CarMax , Inc.

February 4, 2015[redacted]Revdex.com 720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, Virginia 23236Re [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]: Thank...

you for forwarding the complaint dated January 20, 2015 regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in [redacted], South Carolina (“CarMax”) on or September 11, 2014.  Mr. [redacted] requested that CarMax acknowledge an issue with the brakes and repair it at no cost.Mr. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax on or about October 9, 2014 to inquire about a check engine and tire pressure light staying on inside of the Vehicle.  CarMax diagnosed both concerns and made the necessary repairs.Mr. [redacted] brought the Vehicle back to CarMax on or about October 29, 2014 to readdress the check engine light concern and also mentioned a vibration and noise concern in the brakes when decelerating from higher speeds.  CarMax referred Mr. [redacted] to [redacted] for an ECM update to address the check engine light concern and resurfaced the front rotors to address the vibration concern in the brakes.CarMax offers a 6-month or 6,000-mile limited warranty on any services performed. CarMax encourages Mr. [redacted] to contact CarMax directly at [redacted] to schedule a service appointment and address the above concern.CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.Please contact me at [redacted] extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.Sincerely,[redacted]Analyst, Customer Relations

I spoke with [redacted] over the phone and pointed out that some information she acquired were incorrect or partially correct.  Most notably the fact we were pre-approved by [redacted] Auto prior to purchasing the [redacted].  I made that abundantly clear to the sales associate by sharing with him that we were pre-approved for a 2.49% loan and if Carmax could not match or beat it that we would pursue [redacted] instead.  I also mentioned to him [redacted] is just a service, middle man, out of California and checks can take up to 10 business days to be issued and proceeded to ask about the 3 day refinance rule.
The way things unfolded at a minimum shows poor training and bad management of the situation, and some unethical behaviors.  I did not speak to anyone at Carmax via phone or sign any paper allowing them to pull my credit, and I am dumbfounded to know my wife or anyone can speak on my behalf regarding something so personal.  I value my privacy and my financial health which in my opinion was put at risk that day.
Below is a table showing the charges I paid through Carmax and that I am once again paying through [redacted].  This includes the admin fee, license/tag, and of course the accrued interest rate for the period.  It is worth noting Carmax should receive a check from [redacted] soon as the check has already been issued.
[redacted]

Carmax
[redacted]

Car
 $     
26,998.00
 $28,251.32

Admin Fee
 $          
199.00
 $    
199.00

Taxes
 $          
815.91
 $           
-  

License/Tag
 $            
69.00
 $    
130.00

I do like to reach an agreement for the full financial burden incurred during this painful and time consuming process in the amount of $199 for the adm fee, plus the $69 for the license/tag and plus the interest rate.  However mostly I would like Carmax to admit its wrong doing, and at least admit there were mistakes on its procedure that day.
Kind regards,[redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's offer.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved. If the company does not perform as promised I can get back to you at: [redacted].
Regards,[redacted]

14 March 2014

[redacted], Operations
Supervisor
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia  23236
Re:      [redacted],
Complaint #[redacted]
          [redacted], VIN [redacted]
(the “Vehicle”
Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your
office from [redacted] regarding the above referenced Vehicle, purchased from
CarMax of Lithia Springs, Georgia (“CarMax”), on 26 August 2013.  In her complaint, [redacted] requests a
repair of the Vehicle at no charge to her under the terms of the 30-Day Limited
Warranty, stating that a current issue with the Vehicle is related to a
complaint that was reported to CarMax within that period of time.
A review of CarMax’s records indicates that on 4 September,
2013, CarMax inspected the Vehicle for a knocking sound as reported by [redacted].  A CarMax technician determined
that the knocking sound was related to the tires, and occurred when making
sharp turns, and that there were no repairable mechanical issues with the
Vehicle.  The Vehicle was then sublet to
another dealership for a second opinion. 
The dealership inspected the Vehicle and also determined that there were
no mechanical problems and no repairs were needed.   CarMax
has not had the opportunity to repair or service the Vehicle since that time,
and is not aware of any diagnosis of any concern that the Vehicle may have at
present.
If the Vehicle is in need of repair at this time, CarMax
would be happy to diagnose and repair it. 
However, as the 30-Day Limited Warranty has long expired, any repairs
would be at the expense of [redacted]. 
If she wishes to pursue a repair, she may call CarMax to schedule a
service appointment.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.  If you have any questions, please contact me
directly at [redacted] extension [redacted].
Sincerely,
[redacted]
CarMax Customer Relations

