Bastian Roofing, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  I brought in my vehicle as instructed initially on February 15, 2017 but unfortunately the gentleman I was to meet had a medical situation and had to leave and the other manager was on vacation.  Of note, I drove 60 min round trip to find this out without a phone call of the changing circumstances. Then I was to meet again the following two Wednesday's but my schedule has not allowed. I will try to stop in when I'm able.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this      Is Not Acceptable.  Carmax Upon Purchasing A Vehicle Does An Extensive Check And Inspection So They Would Have Know The Vehicle Was In An Accident With The Repaint.  The Provided A Bogus Auto Check To Me That Car Was Not In An Accident.  This Is Fraud.  I Would Not Have Purchased The Car And For That Much If I knew It Was In An Accident.  I Did Contact A Sales Manager And Complained ABout This Discrepancy When I Was Receiving Less on trade inAnd They Did Not Offer Any Services To Me To Contact An Emergency Response Team.  I Talked And Emailed With Chelsie Huntley at Carmax. I Want A Refund For What I over Paid For The Car and Lost On Trade In [redacted]. This Is Fraud Selling A Car As No Accident.  Carmax Inspects Cars. proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference,  details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]

March 17,
2016
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
720
Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond,
VA 23226
RE: [redacted]
VIN: [redacted] (the “Vehicle”)
Dear Mrs.
[redacted],
            Thank you...

for forwarding the
complaint received in your office from [redacted] regarding the Vehicle
purchased from CarMax of Duarte, CA (“CarMax”) on March 8, 2015.  In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] states the Vehicle
has transmission and electrical concerns. 
Ms. [redacted] states that the Vehicle has been at [redacted] for service
since November, 2015 with no resolution. 
Ms. [redacted] requests to exchange the Vehicle or to be provided a “rebate”
to pay for the pending repairs.
            On or around March 8, 2016, an
investigator with the Bureau of Automotive Repairs visited CarMax in regards to
a complaint submitted by Ms. [redacted] specific to the transmission concern
with the Vehicle.  The investigator spoke
with a manager and considered the complaint closed.  He advised he would be visiting [redacted] to
learn about the status of repairs there.
CarMax
has not heard directly from Ms. [redacted] since November, 2015.  In order to learn more about the status of
the repairs and any available assistance CarMax can provide, a manager has
contacted the Bureau of Automotive Repairs investigator handling Ms.
[redacted]’s complaint.  As of March 14,
2015, CarMax is still waiting on a reply from the investigator.
            At this time, CarMax does not have
enough information to respond to Ms. [redacted]’s request.
            If Ms. [redacted] has any additional
questions, or would like to discuss this concern further, she may contact me at
1-800-519-1511 ext. [redacted].

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]

September 23,
2015
 
[redacted]                             
720 Moorefield
Park Drive, Suite...

300
Richmond,
Virginia 23236
 
Re: [redacted]
Complaint
ID [redacted]
[redacted]
 
Dear Mrs. [redacted]:                                  �...⇄
 
I am writing in response to your
letter dated August 27, 2015, wherein you forwarded a complaint from Mrs. [redacted]
[redacted] regarding her request to be excused from having to pay CarMax’s Credit
and Collections Department a settlement amount of $300.  Mrs. [redacted] also mentioned in the complaint
that CarMax uses tactics to finance their customers at a higher interest rate.
 
Mrs. [redacted] came in to CarMax on or
about July 6, 2015 to trade the Vehicle in for a 2014 [redacted].  CarMax appraised the Vehicle for $14,000.00, sent
her lienholder (Capital One) a payoff check in the amount of $4,960.54, applied
$9,039.45 towards the purchase of the 2014 [redacted] and sent Mrs. [redacted] a
reimbursement check in the amount of $450.19 for the balance remaining on her
Extended Service Plan.
 
CarMax was later contacted by [redacted] to inform them that the payoff was short by $450.19.  A review of CarMax’s records indicate that the
previous amount mailed to Mrs. [redacted] were monies that should have been added
into the total payoff balance of the loan with [redacted].  In an effort to correct this error, CarMax
contacted Mrs. [redacted] by phone to inform her of the situation and to advise her
that the $450.19 would need to be returned back to CarMax as soon as possible (per
the signed Vehicle Purchase Agreement).
 
