Sullivan's Island. We have a full selection of appliances for you to see, like refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, and microwaves. If you’re looking for it, chances are we have it in stock!

If you have questions or need assistance choosing the right appliance for your home and budget, we’re here to help however possible. Whether you need a detailed rundown of how an appliance works or would like to hear more information about our easy financing options, our team will take the time to answer your questions.

charleston

At Preferred Appliance Sales and Repair, our customers always come first!

Latest News in Sullivan's Island

DHEC says Sullivan’s Island forest cutting will need a permit

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND — A plan to thin parts of the maritime forest here will face stricter scrutiny from state regulators after the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control said the cutting is extensive enough that it requires a permit.The thinning is part of a lawsuit settlement reached in October 2020 between the town and some homeowners who live on the edge of the thicket. The plaintiffs wanted more management of the wild land, which has slowly accreted along most of Sullivan’s Island’s beach for dec...

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND — A plan to thin parts of the maritime forest here will face stricter scrutiny from state regulators after the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control said the cutting is extensive enough that it requires a permit.

The thinning is part of a lawsuit settlement reached in October 2020 between the town and some homeowners who live on the edge of the thicket. The plaintiffs wanted more management of the wild land, which has slowly accreted along most of Sullivan’s Island’s beach for decades. A staunch group of activists on the island, however, want the area mostly left alone.

So the town put together a plan based on the settlement for state and federal regulators to review. The Army Corps of Engineers already determined the work wouldn’t require one of its wetland disturbance permits. But DHEC said in a Dec. 20 letter that in a few parts of the forest, the cutting is significant enough that a state environmental permit is required.

Some parts of the land would be left mostly untouched. But in other areas, the plan calls for removal of several smaller trees.

Specifically, DHEC wrote that in parts of the 100-foot “transition zone” area that is closest to adjacent homes, 96 percent of the trees would be removed, based on a 2014 survey of the plants there.

In a portion of the accreted land area that stretches from the edge of island’s elementary school to Station 28½, 80 percent of the trees would be removed, DHEC wrote.

“This level of tree removal is significant; therefore, a Major Critical Area Permit … would be required if the Town pursues the activities described in the work plan,” the agency wrote.

Sullivan’s Island Town Council did not discuss the letter in its Dec. 21 meeting, when three members of the seven-person panel were absent. Town Administrator Andy Benke said he expects a discussion on the forest in January.

Jamie Hood, an attorney for the homeowners who sued the town and then settled, said in an email that the plaintiffs would keep working with Sullivan’s Island to make sure the plan is approved by the state.

“We will need to consider whether there are modifications to make to the current work plan or if the permit application should be submitted with the current work plan as is,” Hood wrote.

At the same time, a turnover in Town Council since the settlement was reached and pressure from a vocal group of activists on the island may ultimately serve to scuttle the work.

The council recently decided to hire an outside attorney, William Wilkins, to review the settlement. Wilkins, a former federal judge, wrote in a letter earlier this month that the agreement may be unenforceable, because it is too restrictive of the council’s powers to make policy for the town.

But to actually challenge the settlement, the council would have to vote on moving forward with a legal action.

South Carolina Department Of Health And Environmental Control ‘Concerned’ About Plans To Trim Maritime Forest

By Brian Sherman for The Island Eye NewsThe South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control is “concerned” about how and how many trees would be removed from Sullivan’s Island’s Maritime Forest under a plan created for the town by consultant Thomas & Hutton. In a Dec. 20, 2021 letter, DHEC Beachfront Permitting Project Manager Matthew Slagel wrote that the plan would require a major critical area permit. The plan was developed after a divided Sullivan’s Island Town Council reached an agr...

By Brian Sherman for The Island Eye News

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control is “concerned” about how and how many trees would be removed from Sullivan’s Island’s Maritime Forest under a plan created for the town by consultant Thomas & Hutton. In a Dec. 20, 2021 letter, DHEC Beachfront Permitting Project Manager Matthew Slagel wrote that the plan would require a major critical area permit. The plan was developed after a divided Sullivan’s Island Town Council reached an agreement with homeowners who live near the Maritime Forest, apparently settling a lawsuit originally filed in July 2010 and permitting the removal of trees and other vegetation from the Forest. Under the plan, based on a 2014 survey of trees 6 inches in diameter and larger, in one section of the forest, 167 of 174 trees would be removed. In another section, only 16 of 79 trees would remain in place. “DHEC found that in certain areas, 96% of all trees would be removed.