November 10, 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] complaint and providing us the opportunity to
respond.  Ms. [redacted] is unhappy that she
had a remaining balance on her account after experiencing a total loss on her
vehicle even though she had insurance and optional Guaranteed Asset Protection
(“GAP”).  She purchased the optional GAP Waiver
Agreement on December 8, 2011, in conjunction with the purchase of her vehicle
from our dealer affiliate.  [redacted]”) is the administrator of the GAP
Waiver Agreement.  In addition, she is
dissatisfied with the processing time for her GAP claim.  Further, she disputes the credit bureau
reporting and balance on her account.  The
relevant facts leading up to Ms. [redacted] complaint are as follows:
§  On May 14, 2014, we
received a call from Ms. [redacted] stating that her vehicle had been in an accident
and was declared a total loss by her insurance company.
§  As of the date of loss,
Ms. [redacted] was past due for her February, March, April, and May 2014 payments.
§  Ms. [redacted] made a
$500.00 payment on May 8, 2014, for her February payment. However, the payment
was returned for non-sufficient funds (“NSF”) on May 27, 2014.
§  On June 2, 2014, we
received a check from Nationwide Insurance in the amount of $7,544.88.  This payment was posted to Ms. [redacted]’s
account as of the date of loss; May 14, 2014.
§  On June 11, 2014, we
faxed the required finance company documents to [redacted]
§  We confirmed [redacted]
had all of the documents required from us on June 24, 2014.  However, [redacted] was waiting on documents
from Ms. [redacted].
§  The account was charged
off on June 30, 2014.
§  [redacted] received the
required documents from Ms. [redacted] in December 2014.
§  We received the GAP
check from [redacted] in the amount of $2,801.38 on January 6, 2015.   This payment was posted to Ms. [redacted] account
as of the date of loss; May 14, 2014.
The
above timeline reflects that we submitted Ms. [redacted] GAP documents within 9
days from the date we received the insurance check.  Any delay processing the GAP claim appears to
be due to [redacted] waiting for required documents from Ms. [redacted].
After
we applied the insurance and GAP proceeds, $2,965.25 principal balance remained
outstanding on Ms. [redacted] account. This amount includes the four payments that
were past due at the time of loss.  Since
that time, $821.67 of finance charges have accrued on Ms. [redacted] account.  Ms. [redacted] has an additional $64.80 in late
fees on the account.  Finance charges continue
to accrue until the balance is paid in full.  Ms. [redacted] does not believe she should be
responsible for any balance after the date of loss because she purchased GAP
and the vehicle was deemed a total loss.  However, the GAP Waiver Agreement specifies
that it will not cover unearned finance charges, payments due but unpaid,
deferred or extended payments, late charges, disposition fees, termination
fees, penalty fees, or other items added to the contract balance after
origination.  Nevertheless, in the
interest of customer service, we will waive the interest charges and the late
fees on the account totaling $886.47.
Upon
receipt of this complaint, we have again carefully reviewed the information we
are furnishing to the consumer reporting agencies and we have confirmed that
the information we are furnishing is accurate. 
We will continue to report her trade line as disputed.
If Ms. [redacted] would like
to discuss arrangements to pay her remaining balance of $2,965.25 to avoid
future interest charges from accruing she may contact [redacted], extension [redacted].  In the
meantime, if you need additional information regarding the above, please do not
hesitate to contact [redacted] extension [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.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I noticed that the response from Carmax said they fixed the front strut.  The only struts they ever fixed was the rear.  They never fixed the front because they said they couldn't find the leak that [redacted] found.Again, I would like to reassert the original complaint.  I took my car to [redacted] to get the initial diagnosis because I wanted the actual makers of the vehicle to have a look since they are the experts.  [redacted] advised that all 4 struts needed replacing and the right front strut also had a leak.  I took this information back to CarMax and showed them the [redacted] paperwork and they only fixed my back struts.  They never fixed the front struts as the analyst responded.  They also said they didn't see the leak that [redacted] had already confirmed.  That in no way means the leak didn't exist.  I truly believe they didn't want to fix the front struts as well because it would have been expensive.  They only did the back struts and Carmax doesn't have that documented either but they accepted Lexus' evaluation on that diagnosis.  Again they are only honoring certain repairs.