Mrs. [redacted] informed CarMax that she
would need to make payment arrangements to pay off this balance because the
funds had already been spent.  CarMax
paid Capital One the $450.19 on Mrs. [redacted]’ behalf, and forwarded her information
to CarMax’s Credit and Collections Department to set up payment arrangements.  CarMax’s Credit and Collections Department
offered Mrs. [redacted] a settlement amount of $300, as opposed to the previous
balance of $450.19.  Mrs. [redacted] paid CarMax’s
Credit and Collections Department this amount on or about August 21, 2015. 
 
Due to CarMax’s Vehicle Purchase
Agreement stating that “The Estimated Payoff may be greater or less than the
amount that is actually due to the lienholder(s) to transfer title (“Actual
Payoff”). You agree to pay CarMax the difference between the Total Estimated
Payoff and the Actual Payoff plus any additional costs [i]ncurred by CarMax,
upon demand,” CarMax is declining Mrs. [redacted]’ request to be excused from having
to pay CarMax $300.
 
In addition,
CarMax does not engage in deceptive financial tactics and does not make
financing decisions.  The order in which
the names are listed on the credit application has no bearing on the rate
offered by a finance company.
 
CarMax apologizes for any
inconvenience that Mrs. [redacted] may have experienced and appreciates the
opportunity to respond to this complaint.
 
Please contact me
at [redacted] extension [redacted] with any questions that you may have.
 
