CarMax , Inc.

October 2, 2015
 
[redacted]...

[redacted]                             
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
 
[redacted]
Complaint ID: [redacted]
 
Dear Ms. [redacted]:                                  �...⇄
 
Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated September 19, 2015 regarding
the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Laurel, Maryland (“CarMax”)
on or about February 18, 2015.
 
CarMax’s records indicate that Mr. [redacted] was issued a refund of $300.00 for his MaxCare extended service plan deductible
on or about September 19. 2015.  CarMax’s
records also indicate the refund was issued in the form of cash and was
presented to Mr. [redacted] in person.
 
 
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 bought a 2011 [redacted] from CarMax and was very pleased with my experience from the Sales team to the Finance team. This was the easiest car buying and selling experience I have ever had. I went in, sold my previous car to them and purchased another all within a couple hours. My salesman was by my side from the time I walked in, to the time I left. A week or so later my salesman called to make sure everything was going good with the car. After having the car a year I called the service department with a concern from a noise under the hood and was informed I was still under factory warranty so I needed to take it to [redacted] first. Within 3 days of that called I have had 2 different people from CarMax call to check on the car and to make sure I was able to get a [redacted] dealer to help me. What fast, friendly, and over all Great service!!.

July 26, 2016
[redacted]
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re: [redacted]
Complaint ID [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN:...

[redacted]
Dear Mrs. [redacted]:
I am writing in response to your letter dated July 8, 2016 wherein you forwarded a complaint from [redacted] regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Des Moines (“CarMax”) on or about December 11, 2014.
Mrs. [redacted] complaint is that she was confused by the coverage of the Guaranteed Asset Protection ("GAP") product she purchased.  She thought the product would cover her car payments if she became sick.  CarMax does not offer any such product and our processes for offering GAP are standardized and follow a specific flow within our sales transaction program.  In fact, when Mrs. [redacted] first brought this concern to our attention we conducted an investigation and concluded that no one misled Mrs. [redacted] into believing the product offered was for anything other than GAP, which would  cover the balance of her account if she incurred a total loss. 
Our standardized process for the presentation of the GAP product begins after a credit offer is selected.  This action prompts the system to display the screen introducing GAP.  The GAP screen explains, among other things, that a GAP Agreement pays the difference between what you owe and what insurance will cover in the event of a total loss.  Additionally, the screen displays the cost of GAP.  If the customer makes the choice to purchase GAP he or she does so on this screen. Following the Retail Installment Contract, the GAP Waiver Agreement is presented.  As the associate walks through the form they explain the coverage terms and advises customers to read the contract thoroughly to understand their obligations under the agreement, as well as their benefits.  It is important to note that this paperwork presentation is performed by someone other than the associate who first introduced the GAP product during the sales transaction, so if there was confusion by Mrs. [redacted] during the sales process, the business office associate would have been able to address this confusion at the time they were reviewing the GAP Waiver Agreement.  CarMax does not offer any product that would function as disability insurance, which seems to be what Mrs. [redacted] describes.
 Our records reflect that CarMax’s Customer Relations Department conducted an investigation of Mrs. [redacted]’s initial complaint regarding this issue between the dates of July 6, 2016 and July 8, 2016.  At that time we concluded that our standardized process was followed and provided the above explanation to Mrs. [redacted].   
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint and will honor Mrs. [redacted]’s request not to be further contacted back by the business.
Please contact me at [redacted] extension [redacted] with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Nekia W[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]
We would like to add to our case against CarMax in King of Prussia.  We received a notice saying we did not respond in a timely matter and the case was considered closed - we would like it to remain open.
 
As stated in the response from CarMax - we were given two options and we declined the appraisal.  This is not true - we did have the car appraised while it was still in need of a repair and CarMax told us we would have $8000 in negative equity which basically made it impossible for us to proceed in any other way - we had to have the engine repaired.
 