April 19, 2016
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re: Ms. [redacted]
Complaint ID...

[redacted]
2012 [redacted], VIN: [redacted] (the “Vehicle”)
Dear Mrs. [redacted]:
Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated April 4, 2016 regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana (“CarMax”) on or about March 11, 2016.  Ms. [redacted] requested in the desired settlement for CarMax to either take full return of the Vehicle or allow her to exchange the Vehicle for another.
CarMax reviewed Ms. [redacted]’ request and elected to take full return of the Vehicle.  However, CarMax attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] and Mr. Simmons (the primary owner of the vehicle) by phone on several occasions, but has been unable to connect.  CarMax left a voicemail at the time of each call.
If Ms. [redacted] and Mr. Simmons would like to accept CarMax’s offer to take full return of the Vehicle, they are encouraged to contact CarMax’s Line Production Manager, Patrick B[redacted], at (225)663-7292 ext. [redacted] within the next 10 business days.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint and considers this matter closed.
Please contact me at (804)747-0422 extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Nekia W[redacted]
Analyst, Executive Response Team

...

                                      March
13, 2015
 
Via Electronic Mail
 
[redacted], Operations Team
Leader
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, VA23236
 
Re: [redacted]
 
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
 
I am
writing in response to your letter which forwarded the complaint of [redacted]
[redacted]. On May 2, 2014, Ms. [redacted] purchased a [redacted], VIN [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), at the CarMax of Birmingham, AL.  In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is requesting a
vehicle that doesn’t have to be re-serviced for looked over issues such as
struts and worn parts.
 
Ms.
[redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax for a loud popping noise on July 2, 2014.  CarMax discovered that her struts needed to
be replaced.  CarMax replaced the struts
in July of 2014.  Ms. [redacted] brought the
Vehicle back for a squeaking noise while going over bumps on December 18, 2014
and February 17, 2015.  CarMax took the
Vehicle for a test drive on February 17, 2015 and was not able to duplicate the
concerns.  CarMax offered to reimburse
Ms. [redacted] for the deductible charge by another repair location should she
choose to obtain a second opinion.
 
CarMax
appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. If you have any
questions, please call me at [redacted], ext [redacted].
                                   
 
 
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Customer Relations Analyst

August 21, 2015
[redacted]...

[redacted]
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, VA 23236
RE:
[redacted]
[redacted] (“the Vehicle”)
Dear Mrs. [redacted],
            Thank
you for forwarding the response received in your office from Ms. [redacted] regarding
her purchase of the Vehicle from CarMax of Ellicott City, MD (“CarMax”) on April
28th, 2013.
CarMax has not serviced
the Vehicle since approximately June of 2013 for a remote key concern. Prior to
this visit, CarMax replaced the starter assembly of the Vehicle on April 30th,
2013 under Ms. [redacted] limited 30-Day Warranty. This repair included a
removal and replacement of the intake manifold gasket which Ms. Carroll
mentioned in her complaint.
CarMax has not seen the
Vehicle in over two years, and, as a result, cannot make a determination of the
cause for any engine failure. CarMax welcomes the opportunity to inspect and
repair the Vehicle at her expense.
In the event Ms. [redacted] would
like to sell the Vehicle to CarMax, she is welcomed to have it appraised. CarMax
will not provide Ms. [redacted] with the resolution she seeks as the 5-day
timeframe CarMax offers for returning the Vehicle has passed.
            Thank
you kindly for providing CarMax the opportunity to respond to this matter.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Analyst, CarMax Customer Relations

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer 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.
Carmax did not address the issue of not disclosing the a carfax to me during the initial sale of the previous [redacted] in 2012, nor did they disclose in print a [redacted] warranty end date (3-31-12) giving me a chance to get necessary repairs done at [redacted]. I took the car to [redacted] in April 2012 myself to see what the mechanical issue were, and there was a few too many to address financially. The sale of the car on 11-7-14 has nothing to do with resolving the issue of not disclosing the carfax the reported a car accident. As I stated previously, I would have never purchased the [redacted] if the carfax disclosed an accident, which Carmax did NOT! This issue arose as I attempted to trade in the 2008 at a [redacted] dealership on 10-27-14. Also it is irrelevant to discuss the trade in value from [redacted] (8,000) verse Carmax value (12,000) of the previous car. Carmax did not make any offer to fix their mistake. I was not able to get out of the 2008 vehicle due to a previous bankruptcy therefore, I believe Carmax should honor their mistake and at least refund the amount of the repairs on the [redacted] that I no longer own. 
Regards,[redacted]

September 21, 2016
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re: Mrs. [redacted]
Complaint ID...