Sincerely,
 
[redacted]
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The key I brought in still has the Carmax tag and serial number on it.  Where in the world would I get a third spare key to the EXACT car they sold me? That story doesn't remotely make sense.  Carmax did not do their job initially and never checked the key.  If they did and the key happens to be a fluke that just happened to deactivate itself a few months later, then I need to see a report showing the key was tested and it needs to match with the serial number I have. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]
[redacted]       I have finally figured out how to send all the documents as one file. I am sending them to you as a link located at the bottom of this email.        The documents I have attached in this email are all related to the services that I have had to get since buying the [redacted] a year and a half ago. As you can see it has been a lot and has occurred frequently.        I am refusing Carmax's "offer" because honestly no deal, offer or compromise has ever been given to me at all at any time. I am paying for an unreliable vehicle that was supposedly inspected by Carmax and listed as a certified, reliable vehicle, by Carmax, and the vehicle has had problems since I first bought it. I have the max care coverage from Carmax but it is unfair to have to bring the vehicle in at least once a month, sometimes twice a month to have the same problems, and new problems, fixed. That is not a reliable vehicle. Once the vehicle is in being serviced, it stays in the service department for two weeks to a month each time. I have one vehicle and I, along with my family, rely on the one vehicle. Once the vehicle is being serviced, I am given a small sedan sized loaner vehicle when I am covered for a large SUV. I have many kids that rely on the vehicle that I am paying for because of its size.        As far as the $250 deductible that Carmax mentions waiving for me as a sign of good customer service, it was explained to me that if a problem happens more than once on that vehicle then I don't need to pay a deductible. I was also explained that if I ever were to pay a deductible it would be  a $250 deductible if the vehicle was serviced at Carmax, and a $300 deductible if the vehicle was serviced elsewhere. As you can see in the documents I have provided, the same problems, in addition to new problems, have occurred on the vehicle sometimes more than twice.  Therefore, the $250 deductible was never charged because the problems were the same problems over and over.       I am going through too much emotional and mental stress and fear of losing my job because of this unreliable vehicle.  I am paying close to $500 a month for a vehicle that was inspected by Carmax and listed as a certified vehicle. It seems like all CarMax relies on is the good insurance that their customers have because without good insurance the problems that occur with the vehicles have to be paid out of pocket. The vehicle is only serviced  because I have good insurance and the max care.       I would like to come to some type of agreement on giving me money back for purchasing a vehicle that was falsely advertised.          In the following paragraphs, I will be listing the problems with the vehicle, how many times those problems occurred and the loaner vehicles that were given to me by Carmax.       [redacted] 1 - 5, (10/10/2013), refer to the first service done on the vehicle. As you can see, on pg 2 and 3, the brake booster had to be replaced (first time but not the last). No charge because it was within the first 30 days. Pg 4 refers to the back A.C. system having to be replaced (first time but not the last). [redacted] 7 refers to the loaner vehicle that was given to me while my vehicle was being serviced (notice it is a small sized sedan, Hyundai Sonata.) Given to me as the loaner vehicle when I have many kids relying on a larger SUV sized vehicle.         [redacted] 8 -12, (10/16/2013), refer to the second time I had to bring my vehicle in for service, which was only 6 days after the first time I brought it in, and only 1 day after getting it back from the first service. As you can see on [redacted] 10, the A.C. had to be replaced again (second time) and it was sent to the dealer to be replaced. [redacted] 10 also refers to the check engine light being on (first time but not the last).  [redacted] 10 also refers to the stabilitrac sensor having to be sent to the dealer to be serviced (first time but not the last). [redacted] 8 refers to the loaner vehicle given to me while my vehicle was being serviced for the second time. The loaner this time was an SUV but still not a large sized SUV. I guess Carmax was thinking that would suffice, even though the vehicle I'm paying for, the [redacted], is much bigger. I'm paying for a large SUV and should be given the same amount of space.       [redacted] 16, 18 and 19, (10/23/2013 and 10/24/2013), refer to the stabilitrac sensor and check engine light being on and needing service (second time for the stabilitrac sensor and for the check engine light). [redacted] 18 refers to the loaner vehicle. I was given the same loaner vehicle while these repairs were being done on the vehicle. I was not given anything bigger even though I am paying for a large SUV.       [redacted] 20 (10/24/2013), refers to the brake booster having another issue (second time) and a brake light switch being inoperable (only occurrence).       [redacted] 24 and 25, (2/23/2015), refer to the check engine light being on again (third time), the rear door having an issue with the automatic button located on the inside of the rear door (first time), the power outlets not functioning (first time but not the last), vehicle shifting hard into drive due to transmission (second time) and vehicle still shutting off after pumping gas (second time). As you can see on [redacted] 25, I was given a small SUV, Rav 4, as my loaner vehicle. Which was still not enough space for me.        [redacted] 26 and 27, (3/5/2014), refer to the car shaking when put into drive and reverse. Because of this issue, CarMax had me take the vehicle to the [redacted] where the issue ended up being the transmission (third time).       [redacted] 28 - 35, (2/13/2015), refer to the evaporative emission canister needing to be replaced (which was related to the car not starting after putting gas, which was the third time this problem occurred). These [redacted] also relate to the front axles needing to be replaced (first occurrence).  Also, the outlets needed to be fixed (second time). Also, the motor mounds needed to be replaced. This issue actually ended up being related to the transmission because the vehicle was still giving a hard hit when put into drive even after the motor mounds were replaced. As you can see on [redacted] 35, CarMax gave me a Toyota Camry as my loaner vehicle. Another small four door sedan.       [redacted] 39 - 42, (3/2/2015), refer to the transmission mount needing to be replaced. This is the problem before that Carmax thought by replacing the motor mound that it would be fixed. The rear hatch switch also needed to be replaced (second time). The A.C. needed to be fixed again (third time) because on a test drive, one of the technicians noticed it was blowing hot air. It was the A.C. compressor that needed to be replaced and the system needed to be recharged. On [redacted] 42, it states that a code was found when scanning the system. This code was an evap purge solenoid failure and needed to be replaced. This was causing the vehicle to not start after pumping gas (fourth time).       [redacted] 43 - 46 (6/8/2015) refer to the check engine light being on again and an O2 sensor needing to be replaced. The O2 sensor has something to do with the transmission and so, on this occasion, the transmission was replaced yet again, for the fourth time.        As you can see, this vehicle has had many problems and continues to have many problems. Some of the problems even occurred while the vehicle was in the service department getting repaired. It is problem after problem with this vehicle, making it very unreliable, and I should not have to deal with an unreliable vehicle. Carmax guarantees certified vehicles and Carmax sold me an unreliable vehicle. I want money back for having to pay for this unreliable vehicle. Carmax has done nothing to help me out in any kind of way. The only reason they service the vehicle is because I have the max care plan and good insurance. Carmax has not gone above and beyond to satisfy me. I will never return to Carmax to purchase any vehicles from them. Their customer service is horrible. I have even gone as far as speaking with the manager of the store and a sales manager and I got no kind of help, assistance, solution, or customer service. This vehicle is causing me too much stress and I want my money back. I hope there can be some kind of compromise on giving me money back for having been sold a falsely advertised vehicle from Carmax.                                Sincerely,                                    [redacted]

Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your
office from Mr. [redacted] regarding the Vehicle purchased from CarMax of [redacted] (“CarMax”) on or about November 26, 2016.
In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] describes service concerns
related to the Vehicle’s mechanical and...