It took CarMax 30+ days to get the car back to us once we agreed to the engine repair.  We made at least one car payment in that time for a car we did not have in our possession.  We now have the car back.  The air conditioner is still not working properly (this has been a complaint of ours since we purchased the vehicle in September).  In addition, there is a live wire that rests at the driver's feet for no apparent reason - we have asked CarMax to look into this and all they do is tuck it under the foot mat.  We have now put electrical tape on it as a precaution.
 
We want to get out of this vehicle.  We went back to CarMax to have the car re-appraised this week.  CarMax now says the car is worth $17500 - which means we still have a negative equity of $3200.  We do not have $3200 to simply wipe that first loan away, so, we are forced to roll that into our next loan.  We have a strict budget and we cannot afford more than what we are paying on a monthly basis to CarMax finance for the Aspen ($381/mo).  This means we can only look at cars that are older with more mileage OR cars that are smaller with less features.
 
We are not happy with either option.  We bought the Aspen because of the size and features.  We sometimes transport my 65 year old mother-in-law and 89 year old grandmother-in-law who both require wheelchairs - we need a vehicle that fits 7 AND still has room for storage.  We feel like CarMax will be getting money out of us 2 times with the offer that is currently on the table.  They will make money off the first sale of the Aspen to us, they will make money off the resale of the Aspen to whoever comes in and buys it after we trade it in and they will make money off the sale of a new car to us.  Something doesn't seem right here.
 
Additionally, we did pay for half of the engine repair, we also paid to have the car inspected and new brakes were installed at that time.  We have been on time with all of our monthly car payments to CarMax finance.  We really want and need that negative equity not to be an issue!  We feel we should be able to get into a car of equal value to what we purchased in September (in size, price and features) for the same cost to us.
 
We want this case to remain open.  Please let us know if that is possible.
 
Thank you, [redacted]

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]
Carmax painted the front of the vehicle not just the bumper. This isnt a cosmetic paint job. The bumber and the section between the headlights by thehood all have been painted. To make it sound like a simple scratch and touch up. They just keep misleading the way they are describing it. I would have reconsider purchasing the vehicle if it was disclosed that the front had been repainted. I spoke to [redacted] he said the bumper had the front including the section between the lights had been painted. Why paint the whole front of a vehicle they are affecting the value of the car.

May 18, 2016
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re: Mr. [redacted]
Complaint ID...

[redacted]
2012 [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN: [redacted]
Dear Mrs. [redacted]:
I am writing you in response to your letter dated May 2, 2016 wherein you forwarded a complaint from Mr. [redacted], regarding the Vehicle located at the CarMax store located in Kennesaw, Georgia (“CarMax”).  Mr. [redacted] requested in the desired settlement for CarMax to refund him the amount that he paid to have the Vehicle transferred.  Additionally, Mr. [redacted] requested that CarMax repair or replace the items noted in the complaint, and then have the Vehicle transferred to the CarMax located in Chattanooga, Tennessee at no cost.
CarMax’s records indicate that shortly after the receipt of this complaint, CarMax agreed to honor Mr. [redacted]’s request as stated in the desired settlement.  However, after contacting Mr. [redacted] to inform him of this update (on or about May 17, 2016), Mr. [redacted] informed CarMax that he elected to purchase another vehicle from a facility outside of CarMax.  Therefore, CarMax was unable to fully meet Mr. [redacted]’s request, but has refunded him $199 for the amount that he paid to have the Vehicle transferred.
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint and considers this matter closed.
Please contact me at (855)562-4935 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.
I know it is closed but I wanted to respond to their response. They are saying that I had a daily interest loan. I was not aware that it was that type of loan. That was not told to me when I purchase the car that was the type of loan that I was getting. I thought my loan was a fixed rate for the life of the loan and that was what I was told that my payment would be for the life of the loan. It was not explained to me when I purchase that I had a daily interest loan should I have be aware of that when I purchased the car. They know if I had known that most likely I would have made that decision to buy with that type of loan. I think when they sale you merchandise they should explain that to you when you are making the purchase. I did not even now that that type of loan existed when purchasing cars. I know that ignorance of the law is no excuse but many time when you purchase stuff like that large items, an investment, it is explained to you all the stipulations that comes with that investment.
 