Studies by three federal agencies, including NOAA and FEMA, show that the density and height of vegetation and trees are our most important protection from the No. 1 threat on the island: hurricane storm surge,” said Karen Byko, president of Sullivan’s Island for All, a nonprofit organization whose mission is to preserve the Sullivan’s Island Maritime Forest and accreted land in its natural state for the benefit, protection and enjoyment of all. In the Dec. 20 letter, Slagel also raised concerns about how trees and vegetation would be removed. “You have proposed to use a skid steer mower mounted to a small rubber-tired tractor or similar machinery within this area to cut at ground level and mulch in place trees and shrubs 3 inches and smaller. It is our opinion that utilizing machinery in the beach/ dune system will disturb and alter existing soils and topography, even if the trees and shrubs themselves are cut at ground level,” the letter said. Slagel also pointed out that the DHEC Bureau of Water Coastal Stormwater Permitting is working with Thomas & Hutton to obtain information about how changes in vegetation cover might affect stormwater runoff. According to a Sullivan’s Island for All press release, the DHEC letter “shows that this plan is environmentally unsound and goes far beyond vegetation thinning and trimming.” “As DHEC’s stormwater division noted, removing these thousands of trees and shrubs puts the island at much greater risk of flooding,” Byko said. “These trees work as nature’s stormwater pumps. Taking them away for better views puts every homeowner on the island at greater risk.” DHEC’s concerns are not the only thing holding up the implementation of plans to remove trees and other vegetation from the Forest. Of the four Council members who voted to approve the settlement agreement with nearby homeowners, only two remain in office: Greg Hammond and Kaye Smith. Tim Reese was defeated in the May 4 municipal election, and Chauncey Clark lost his bid to unseat Mayor Pat O’Neil.

The new Council, which apparently is considering its options in its effort to change the terms of the agreement, voted in September 2021 to ask the former Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth District William W. “Billy’ Wilkins to assess the agreement. Wilkins determined that the agreement is invalid “because its provisions improperly restrict the legislative/governmental powers of successor Town Councils, improperly divest the town of legislative/governmental powers and improperly restrict the proprietary functions of the town.”

Legal expert says Sullivan’s Island maritime forest agreement is unenforceable

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND, S.C. (WCBD) – A legal expert hired to review an agreement reached with the Town of Sullivan’s Island regarding the cutting of a maritime forest has deemed the agreement invalid, in his professional opinion.William Wilkins has “five decades of legal experience, including but not limited to 25 years as a United States District Judge for the District of South Carolina and a United States Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.”The settlement would allow the town to pe...

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND, S.C. (WCBD) – A legal expert hired to review an agreement reached with the Town of Sullivan’s Island regarding the cutting of a maritime forest has deemed the agreement invalid, in his professional opinion.

William Wilkins has “five decades of legal experience, including but not limited to 25 years as a United States District Judge for the District of South Carolina and a United States Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.”

The settlement would allow the town to periodically thin portions of a maritime forest, which advocates say is necessary to maintain a view of the beach. Those in opposition worry about the biodiversity of the island.

Wilkins found that the settlement “is invalid because (A) its provisions constitute an improper restriction of the legislative/governmental powers of successor Town Councils, (B) its provisions constitute an improper delegation and/or divestment of the legislative/governmental powers of the Town, and (C) its provisions unfairly, unreasonably, or improperly restrict the proprietary functions of the town.”

He continued, saying “as a result, provisions of the settlement agreement are unenforceable in law or contract.”

Wilkins was careful to point out, however, that his opinion “is not, and should not be construed as, a guarantee of any legal outcome related to the issues presented; nor does it attempt to determine or comment on the wisdom of any non-legal political issues, such as policy decisions of the Town, or any past or present action by the Town.”

He also noted that it “should not be interpreted as a prohibition or restriction on the Town from taking such action as it determines to be ‘necessary for the health, safety, or general welfare of the Town’ and the public at-large to ‘further or effect’ the ‘Public Policies’ enumerated in the covenants set forth in the deed from the Lowcountry Open Land Trust.”

Wilkins went on to lay out what he sees as potential legal paths forward, which would result in “a judicial determination of the rights and obligations of the Town under the Settlement Agreement.”

Click here to read the opinion in full.

Commentary: History of Sullivan’s Island maritime forest explains the present dispute

Just about any good story has an “other” side, and such is the case with Chauncey Clark’s recent commentary claiming that a group of Sullivan’s Island residents is stopping progress on the island by “debating yet again the settled accreted-land lawsuit.”His claims that those of us who want to save the maritime forest are using division and fear as political tools deserve special examination since Mr. Clark is a candidate for mayor in the May 4 election.As is often the case in Charleston, a bi...

Just about any good story has an “other” side, and such is the case with Chauncey Clark’s recent commentary claiming that a group of Sullivan’s Island residents is stopping progress on the island by “debating yet again the settled accreted-land lawsuit.”

His claims that those of us who want to save the maritime forest are using division and fear as political tools deserve special examination since Mr. Clark is a candidate for mayor in the May 4 election.

As is often the case in Charleston, a bit of history is needed to understand the present. The debate Mr. Clark refers to is about the more than 190 acres of beachfront property the town transferred to the Lowcountry Land Trust for preservation.

The public ownership of such a valuable resource on a residential barrier island is unique to Sullivan’s Island because the military owned much of the island from the 1700s well into the 20th century, when it transferred ownership to the state, which then transferred it to the town.