[redacted]
2010 [redacted], VIN: [redacted] (the “Vehicle”)
Dear Mrs. [redacted]:
Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated September 2, 2016, regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Jacksonville, FL (“CarMax”) on or about January 7, 2016.  Based on the mechanical concerns experienced since owning the Vehicle, in addition to receiving the guidance that the Vehicle was involved in an accident prior to sale, Ms. [redacted] is requesting that CarMax to pay off the remaining balance of her loan.
CarMax’s records indicate that the Vehicle was brought in on three occasions for a popping noise and/or overheating concern: 1/15/16 - 2/3/16, 2/8/16 - 5/17/16, and 6/24/16 - 7/21/16.  On each occasion, CarMax sublet the Vehicle to the local [redacted] Dealership for repairs, and provided Mrs. [redacted] with a comparable loaner vehicle – all at no cost to her.  In addition to this, CarMax also offered to pay the expense of the three car payments as a gesture of customer service, due to the Vehicle being out of her possession during the above duration of time.
CarMax of Jacksonville, FL was not made aware of the Vehicle’s most recent concern until the receipt of this complaint.  However, upon further research, it was discovered that the Vehicle was repaired and returned back to Mrs. [redacted] on or about September 12, 2016, by CarMax of San Antonio, TX.  This concern was unrelated to the previous repairs performed by CarMax of Jacksonville, FL.  However, as an added gesture of customer service, CarMax again extended a loaner vehicle to Ms. [redacted] during the length of this repair, and also covered the amount of her deductible (from her Extended Service Plan).
In regards to Ms. [redacted]’ claim regarding the Vehicle having been in an accident, CarMax has no record of this – based on the AutoCheck Report provided to her at the time of sale, indicating that there were no signs of impact as it relates to the Vehicle.
Based on the above gestures offered to Mrs. [redacted], CarMax declines to honor her requested settlement.  However, CarMax would be happy to make her an offer on her Vehicle if she would like to have it appraised.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Please contact me at (804)747-0422 extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Nekia W[redacted]
Analyst, Executive Response Team

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer 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]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's offer.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved. If the company does not perform as promised I can get back to you at: [redacted].
Regards,[redacted]

The consumer reached out to the Revdex.com and stated the complaint was resolved

Roman';">                                  ...⇄ September 9, 2014
Via Electronic Mail
[redacted]
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, VA23236
Re: [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
I am writing in response to your letter which forwarded the complaint of [redacted]. On August 2, 2014, [redacted] transferred a [redacted], [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), to the CarMax of [redacted].  In his complaint, [redacted] is requesting that CarMax refund his $199.00 transfer fee.
Upon receipt of the Vehicle to CarMax in Cincinnati, [redacted] took the Vehicle for a test drive. During the test drive [redacted] stated that the Vehicle had a very hard shake.  CarMax service department inspected the Vehicle and there was no problem found.  [redacted] was told that CarMax would not be refunding his transfer fee. 
CarMax offered to continue to work with [redacted] to find him another vehicle.  [redacted] stated that he would only purchase the Vehicle if CarMax returned the transfer fee.  CarMax declines [redacted]’s request as set forth in his complaint. 
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. If you have any questions, please call me at [redacted], ext[redacted].
                                   
Sincerely,
[redacted]
[redacted]

July 9, 2016
[redacted]...

[redacted]                             
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re: [redacted]
Complaint ID: [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:                                  �...⇄
 
Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated June 18, 2016 regarding
the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Ontario, California (“CarMax”)
on or about July 25, 2015.
 
In the letter Ms. [redacted] describes concerns with the Vehicle’s
mass air flow intake system, PVC valve, and an issue related to the Vehicle’s
acceleration. Ms. [redacted] also expresses concerns regarding her MaxCare Extended
Service Plan, and the negative equity applied to the loan for the Vehicle.
 
CarMax’s records indicate that Ms. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to
CarMax on or about April 18, 2016 for a service appointment to address the mass
air flow intake system concern. Due to the Vehicle being within the applicable
miles and months for the manufacturer’s warranty, CarMax sublet the Vehicle to
a Nissan service center for the repairs. Service documents also indicate that Ms.
[redacted] brought the Vehicle back to CarMax on or about March 29, 2016, and on or
about May 3, 2016, for transmission concerns. CarMax sublet the Vehicle to the
Nissan service center on both occasions.
 