[redacted], [redacted],
[redacted]
[redacted] or contact me at [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.
CarMax's "offer" to resolve this is riddled with lies and inconsistencies. CarMax called me on February 15, 2016, at 10:50am. The call lasted 22 minutes at which time I was made no offer for a diagnosis of the problem. In fact, the woman I spoke with indicated that while she was going to bring my request for them to pay for a diagnosis to the "senior team" she did not believe they'd offer to cover these costs. I was then contacted again on February 16, 2016 at 10:05am, with a call that lasted for 40 seconds wherein it was confirmed, that the "senior team" would not offer to cover costs of the diagnosis of the problem, but would do the labor to diagnose the problem "cheaper than the dealer." Evidence of these calls is attached herein. I rejected this response as I do not believe I should be paying for the costs of diagnosis.
Should CarMax decide to be truthful and practice acceptable customer service practices, I'd be happy to have a diagnosis of the problem performed by the Volkswagen Dealer. The costs may be paid directly to the dealer by CarMax. Given their apparent willingness to be untruthful, even to the Revdex.com, I do not believe it would be in my best interests to trust their diagnostic team. This company is obviously willing to go to great lengths, including lying to third parties now, to not have to be liable for their misdeeds.
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.
Please investigate this further
Regards,
[redacted]

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]
I'm dissatisfied due to the action that was address to me because of fear that they can potential make the same error. However,I decided to go to a different party that I was able to trust. I believe it's unfair for me as a customer to have to pay for something that I did not damage. Especially so soon after I have purchased 7 months ago. I have submit a copy of my receipts of what was done and would like for Carmax to pay for those fees. 
Sincerely,
[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] The fact that I purchased two cars back to back that immediately needed repairs is unacceptable. Carmax is supposed to be the use car dealer that one can trust when buying a pre-owned car. I will state this: I do not accept your "offer" and I care little about returning to Carmax for any further business. I understand that even in the "professional" world that a "used car salesman" still cannot be trusted. Unfortunately now, should I even choose to return the vehicle for another vehicle or sell this one back for a refund of my down payment, my credit has been "dinged" in doing so much "business" with you all lately that I wouldn't even be able to take my money else where without having an ungodly interest rate. You would not be satisfied in my situation, my co-workers that I've told would not be satisfied with my situation, and above all I am not satisfied with my situation. Carmax has failed, utterly, what with me being a first time customer and it is not welcome. Your "offer" is offensive and does nothing for the stress Carmax has placed on me. I understand, though. It's all about the Benjamins. Customer service does not exist anymore these days. It's a façade. I regret ever doing business with Carmax and will I ever return. You have a great day.

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.
Thank you for the response however the information is not completely accurate. 
I had the vehicle appraised on 12/31 and the report advised that all the mechanical machinery was working efficiently. Only 10 days later, my car stopped and I had to get the transmission rebuilt completely. My mechanic advised that the converter was coming apart and the filter was stopped up. He also advised that there is no way all of these transmissions issues surfaced in the last 10 days. He advised that the issues should have been caught when I received an appraisal. If your company is unable to purchase the 'lemon' back, I will settle for the repairs and rental car expenses to be covered in the amount of $2000. Because of this issue, I had to take out a loan to pay for the vehicle repairs and rent a car until the repairs were completed. I am graciously asking Carmax to pay these expenses because the transmission problem should have been identified 10 days prior while the car was in your possession.
 