cosmetic quality. As a result of these
concerns, Mr. [redacted] requests that CarMax offer a refund or return of the
Vehicle.  
CarMax would like to note that Mr. [redacted] has since been in
touch with the service department regarding the transmission. The Vehicle was
under manufacturer’s warranty and the transmission was replaced at no cost to
him. During this repair Mr. [redacted] was provided with a loaner vehicle as a
gesture of goodwill. Additionally, the completed transmission repair comes with
a 12 month, 12,000 mile warranty.
According to CarMax’s business records, Mr. [redacted] was
provided with a copy of the inspection at the time of sale. CarMax stands
behind our vehicles with our 5-Day Money Back Guarantee, 30-Day Limited
Warranty and option to purchase MaxCare at the time of sale.
Due to the Vehicle being outside of CarMax’s 5-Day Money
Back Guarantee, CarMax declines Mr. [redacted]’s request to return the Vehicle. However,
CarMax stands by the option of an appraisal should Mr. [redacted] decide to sell it
back.  
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this
complaint and considers this matter closed. 
If you have any additional questions or would like to discuss this
concern further, please contact me at 1-800-[redacted] ext. [redacted].
Sincerely,
Kaitlyn C[redacted]

Thank you for forwarding the complaint, dated November 29,
2017, regarding the Vehicle purchased at the CarMax store located in [redacted]
(“CarMax”) on or about June 3, 2016 In the complaint, Mrs. [redacted] describes
service concerns with the Vehicle and request that CarMax complete the...

needed
repairs or return the Vehicle.
CarMax is aware of the service concerns which Mrs. [redacted]
mentions in the complaint and has been working with her to resolve them. CarMax
has completed the following repairs on the Vehicle:
• Between
approximately June 19 and June 21, 2017: Replaced the rear wheel bearings,
replaced A/C compressor and began an oil consumption test. These repairs were
covered under the terms of Mrs. [redacted]’s extended service plan, with Mrs. [redacted]
paying the cost of the plan’s deductible. Mrs. [redacted] also paid to have an oil
change completed during this service visit.
• Between
approximately July 20, 2017 and August 9, 2017: Replaced the front struts and
intermediate steering shaft, replaced the engine splash shield, completed an
alignment. The oil consumption test which was started during the June
appointment showed no abnormal oil consumption so no repairs were completed
regarding this. Repairs were covered under the terms of Mrs. [redacted]’s extended
service plan, with Mrs. [redacted] paying the cost of the plan’s deductible.
On or around September 20, 2017, Mrs. [redacted] informed CarMax
that the Vehicle’s engine was still consuming oil. CarMax brought the Vehicle
to an authorized [redacted] dealership to begin another oil consumption test. While
the test was being completed, CarMax provided a loaner vehicle for Mrs. [redacted]’s
use. On or around November 3, 2017, the number of miles needed to complete the
test was reached and the Vehicle was sent to the authorized [redacted] dealership
for analysis of the oil consumption test and further diagnosis.
As of December 13, 2017, CarMax is continuing to work with
the [redacted] dealership and Mrs. [redacted] regarding any repairs needed to address
the outstanding oil consumption concern. CarMax has continued to offer the use
of a loaner vehicle as a gesture of customer service. All other repair concerns
which have been brought to CarMax’s attention have been addressed. CarMax will
continue to stay in contact with Mrs. [redacted] regarding the status of the vehicle
and needed repairs. CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this
complaint and address the repair needs on the Vehicle. Please contact me at
([redacted]) [redacted], extension [redacted], with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Jennifer L[redacted]
Analyst, Executive Response Team

October
30, 2016
[redacted], Operations [redacted] 
RE: [redacted]
(VIN: [redacted], [redacted] the “Vehicle”)
Dear Mrs.
[redacted],
            Thank you for forwarding the
complaint received in your...