Fast forward to 1991, when the town placed restrictions on the deed that required the property to be kept in its “natural state” except that the Town Council could authorize some cutting for views.

The controversy over the amount of cutting quickly arose, with an Oct. 13, 1994 article in The Post and Courier that describes the town as wrestling with the question. Another ran on Jan. 26, 1995, reporting: “Sullivan’s Island residents proved last week that they could reach a compromise on the issue of cutting vegetation in the town-owned dune property. … The compromise was a give-n-take with victories for both sides.”

Since that compromise, the cutters have continually demanded more, and the town has allowed more. But in 2010, two adjacent landowners sued to allow essentially unlimited cutting. The lower court ruled against them, but then the S.C. Supreme Court ordered additional review.

Two new Town Council members were elected, both of whom were less than transparent as to their views on the land-trust issue. Last year, three council members who are adjacent landowners joined with one a real estate agent to approve, on a 4-3 vote, a settlement of the case that allows for massive cutting. They refused citizen pleas to postpone a final vote until residents could register their view in the May 4 election.

The adjacent landowners have falsely argued that this settlement was necessary to prevent the Supreme Court from ultimately ordering the entire area in the land trust clear-cut and the town held liable for enormous damages for denying the adjacent landowners a view. But all the Supreme Court ordered was that the lower court conduct a trial to determine the intention of the town and the Lowcountry Land Trust in creating the trust.

Anyone with the slightest familiarity with the land trust’s creation knows the intent was for a natural area. There is overwhelming evidence to prove this, including newspaper articles, Town Council minutes, consultant reports and testimony. There is no evidence to support the plaintiffs’ position that the intent was to maintain the vegetation at the 3-foot level it was when the trust was created. The town would have won the lawsuit.

While Mr. Clark claims his opponents won’t compromise and follow democratic principles, these charges are true as to him. His crowning anti-democratic action was to include in the settlement agreement a provision that no future Town Council could alter the cutting regime without approval of the plaintiffs to the lawsuit — who want unlimited cutting.

Mr. Clark’s sweeping allegations simply are not supported by the facts.

Billy Want has been an environmental lawyer for more than 40 years, working for the U.S. Justice Department, in private practice and as a law professor. He is a resident of Sullivan’s Island.

Sullivan’s Island adjusts forest cutting plan to account for wetlands

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND — This barrier island community is adjusting a plan to cut trees and shrubs in its maritime forest after a survey found extensive wetlands on the accreted land.The forest was at the center of a decade-long lawsuit brought by some homeowners on the edge of it who wanted to thin the thicket. They complained of vermin and wildfire risk, among other factors. The suit was ...

SULLIVAN’S ISLAND — This barrier island community is adjusting a plan to cut trees and shrubs in its maritime forest after a survey found extensive wetlands on the accreted land.

The forest was at the center of a decade-long lawsuit brought by some homeowners on the edge of it who wanted to thin the thicket. They complained of vermin and wildfire risk, among other factors. The suit was settled by the town in October with a plan to cut many smaller trees, over the objections of other islanders who wanted the forest to stay largely wild instead.

That settlement, it turns out, is mostly unworkable because so much of the area slated for cutting is protected or contains wetlands. The exact boundaries of wetlands can only be determined in a survey, and the town conducted one in January and found 65 acres. Other parts of the land are “critical area,” or special coastal zones that the state of South Carolina protects.

Town Council voted 4-2 at its March 16 meeting for a new work plan and a court filing indicating the settlement was being adjusted. The same four council members who voted to settle the case last year approved the changes: Tim Reese, Chauncey Clark, Greg Hammond and Kaye Smith. Councilwoman Sarah Church was not present.

Now, the plan involves highly technical determinations of what can be cut and what cannot, as opposed to eliminating most smaller trees of certain species.

“I don’t know that this is any better, maybe in some ways it is, maybe in some ways it’s worse, but there’s no way I can support anything here,” said Mayor Pat O’Neil, who opposed settling the suit last fall as well as this week’s adjustments.

Work would begin in November, pending approval by the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control and Army Corps of Engineers.

A vocal group of islanders who don’t want the forest cut argue it provides protection from storm surge, wildlife habitat and a unique natural amenity. The forest is on land that slowly accreted on the south and central sections of Sullivan’s beach; sand collects there because of nearby jetties that keep the entrance to Charleston Harbor clear.

Some, like Larry Kobrovsky, hoped that leaving the original settlement in place would actually mean that cutting wouldn’t happen because state and federal regulators wouldn’t have approved of the original plan.

Councilman Bachman Smith also said he thought the regulatory issues might “shut the whole thing down” if the council hadn’t passed the changes.

But Town Attorney Derk Van Raalte said it was unlikely such a move would work.

“You’re in a relationship with (the plaintiffs) and in a relationship with that court order, and it’s difficult to walk away from,” Van Raalte said.

Disclaimer:

This website publishes news articles that contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The non-commercial use of these news articles for the purposes of local news reporting constitutes "Fair Use" of the copyrighted materials as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law.