Regards,
[redacted]

May 9, 2014
Via Electronic Mail
[redacted], Operations Supervisor
Revdex.com
720 Moorefield Drive, Suite 300
Richmond, Virginia 23236
Re:  [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
     I am writing in response to your letter which forwarded the complaint of [redacted].
     On March 1, 2014 [redacted] purchased a [redacted], VIN [redacted] (the “Vehicle”) from CarMax in Ontario, California.  In his desired settlement he would like a replacement vehicle or monetary settlement.
     [redacted] stated the vehicle pulled to the left, then to the right and the transmission sometimes delays shifting.
     The vehicle was brought into CarMax with a list of concerns from [redacted].  We determined that there were issues that needed to be corrected.  Repairs were completed.  We also identified the one concern could not be identified, the transmission problem.  We also sent the vehicle to [redacted] to review.  They found nothing wrong. 
     CarMax does decline [redacted] request to replace the vehicle or monetary settlement.
     If you have any questions, please contact me at [redacted], extension [redacted].  Thank you for providing CarMax with an opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Sr. 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 reject the suggestion than an adequate effort to cure this deficiency was offered while I was in the sales room. While the transfer fee was refunded the day I visited the show room, it was not until days after that any remedy other than a fee refund was offered.  CarMax clung to their notion of "integrity" while telling me with a straight face than a 30% error in mileage had no impact on the car's sale value. This simply would not work in a private transaction and CarMax should be held to the same accuracy standards in odometer reporting, and hence vehicle valuation, as others are.
Regards,
[redacted]

July 19th, 2016[redacted]Revdex.com720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23236RE: Juan [redacted]Dear Mrs. [redacted],     ...

      Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your office from Mr. [redacted] regarding his attempt to purchase the Vehicle from CarMax of Beaverton, OR (“CarMax”). In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] requested reimbursement of the $899 transfer fee that he paid CarMax charged for the Vehicle transfer.            CarMax initiated the transfer of the Vehicle from Tinley Park, IL to Beaverton, OR on approximately June 11th, 2016. The Vehicle arrived well within the 28-day time period communicated to Mr. [redacted]. At the time the Vehicle arrived, CarMax completed an appraisal on a vehicle Mr. [redacted] wished to trade in for the Vehicle. A competitive offer was made however Mr. [redacted] declined CarMax’s offer.             CarMax will not be participating in Mr. [redacted] requested settlement as the transfer fee is a non-refundable charge used for the transport of the Vehicle to a location more convenient for Mr. [redacted]. Additionally, CarMax does not make or guarantee the amount of any appraisal offer over the telephone.If Mr. [redacted] has any questions about this offer, 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]
[redacted]

January 28, 2015

class="MsoNormal"> 
[redacted]
Revdex.com
[redacted]
Richmond, VA 23236
 
Re: [redacted]
Dear Mrs. [redacted],
Thank you for forwarding the complaint 10395167 received in your office from Miss [redacted] regarding the experience that she and her boyfriend, [redacted], had on or about January 7, 2015 at the CarMax store located in [redacted], Alabama (“CarMax”).  In this complaint, Miss [redacted] alleges that a generator was stolen from her boyfriend, [redacted]’s, [redacted] truck, (“the Vehicle”) while shopping for a vehicle.
According to our records, Miss [redacted] had a 2008 [redacted], [redacted], appraised during the CarMax visit on or about January 7, 2015.  During the visit, the Vehicle was parked in the customer parking lot when the alleged theft occurred.  CarMax advised Miss [redacted] and her boyfriend to file a police report, as this is a criminal matter that would have to be addressed with the police.   CarMax managers attempted to call Miss [redacted] to follow up on the matter with no return phone calls.  CarMax Operations Manager and the Location General Manager reviewed the cameras on 3 separate occasions: on or about January 8, 2015, a week later when Miss [redacted] and her boyfriend came into CarMax interested in a [redacted], and when CarMax was contacted by the [redacted] Police Department.  On each occasion, CarMax was not able to identify anything in relation to the theft claim.  CarMax shared this information with Miss [redacted] as well as the [redacted] Police Department.
CarMax regrets Miss [redacted]’s experience and will continue to cooperate fully with the [redacted] Police Department.  
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