office from Mr. [redacted] as it pertains to his
purchase of the Vehicle from CarMax of Laurel, MD (“CarMax”) on February 21st,
2013. At the time of purchase,
Mr. [redacted] also elected to purchase a MaxCare Extended Service Plan (“ESP”) for
a term of 72 months or until the Vehicle exceeded 100,000 miles with a
deductible of $[redacted].00. In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] expresses
concerns with CarMax’s efforts to clean pen and grease spots in the Vehicle and
requests that CarMax refund him for the amount that it would cost to have the
Vehicle professionally cleaned.
            Mr. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax on or about
September 23, 2016, with several mechanical concerns. During this visit, CarMax
diagnosed the Vehicle at no cost to Mr. [redacted], and was able to submit his
repairs to his ESP provider to be covered at the cost of his deductible. When
Mr. [redacted] came to pick up the Vehicle at CarMax, he mentioned that there were cosmetic
concerns with the Vehicle, to include grease spots present in the car on the
door handle as well as pen marks on the seat belt and leather. CarMax was not
aware of having caused these concerns during the time of repair; however, in the
effort of customer service, CarMax agreed to clean the spots per the request of
Mr. [redacted]. Upon completion, Mr. [redacted] was not satisfied with CarMax’s efforts
to address this to their standards and requested for them to further detail
these spots.
            CarMax will not be participating in Mr. [redacted]’s desired
settlement considering the effort previously made to resolve these cosmetic concerns
as cleanliness and cosmetic quality of the Vehicle met CarMax’s standards at
the time of Mr. [redacted]’s visit. CarMax does not believe that these marks or
spots were caused while the Vehicle was being repaired.
            In the event that Mr. [redacted] has any further questions, he
is welcomed to contact me at [redacted], ext. [redacted].
Thank you for
providing CarMax the opportunity to respond to this matter.
Sincerely,
Curt D[redacted]
Analyst, Customer
Relations

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated
August 10, 2017, regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located
in [redacted] Springs, [redacted] (“CarMax”) on or about March 31, 2011.In the...

complaint, Ms. [redacted] states that
the Vehicle was sold to her without proper paperwork and is now having
difficulty obtaining a copy of her title. Ms. [redacted] requests that CarMax provide her with a clean title as her desired resolution.
According to CarMax’s records, Ms. [redacted]
has submitted all the needed documentation and will need to wait for the state
to process the title, as well as send it to the lien holder. Once the lien holder receives the title, they will
send the Vehicle’s title to Ms. [redacted]. On or about, August 4, 2017, Ms.
[redacted] received the above information when speaking with a CarMax Customer
Relations Analyst.
Carmax advises that Ms. [redacted] update her
information with the lien holder so that they send the title to her correct
address.
CarMax is unable to assist further, as this is
being handled by the state of [redacted] and considers this matter closed.
Please contact me at (800)[redacted], extension [redacted], with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle P[redacted]
Analyst, Executive Response Team

January 20, 2015
[redacted], Operations Supervisor 720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, Virginia 23236Re: Mr. [redacted]Complaint ID [redacted]2011 [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN: [redacted]Dear Mrs. [redacted]:I am writing you in response to your letter dated January 4, 2015...

wherein you forwarded a complaint from Mr. [redacted], regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in San Diego, California (“CarMax”) on or about December 5, 2015.CarMax has been in communication with Mr. [redacted] regarding this matter and has agreed to allow him to take the Vehicle to [redacted] to have the repairs noted in Repair Order #[redacted] completed at CarMax’s expense.CarMax’s records indicate that [redacted] was able to diagnose and repair each of the concerns noted in Repair Order #[redacted].  In addition, CarMax’s records also indicate that these repairs are under warranty through [redacted] for a period of one year.CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint and considers CarMax’s gesture to have the repairs completed at CarMax’s expense the resolution to the complaint.Please contact me at (855)562-4935 extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.Sincerely,Nekia [redacted]Analyst, Executive Response Team