CarMax’s Operations Manager spoke with Ms. [redacted] on or around the
week of June 12, 2016. Notes from this conversation stated that Ms. [redacted] shared that there were no current mechanical concerns with the Vehicle at the
time of that conversation. Records also indicate that the previous repairs were
discussed at that time, in addition to an explanation of the negative equity
from her previous vehicle (as stated in her financing paperwork).
 
While CarMax is happy to appraise the Vehicle for Ms. Briggs, they
will not be participating in the buy back of the Vehicle or the request to pay
off the remaining loan for the Vehicle. Should Ms. [redacted] wish to bring in the
Vehicle for a no-pressure appraisal, she is welcome to visit [redacted] to
receive a written offer, which is valid for seven days.
 
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
 
Please contact me at [redacted], extension [redacted],
with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Kristina S[redacted]
Analyst, Executive Response Team

May 5th, 2014
name="OLE_LINK4">
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
Revdex.com
701 East Franklin Street
Richmond, Virginia23219
RE: [redacted] VIN: [redacted] (the “Vehicle”)
Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your office from [redacted] regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax of Henderson, Nevada (“CarMax”) on December 27th, 2012.  In his complaint, [redacted] shares his frustrations with the cost and amount of needed repairs to the Vehicle within the timeframe he has owned it.  Due to his frustrations, [redacted] is requesting that CarMax reimburse him and his wife all expenses they have paid associated with the repairs to the Vehicle.
CarMax’s repair history indicates the following:
On or about January 15th, 2013, CarMax repaired a brake concern, a radio and cd player  concern, and an issue with pumping fuel into the Vehicle under CarMax’s Limited 30-Day Warranty
On or about April 3rd, 2013, CarMax diagnosed a check engine light concern and a drivability concern associated with the check engine light concern.  CarMax did not complete the recommended repairs at this time.  However, CarMax did complete a recommended maintenance service during this repair visit.
On or about April 25th, 2013, CarMax did repair a motor mount concern and replaced the valve covers on the Vehicle under the [redacted] guidelines.
CarMax Management was unaware of any additional concerns prior to receipt of this complaint.  [redacted] is invited to contact the Service Manager of CarMax ([redacted]) to discuss the additional concerns listed in his complaint and determine if any options are available to assist. Thank you for providing CarMax an opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Analyst, CarMax

[redacted], Operations Team Leader
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, VA23236
Re: [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
 
I have emailed you a copy of the repair order that you requested.  Also, here is the information on standards you requested. 
There needs to be at least 2/32 of an inch difference in tread variation. Service manager stated that there was a slight cupping and the difference was immeasurable.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint. If you have any questions, please call me at [redacted], ext [redacted].
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Customer Relations Analyst

April 8, 2014

class="MsoNormal">
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
Revdex.com Serving Central Virginia, Inc.
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, VA23236
Re:  Complaint ID [redacted]
[redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
I am in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] on March 27, 2014 regarding a [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN [redacted], that was purchased at the CarMax store located in Raleigh, North Carolina (“CarMax”), on or about December 27, 2012.  [redacted] requested in her desired settlement a replacement vehicle.
[redacted] shares her frustrations that the Vehicle recently broke down in the complaint.  She had the Vehicle towed to CarMax of Raleigh, North Carolina on or about March 27, 2014.  CarMax recommended to have the Vehicle sent to [redacted] to have a diagnosis completed.  [redacted] declined the recommendation. 
CarMax met with [redacted] on or about April 1, 2014 to discuss next steps.  [redacted] authorized CarMax to have the Vehicle towed to [redacted] to complete the needed repairs. CarMax had the Vehicle towed on or about April 2, 2014.  The Vehicle is currently being repaired by [redacted].
[redacted] purchased a [redacted] (“[redacted]”) during the purchase of the Vehicle.  As a gesture of goodwill CarMax offered to cover [redacted] and [redacted] for her [redacted] related to this most recent service visit at [redacted].  [redacted] has accepted CarMax’s offer.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint and considers this matter resolved.
 
Please contact me at [redacted] extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Analyst, Customer Relations

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer 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 will be scanning and emailing supporting documentation per Revdex.com request.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]