Car Cash of New York, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
Before I came to the place of business, I detailed over the phone the exact condition in which the vehicle was right at that date and then I came in and that same vehicle, which according to my description was assessed between $4.5K and $6.5K over the phone was visually assessed at $1.5K? I took the time to describe the car in great detail ahead of timeThe reason for the difference in assessments was obvious to me: the company's representative was trying to take advantage of me; he even told me that cleaning the car would cost the company $and while the car had not just been detailed, it had been cleaned thoroughly a week before and I had driven it twice after that There is no way that this company will pay anyone $to detail a car; the representative thought me stupid and desperate and so he made up costs that the company would have to bear The costs that he piled on were completely unwarranted and clearly so to anyone who has any experience with cone artists, which unfortunately I do. There was nothing genuine about two thirds of the "damages" that a price of $1.5K would imply I understand that the company has to turn a profit, as the representative hastened to point out, hence --because I was looking to quickly sell --I would have been happy with a discounted price and I would have taken the low end of the phone assessmentBut no one wants to be taken utter advantage of More evidence of the corrupt attitude with which this company seems to be governed can be gleaned from earlier e-mails in which it is repeatedly alleged with confidence that both the inside and the outside of this vehicle were damaged severely enough that it would warrant a difference in assessments of $3K. The inside of this vehicle is -- and was then -- in perfect condition, just as new, while the outside does have a dent at the rear of the driver's side The dent on the driver's side was detailed minutely in a phone conversation before I came in, during which I was given the assessment that the car would be worth between $4.5K and $6.5K If evidence can help, such as photos of the car, taken around the date of the visual assessments, I'm happy to provide them
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
The assessment was from $to $6500, quite a large range and the vehicle under consideration has 65K miles on the engine and the only thing that could be considered damaged in this vehicle is that it has a scratch on the left rear side. The person at the shop obviously had the intention to reassess so that he could make a larger profit, perhaps thinking me gullible, but this vehicle is in very good shape and if you look at ads for comparable vehicles you would never find them under $anywhere and that only if the vehicle is in worse conditions than ours or has more miles on itHence the original, much more realistic assessment that lured me in. I see this as a clear bait and switch issue and I would be willing to get an independent assessment of our (since then unchanged) vehicle to settle the issue
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

Hi,     I would like to address the previous email directly but it seems that [redacted] and I are going in circles outlining our perspectives on this issue repeatedly.  Again I will state that he brought in a vehicle that was not in perfect condition that needed a certain amount of reconditioning.  His argument is that the vehicle did not need the amount of reconditioning we felt it needed.  We are a professional organization that has been in business for 38 years with an impeccable standing in both the community and with the Revdex.com.  We have made a business out of buying and selling vehicles, I'm not sure that [redacted] can say the same.  So while his perspective on his own vehicle is certainly valid, it may not be credible in the realm of actual cost.     There is no pressure on any customer to sell their vehicle to us, we can only offer our best possible price based on the information that the consumer gives us on the telephone or online.  If that information is not 100% accurate we cannot be held responsible for the price being different from the original quote.  We try our best to make every customer happy by offering fair pricing and beating our competitors pricing and we are very successful because of this premise.  If we had a standard practice of what [redacted] has described his experience to be, we would not have lasted 38 years in this industry and we would not have the impeccable record that we have with the Revdex.com.    We will continue to do business in a positive manner by assessing vehicles fairly and accurately and we will continue to maintain our excellent standing with the Revdex.com for many years to come.  As for resolution with [redacted], that is entirely up to him, we are willing to purchase his vehicle for a fairly assessed price if he decides to use our service in the future.     I hope this helps to clarify the matter in some way.      Thank you,[redacted]Managing Partner1-800 Car Cash

So I was finally able to speak to the appraiser [redacted] regarding this particular vehicle.   The vehicle in question was a 2009 Chrysler Pt Cruiser with 67054 miles.  The vehicle had a substantial amount of damage that we estimated to be over $2000.  We felt that the value...

was substantially less than the online appraisal because of the overall condition both inside and out.  We regret that the customer felt that we misled him in our assessment of his vehicle but we offered a value based on the condition that was presented to us.  I hope that helps clarify the situation.  Please contact me with any questions regarding this.   [redacted]

Review: I wanted to sell my 2009 PT cruiser with low mileage (67000) and minor dents and so I saw an advertisement online and followed the link; I received a quick online appraisal from this company suggesting that my car was worth between $4300 and $6700, quite a large range. Having talked to previous car sellers I was told that my car was worth about $5500 at the lowest estimate and so, realizing that instant cash was a convenience worth about $1000 to me at this moment I decided with my girl friend ahead of going down to the company that I would accept any offer over $4500. When I arrived, two men briefly walked around my vehicle and after seeing the aforementioned minor dent and a few other barely visible scratches, I was told that he would be happy to give me $1500 for my car. Of course I declined this offer and then he invited me to have a seat, after which he detailed all of the "issues" he would have to spend money on, including a detailing (throughout cleaning of the car, which he quoted at $200). After I was adamant that I would not sell my car for $1500, he offered $2000, which I think is an indication that he was aware of the inequity of his offer. I'm complaining because the whole ordeal wasted an hour of my time and more importantly, because I am afraid that these predatory methods of showing people quick cash might all too often be successful with less savvy people. Why should an old lady, for example, be legally robbed of $3000?Desired Settlement: Offer people the convenience of fast cash for a reasonable profit (i.e. $500 per car). The business should not quote a quick $4300 to $6700 and then offer $1500!