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in refere**e to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your refere**e, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Unfortunately the response posted by CarMax is not accurate. This is not a warranty issue.This is not a timing/contact/customer service issue.This is specifically due to CarMax selling a vehicle as “Accident Free / 0 Accidents” although the vehicle had an insura**e accident claim filed and was damaged in a previous accident. CarMax did contact me after I wrote a letter to their corporate office expressing my co**ern.CarMax did offer the option to bring the vehicle in so they could “assess” the vehicle for damage.CarMax has a program for vehicle pre-inspection prior to sale. Assessing my vehicle for damage provides no value, unless the firms (CarMax) internal programs were not followed for vehicle inspection.When Carmax corporate was made aware that I sent a copy of my “letter of concern” to the ** Attorney General, all communication ceased. The next attempt at communication by CarMax was through their legal department.Their (CarMax) legal department statement is similar to the statement provided to Revdex.com. Their reply/statement does not address:1) The sale of a Previously Damaged Vehicle as “Accident Free / 0 damage”.2) Wrongly appraising a previously damaged vehicle above market value with regards to a previous accident.3) Lack of Quality Control for their internal systems used to appraise vehicles and used to provide vehicle history reports to customers. I was firm in my communication with CarMax about my expectations.I requested a vehicle with 1 owner, low miles, and no previous accidents or damage.CarMax sold a vehicle that was previously involved in an accident as an “accident free / previous damage free” vehicle.I would not have purchased the vehicle if I would have known the vehicle was involved in a previous “insurance claim / accident”. I would like to re-open my case.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I decline simply because the engineer did also state someone could have connected something incorrectly to cause this problem. CarMax never informed me of a damage fuse box. I was informed by [redacted] that my fuse box looked like it had been vandalized and CarMax blamed my husband only because he removed the wiper to make the wipers shut off (after putting the charged battery back from charging) that was the only signal was for the wipers to come on. He never put anything into the fuse box. CarMax "worked" on my car for two days! What were they doing? Looking at it? How did the determine it was a module issue?Once [redacted] called to inform me my fuse box had been damaged, I contacted my private insurance. My claim was denied! My adjustor stated it looked like someone damaged it while trying repair it. On 01/20/17 the engineer came out and stated, "It could have been lightening damage" or "someone connected something incorrectly to damage my modules." Again I filed a claim with my private insurance and again it was denied because they stated it was related to the previous claim. There was no entry point or proof of lightening damage. With that being said, my car was parked under my garage the day it shut down! I think it is CarMax responsibility for my repair because my care was damaged on their property! Where were all the managers when this problem started? When Rick the service manager got involved the damaged had already been done! He wasn't even there! Courtney "the fill-in" told lies about why they did not want to sent it under CarMax name! Now it all makes since! They knew damaged had been done and wanted me to send my car to [redacted] so I would be responsible!Attached are the denials from my private insurance company.
Regards,
[redacted]

June 11,
2015
 
 
Revdex.com Serving
Central Virginia, Inc.
720
Moorefield Park Drive
Suite 300
Richmond,
VA 23236
 
RE:      Consumer
Complaint of [redacted]
           ...


           
Dear
Sir/Madam:
 
Thank
you for sharing [redacted]’s complaint and providing us the opportunity to
respond.  Ms. [redacted] is unhappy that we
declined to sell her a vehicle.  Our
records reflect that we declined to sell Ms. [redacted] a vehicle because Ms.
[redacted] provided us with a fraudulent document to prove her income.  The relevant facts are as follows:
 
§  On May 16, 2015, we received a telephone
call from a third-party requesting to submit a credit application on behalf of
Ms. [redacted].  Before obtaining a copy of
Ms. [redacted]’s credit report, we asked to speak to Ms. [redacted] and we obtained her
consent.
§  Ms. [redacted]’s application was
approved on the condition that she substantiates the income she disclosed on
her credit application.  Ms. [redacted]
informed us that she would come to the store at 8:45 PM the same day to finalize
the transaction.
§  We requested and Ms. [redacted] faxed
to us a copy of her pay stub to substantiate her income. 
§  Following our review of the pay
stub, we concluded that the document was fraudulent.  Based on this finding, we contacted Ms.
[redacted] and informed her that we have decided not to conduct business with her.
 
We,
again, thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.  However, we cannot provide Ms. [redacted] with
any relief.  If you have any questions or
concerns, please feel free to contact me at [redacted], extension [redacted]. 
 
Sincerely,
 
 
[redacted]
Paralegal
CarMax
 
CC:
[redacted]

To Whom it may concern, I disagree with the business response. I did not put in a request or application.

June 24, 2015
 
 
 
[redacted]
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive Suite 300
Richmond, Va.  23236
 
Re:  Leslie [redacted]
 
[redacted]
 
Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your
office from...

[redacted] regarding the
[redacted](the “Vehicle”) that
she purchased on or about
November 14, 2014 from the CarMax store located in [redacted] In this complaint, Ms. [redacted]
Is requesting that CarMax repair the Vehicle at no cost to
her.
 
As stated in the letter, Ms. [redacted] had a repair concern that
needed to be addressed. Ms. [redacted] has owned the Vehicle for about 7 months and
was outside of the 30 Day Limited Warranty. This is a repair that is not
covered by MaxCare, Extended service plan. As a gesture of goodwill, CarMax
offered to split the cost of the repair. The parts will be ordered and Ms. [redacted]
will be contacted to set up an appointment. Ms. [redacted] was satisfied with the proposed
resolution.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this
complaint. Please call me at [redacted]
Extension [redacted], if you have any questions.
 