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.Since I did not purchase a vehicle from them because of the events I described above, I would like for the [redacted] Auto Loan that they applied for be closed and to be refunded the $2592.00 that my Auto Loan has increased as a result of their unethical business tactics.[redacted] Auto Finance is the lender that we decided would be best when I spoke with the CarMax sales representatives.  Even though they needed verification of income, bank accounts which would have been supplied if I hadn't had such a bad experience from this dealership.  My husband and I then drove up to [redacted], NY and purchased a vehichle from [redacted].  [redacted] completed a credit application for us, the same that CARMAX had, we chose to use [redacted] Auto Finance as it was a better rate but come to find out they were not allowed to finance me through [redacted] because CARMAX owned the rights to the initial credit application, even though I did not purchase a vehicle from them...  The monthly amount I was quoted by CARMAX for a more expensive vehichle(without warranty) was $100 less a month then I am paying now for a 3 year $4,500 warranty.  Please see attachments of [redacted] Auto Finance letter for CARMAX and my monthly bill with Chrysler Capital that I had to settle for because of the position I was put in by CARMAX. Also CARMAX records their telephone conversations, please submit and review those as well.
Regards,[redacted]

December 19, 2014
Roman"> 
[redacted]
Revdex.com
[redacted]
 
RE:  [redacted]
        [redacted]  VIN [redacted] (“the Vehicle”)
 
Dear [redacted],
 
Thank you for forwarding this complaint received in your office from [redacted] [redacted] regarding the Vehicle purchased from CarMax of[redacted],[redacted] (“CarMax”) on 6/22/13. [redacted] references a transmission failure and is requesting that CarMax pay the full amount of the repair on the Vehicle.
 
Upon purchase of the Vehicle on 6/22/2013, all fluid levels were satisfactory and within CarMax standards. After [redacted]’ initial complaint on or about 10/13/2014, CarMax had a third party, [redacted], inspect the Vehicle.  [redacted] stated that there was very fresh transmission fluid present, which would suggest it had been changed since the time of purchase. CarMax had not serviced the vehicle in about 8 months and has never completed any transmission work on it. Additionally, CarMax had not been informed of any transmission concerns that [redacted] had on the Vehicle. CarMax has assured [redacted] that if the Vehicle had experienced a lack of lubrication or lack of fluid; the Vehicle would have needed service at some point in the approximately 16 months of ownership (and we do not know mileage when vehicle was looked at by [redacted]) before this was brought to our attention.
 
Per[redacted], it is suggested that this Vehicle have manual transmission fluid replaced every 60,000 miles. During CarMax’s reconditioning process, the transmission and fluid were inspected. CarMax found no issues present in the transmission or the fluid. The customer has since had possession of the Vehicle without transmission concerns mentioned to CarMax since the sale on 6/22/2013.
 
CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond; however, CarMax is declining the settlement request as set forth in this complaint. CarMax will not be assisting with any repairs on the Vehicle’s transmission. Please call me at ([redacted])[redacted]-[redacted], extension[redacted], if you have any questions.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
[redacted]
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.
Basically, I don't think this car was ready to sell when I purchased it.  After driving it for two weeks, I returned it for repairs at the CarMax service department.  They kept the car for another two weeks, but were unable to complete the repairs to my satisfaction.
By the time the car was returned to me, it was out of warranty.  Also, I discovered that in addition to the original set of problems, the car leaks water when it rains and the engine now runs erratically at certain speeds.
I feel that a car, especially a late-model [redacted], should provide years of trouble-free service.  This car has numerous ongoing problems and does not meet either my own expectations nor the stated measures of quality of CarMax.  In my opinion, CarMax should offer a refund.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:Thank you for responding to my complaint. I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and would like to provide the following update:
This morning marks 114 days of ownership, and 75 days in the shop. At this point, I have been in constant daily communications with both CarMax Corporate and their Laurel MD location. At this point, we've pretty much decided that the car is unrepairable and are giving up on it. CarMax is in the process of locating another car from their inventory as a replacement, and are processing a full return of the one listed in this complaint. With any luck, we'll be able to solve the situation, as we can't seem to fix the car. 
I would like to leave this case open until that final resolution has been reached, however. 
Regards,
[redacted]