Complainant, [redacted] purchased a Ford Pitruck., VIN [redacted] as an online/internet purchase via internet auction site, [redacted] on or about August 17, See copy of Retail Buyer Order, attached hereto as Exhibit A; and copy of confirmation of sale through [redacted] attached hereto as Exhibit BComplainant purchased the vehicle in "AS IS" conditionSee attached Buyers Guide, attached hereto as Exhibit C; and AS IS disclosure form, attached hereto as Exhibit D, both of which complainant signedComplainant purchased a year old vehicle with 158,miles, as shown in Exhibit E entitled ODOMETER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, which complainant also signedApproximately or weeks after his purchase of the vehicle, complainant contacted Arctic Motors ("AMC") by telephone with the complaint that he believed the vehicle had a defective transmissionHe also threatened to complaint to the Mercer County Division of Consumer affairsAMC does not know whether [redacted] ever carried through with his threatSee copy of complaint's letter attached hereto as Exhibit F At that point AMC advised [redacted] that he purchased a year old vehicle with 158,miles in AS IS conditionAMC also reminded [redacted] that he had the opportunity to personally examine the vehicle or for an independent third party inspection company to examine and inspect the vehicle at any time before it left AMC's premises [redacted] acknowledged that the declined such opportunityRegardless, in good faith and in order to create good customer relations, AMC provided a one-year extended service contract covering the vehicle's power trainAMC provided the extended service contract at no charge to [redacted] AMC bore the entire cost of the said contractSee copy of GWC extended service contract, attached hereto as Exhibit FAMC provided the complainant with the title to the vehicle on or about September 30, Complainant acknowledged his receipt of the titleComplainant commented that he believed that the title was a fraudulent titleHe objected to title because the vehicle's prior owner appeared thereuponSee exhibit G, attached heretoHe refused to accept the procedures of the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, in which a licensed dealer may endorse the back of title as purchaser from the party on the front of the title; and simultaneously issue a Reassignment of Title to the ultimate purchaserIt is based upon this procedure that MrMotter, erroneously claims that title to the vehicle is defective
Complainant, [redacted] purchased a Ford Pitruck., VIN [redacted] as an online/internet purchase via internet auction site, [redacted] on or about August 17, See copy of Retail Buyer Order, attached hereto as Exhibit A; and copy of confirmation of sale through [redacted] attached hereto as Exhibit BComplainant purchased the vehicle in "AS IS" conditionSee attached Buyers Guide, attached hereto as Exhibit C; and AS IS disclosure form, attached hereto as Exhibit D, both of which complainant signedComplainant purchased a year old vehicle with 158,miles, as shown in Exhibit E entitled ODOMETER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, which complainant also signedApproximately or weeks after his purchase of the vehicle, complainant contacted Arctic Motors ("AMC") by telephone with the complaint that he believed the vehicle had a defective transmissionHe also threatened to complaint to the Mercer County Division of Consumer affairsAMC does not know whether [redacted] ever carried through with his threatSee copy of complaint's letter attached hereto as Exhibit F At that point AMC advised [redacted] that he purchased a year old vehicle with 158,miles in AS IS conditionAMC also reminded [redacted] that he had the opportunity to personally examine the vehicle or for an independent third party inspection company to examine and inspect the vehicle at any time before it left AMC's premises [redacted] acknowledged that the declined such opportunityRegardless, in good faith and in order to create good customer relations, AMC provided a one-year extended service contract covering the vehicle's power trainAMC provided the extended service contract at no charge to [redacted] AMC bore the entire cost of the said contractSee copy of GWC extended service contract, attached hereto as Exhibit FAMC provided the complainant with the title to the vehicle on or about September 30, Complainant acknowledged his receipt of the titleComplainant commented that he believed that the title was a fraudulent titleHe objected to title because the vehicle's prior owner appeared thereuponSee exhibit G, attached heretoHe refused to accept the procedures of the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, in which a licensed dealer may endorse the back of title as purchaser from the party on the front of the title; and simultaneously issue a Reassignment of Title to the ultimate purchaserIt is based upon this procedure that MrMotter, erroneously claims that title to the vehicle is defective