If you create a new term for something that there was previously a common, unambiguous term for, people's animal brains assume that there's some sort of difference between the new and old thing, even if the words literally mean the same thing (if you use the actual meaning of the words in technical or industry jargon to determine their meaning, you will usually be wrong.) In other words there's an "existing negative connotation," although you attach this to the word (is it the sound of the word or the ugliness of the letters that creates this connotation? It is a mystery) rather than to the actual thing that the old word denoted.
This is entirely deceptive, and nothing else. It is a change solely made to confuse people about the validity of their past experiences, and to sucker them into disregarding them when making very expensive decisions about their futures.
In some cases, the new term is just a euphemism, and it means exactly the same thing. Like how "homeless" turned into "unhoused". There's no difference in meaning. It's just meant to sound nicer.
In my book, it's the same for "used" and "pre-owned". It never occurred to me that anyone would think a "pre-owned" vehicle automatically came with a warranty. It was just a nicer way of saying that you weren't the first owner, without using the word "used" (which evokes "used up"). Also, I think sketchy used car lots sell what they call "pre-owned" vehicles, even though they don't provide certification and warranties (at least not ones you can count on, since they could just disappear overnight).