Sincerely,
[redacted]
[redacted]

March 7,
2017
[redacted] 
RE: [redacted]
[redacted], VIN:
[redacted] (“the Vehicle”) 
Thank
you for forwarding the complaint received in your office from [redacted] regarding
the Vehicle purchased from CarMax of Laurel, MD...

(“CarMax”) on or around October
5, 2016. In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] describes a concern with a noise near the
Vehicle’s front right tire and requests that CarMax complete the needed repairs
on the Vehicle.
According
to CarMax’s records, Mr. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax service on or around
December 19. During this service visit, CarMax replaced the front right strut
mount and shock absorber assembly at no cost to Mr. [redacted], as a gesture of
customer service. CarMax also provided a loaner vehicle for Mr. [redacted] to drive
while the Vehicle was in for repairs. Repairs were completed on or around
December 23, 2016.
On
or around January 4, 2017, Mr. [redacted] again brought the Vehicle to CarMax,
stating that a noise was coming from the front end of the Vehicle (while going
over uneven surfaces). CarMax was not able to find any mechanic failures and invited
a [redacted] Field Technical Specialist to further inspect the Vehicle. The Toyota
Field Technical Specialist identified the noise as normal strut operation;
therefore, CarMax did not complete any repairs to the Vehicle during this
visit. Mr. [redacted] picked the Vehicle up on or around January 20, 2017 and had
use of a loaner vehicle during the durations of the January appointment.
CarMax
is unable to complete repairs if no failures are found on the Vehicle;
therefore, CarMax must decline Mr. [redacted]’ request for repair. If Mr. [redacted]
would like to have the Vehicle inspected at a repair facility of his choosing
and provide further documentation of any failures which can be diagnosed, Mr.
[redacted] may email such documents to [redacted] for further review by CarMax. At
this time, CarMax would like to note that any diagnosis completed at a repair
facility would be the responsibility of Mr. [redacted].
CarMax
appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.  If you have any additional questions or would
like to discuss this concern further, please contact me at [redacted] ext.
[redacted].
Sincerely,
Jennifer
L[redacted]
Analyst,
CarMax Customer Relations

September 16, 2016[redacted] 720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, Virginia 23236Re: Mr. [redacted]Complaint ID [redacted]Dear Mrs. [redacted]:On or about September 15, 2016, CarMax attempted to make contact with Mr. [redacted] by phone, in order to offer him a written appraisal for the Vehicle in the amount of $16,000.00.  This offer does not reflect any deduction due to the current damage to the driver’s side headlight, but is contingent upon the Vehicle being in the same condition as when CarMax last saw it (with no new damage or excessive mileage).If Mr. [redacted] would like to accept this offer, he is encouraged to visit CarMax’s Southwest Freeway location within 7 days from the receipt of this  response.  Alternatively, CarMax is willing to fix the damage to the driver’s side headlight at no cost to Mr. [redacted] if he would like to keep the Vehicle.If Mr. [redacted] has any additional questions or concerns, please request that he contact me at [redacted]Sincerely,Nekia W[redacted]Analyst, Executive Response Team[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]

May 15, 2015
 
[redacted]
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive Suite 300
Richmond, VA 23236
 
Re: MS. [redacted]
Dear Mrs. [redacted],
Thank you for forwarding the complaint [redacted] received in
your office from Ms. [redacted]...

regarding the [redacted],
(the “Vehicle”) that was transferred on or about April 11, 2015 at the CarMax
store located in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania (“CarMax”).  In this complaint Ms. [redacted] is
requesting a $199 refund, delivery of the Vehicle to the store for purchase,
and better communication.   
According to our records, CarMax refunded Mrs. [redacted]’s
credit card ending -[redacted] on or about April 20, 2015.   The Vehicle arrived at CarMax, and CarMax
informed Ms. [redacted].  Mrs.
[redacted] cancelled her sales appointment and informed CarMax she was no
longer interested in the Vehicle.
CarMax considers this complaint resolved.  CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond
to this complaint. 
 
Please call me at [redacted], extension [redacted], if you
have any questions.
 
Sincerely,
 
 
[redacted]
Analyst, Customer Relations