Business

Response:

So I was finally able to speak to the appraiser [redacted] regarding this particular vehicle. The vehicle in question was a 2009 Chrysler Pt Cruiser with 67054 miles. The vehicle had a substantial amount of damage that we estimated to be over $2000. We felt that the value was substantially less than the online appraisal because of the overall condition both inside and out. We regret that the customer felt that we misled him in our assessment of his vehicle but we offered a value based on the condition that was presented to us. I hope that helps clarify the situation. Please contact me with any questions regarding this. [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

[Your Answer Here]

The assessment was from $4500 to $6500, quite a large range and the vehicle under consideration has 65K miles on the engine and the only thing that could be considered damaged in this vehicle is that it has a scratch on the left rear side. The person at the shop obviously had the intention to reassess so that he could make a larger profit, perhaps thinking me gullible, but this vehicle is in very good shape and if you look at ads for comparable vehicles you would never find them under $4.500 anywhere and that only if the vehicle is in worse conditions than ours or has more miles on it. Hence the original, much more realistic assessment that lured me in. I see this as a clear bait and switch issue and I would be willing to get an independent assessment of our (since then unchanged) vehicle to settle the issue.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

[Your Answer Here]

Before I came to the place of business, I detailed over the phone the exact condition in which the vehicle was right at that date and then I came in and that same vehicle, which according to my description was assessed between $4.5K and $6.5K over the phone was visually assessed at $1.5K? I took the time to describe the car in great detail ahead of time. The reason for the difference in assessments was obvious to me: the company's representative was trying to take advantage of me; he even told me that cleaning the car would cost the company $250 and while the car had not just been detailed, it had been cleaned thoroughly a week before and I had driven it twice after that. There is no way that this company will pay anyone $250 to detail a car; the representative thought me stupid and desperate and so he made up costs that the company would have to bear. The costs that he piled on were completely unwarranted and clearly so to anyone who has any experience with cone artists, which unfortunately I do. There was nothing genuine about two thirds of the "damages" that a price of $1.5K would imply. I understand that the company has to turn a profit, as the representative hastened to point out, hence --because I was looking to quickly sell --I would have been happy with a discounted price and I would have taken the low end of the phone assessment. But no one wants to be taken utter advantage of. More evidence of the corrupt attitude with which this company seems to be governed can be gleaned from earlier e-mails in which it is repeatedly alleged with false confidence that both the inside and the outside of this vehicle were damaged severely enough that it would warrant a difference in assessments of $3K. The inside of this vehicle is -- and was then -- in perfect condition, just as new, while the outside does have a dent at the rear of the driver's side. The dent on the driver's side was detailed minutely in a phone conversation before I came in, during which I was given the assessment that the car would be worth between $4.5K and $6.5K. If evidence can help, such as photos of the car, taken around the date of the visual assessments, I'm happy to provide them.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

Hi, I would like to address the previous email directly but it seems that [redacted] and I are going in circles outlining our perspectives on this issue repeatedly. Again I will state that he brought in a vehicle that was not in perfect condition that needed a certain amount of reconditioning. His argument is that the vehicle did not need the amount of reconditioning we felt it needed. We are a professional organization that has been in business for 38 years with an impeccable standing in both the community and with the Revdex.com. We have made a business out of buying and selling vehicles, I'm not sure that [redacted] can say the same. So while his perspective on his own vehicle is certainly valid, it may not be credible in the realm of actual cost. There is no pressure on any customer to sell their vehicle to us, we can only offer our best possible price based on the information that the consumer gives us on the telephone or online. If that information is not 100% accurate we cannot be held responsible for the price being different from the original quote. We try our best to make every customer happy by offering fair pricing and beating our competitors pricing and we are very successful because of this premise. If we had a standard practice of what [redacted] has described his experience to be, we would not have lasted 38 years in this industry and we would not have the impeccable record that we have with the Revdex.com. We will continue to do business in a positive manner by assessing vehicles fairly and accurately and we will continue to maintain our excellent standing with the Revdex.com for many years to come. As for resolution with [redacted], that is entirely up to him, we are willing to purchase his vehicle for a fairly assessed price if he decides to use our service in the future. I hope this helps to clarify the matter in some way. Thank you,[redacted]Managing Partner1-800 Car Cash

Review: On July ** 2013 I sold my car to Carcash. [redacted] has a note on the vehicle (2009 [redacted] Mustang). Carcash gave me a check for $4472 and was to pay off [redacted] by 7/**/13 the balance owed in the amount of $5322.31. I call [redacted] today and they advised me that they have not received payment. My next payment to [redacted] iss due 8/*/13 and I am on the hook. I tried to call Carcash thiss morning and they are not anwering the phone. [redacted] at Carcash told be that he was going to Fedex the monies to [redacted] prior to 7/**/13. They alo charged me for the Fedex. I appericate your help. Thank you. [redacted]Desired Settlement: I wish for Carcash to overnight balance due to [redacted] prior to 8/*/13

Business

Response:

Sorry this took so long to resolute there were some issues on our end receiving the emails that were sent regarding [redacted] complaint.

On July [redacted] sold Car Cash a 2009 [redacted] Mustang with a balance of $5322.31 owed to [redacted] Motor Credit. Our payment to [redacted] Motor Credit did not go out until the [redacted] of August. Our usual policy is to wait 10 business days, obviously this was a complete oversight on our part. We purchase hundreds of cars every month and once in a while some of the deals are not given the attention they should be given. We offer [redacted] our sincerest apologies, we never meant to take any longer than our standard 10 business days to pay off any vehicle. We do a tremendous amount of business in a small location, we have made strides to rectify these situations which include a change in management and staff. Please accept this as resolution in the wake of our oversight. I am including a copy of the payment we made to [redacted] Motor credit as promised, it just took longer than it should have. if you have any questions please contact me at any point.