CarMax , Inc.

Review: I purchased this vehicle January 30,2016 (Saturday), The check engine light came on the very next day(Sunday) January 31,2016. CarMax gave a free 3 month onstar deal with this vehicle. I contacted Onstar about the check engine light and they told me it was an emissions problem. I made sure it was not a false alarm from the gas tank (Even though I had not touched the gas cap/tank at all)...I was told by the Onstar engine check that the car definitely had a mechanical engine. CarMax's mechanics section was closed Sunday, January 31,2016, So I took the vehicle Monday February 1,2016. They checked the vehicle in for the following problems :1) Non- OEM drivers side mirror had fallen off within a day of driving the vehicle. 2) The emissions problem that had triggered the check engine light to come on. 3) Engine Coolant light was coming on. The repair section gave me a rental Monday morning (February 1,2016) to use while my vehicle was being repaired. I was told that the vehicle would be ready no later than Wednesday February 3,2016. The same day I was issued a rental car, the Rental Car broke down. My car sat unitil Friday. I was told that the check engine light was "reset" (But the problem was not fixed and I knew it). Picked up my vehicle Saturday ,February 6,2016. The Check engine light came on AGAIN Monday , February 8,2016. I called Onstar and was given TWO codes that the vehicle was giving (1 of the 2 is the same code I gave CarMax the first time) back. I stopped by the GM dealership, since the vehicle also has a Airbag RECALL, To verify these codes and the codes were valid, per GM's Check. I dropped the car off Monday Night February 8,2016. I was given another rental, which ended up leaking oil all over my garage and had to take the rental back... I received a phone call Friday February 12th stating the cars part was there and the vehicle would be worked on.Now the vehicle will not be worked on until Wednesday. Ive driven my car 3 days out of the 20.. Continued...Location: Sanford, FloridaMake: [redacted]Model: [redacted]Owner/Co-Ownder? YesDesired Settlement: I would like my 30 day warranty re-instated... I have driven the car 3 days out of 20 days. The car has sat for 5 days @ a time at this location untouched. I would also like my [redacted] Reset for 3 months, since I have not been able to use the feature from sitting at the car dealership. My Vehicle has sat at this place untouched for 2 weeks and still has not been returned. I was told Friday February 12,2016 that the parts were going to be ordered and my car would be worked on By Monday February 16,2016. I received a phone call Monday February 16,2016 and was told that the parts were just getting ordered and that my vehicle would not be worked on until February 17,2016(Wednesday). I feel like the way the warranty is issued, and the way the mechanics work, actually screw the customer. I have driven my car a total of 3 times , since purchasing and the vehicle has sat at this dealership 20 days of my initial 30 days... I would like the Warranty re-instated......

Business

Response:

February 23, 2016

[redacted],

Operations Supervisor

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Re: [redacted]

Complaint ID: [redacted]

[redacted] (the “Vehicle”),

VIN: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated February 16, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Sanford, Florida (“CarMax”)

on or about January 30, 2016.

In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] describes concerns with the

Vehicle’s check engine light, passenger side sun visor, and engine coolant

light. Mr. [redacted] requests that the 30-day limited warranty for the Vehicle

be reinstated and the OnStar trial reset for the full 3 months.

CarMax is working to address the mechanical concerns on the Vehicle

as quickly as possible. According to CarMax’s records, CarMax experienced

difficulty in sourcing the parts necessary to complete the repair. The service

department has been in regular communication with Mr. [redacted] during this

time. CarMax previously offered an extension to the 5-day Money-Back Guarantee due

to the delays with the repair. CarMax’s records indicate that Mr. [redacted]

elected to keep the Vehicle and will be returning to the service department for

additional repairs as soon as the sun visor clip arrives. Per Mr. [redacted]’s

request, the 30-day limited warranty will be extended to reflect time the

Vehicle was at the service center.

If Mr. [redacted] elects to purchase a subscription to OnStar

services, CarMax will reimburse the cost of one month of service. To receive

this reimbursement, Mr. [redacted] will need to submit a receipt for the expense

to the CarMax service department.

CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.

Please contact me at (800)519-1511, extension [redacted],

with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Kristina [redacted]

Analyst, Executive Response Team

Consumer

Response:

[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.]

I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted]( for the warranty to be reset for 30 days), 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,

Review: I bought a car from Carmax in March of 2012, and recently learned that there was a salvage brand issued on the car BEFORE I bought it from Carmax. The branded title was reported in New Mexico in January 2011. Carmax and New Mexico DMV have told me this is an erroneous brand, but it's still showing up on my cars history, and now I can't sell my vehicle. I took the car to a Carmax dealership to try to resolve the issue.... They pretty much told me it was my problem. I have a carfax that shows the vehicle was branded titles before Carmax even bought it. Either someone in New Mexico DMV screwed something up, or Carmax mistakenly sold a salvaged vehicle, or both. I can't do anything with the car, and I paid good money for it. How do I know that I haven't been driving around a vehicle that could have a major problem with it? How do I know that the next Carmax car I buy won't have the same issue? The Carfax I have says this is Carmax's problem. I want a refund on this vehicle.Location: Albuquerque NMMake: [redacted] Model: [redacted]Owner/Co-Ownder? NoDesired Settlement: I want Carmax to give me my money back and take this car back.

Business

Response:

April 22,

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 Orlando, Florida (“CarMax”) around April, 2012. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states that he

recently learned that the Vehicle’s title had been branded as salvaged. Mr. [redacted] states that because of this, he is

unable to sell his vehicle, and would like CarMax to buy back the Vehicle.

CarMax’s Clean Title Guarantee

ensures that at the time of sale a CarMax vehicle has never been designated as

salvage. According to research completed

by CarMax, a salvage branding was placed on the Vehicle’s title on approximately

October 16, 2012. According to this

research, CarMax understands that the salvage branding was entered as a result

of an administrative error.

Out

of customer service, CarMax is working in partnership with the appropriate agencies

in order to have the salvage branding removed from the title. CarMax’s records

indicate that a manager last contacted Mr. [redacted] on April 22, 2016 to provide

an update on this process.

On April 3, 2016, CarMax appraised

the Vehicle and provided a written offer for the Vehicle. According to CarMax records, the salvage

title did not influence the offer made for the Vehicle.

CarMax

is unable to buy back the Vehicle, as it meets our clean title standards, and

is outside the 5-Day Money-Back Guarantee.

If Mr. [redacted] has any additional

questions, or would like to discuss this concern further, he may contact me at

1-800-519-1511 ext. [redacted].

Sincerely,

Jennifer

L[redacted]

Analyst,

CarMax Customer Relations

Review: I HAVE HAD ISSUES WITH THIS VEHICLE SINCE DAY ONE. AT FIRST THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT WAS VERY HELPFUL BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS AN ISSUE EVERY WEEK OR SO THEY BEGAN IGNORING MY CALLS AND MY LETTER DATED JANUARY 28, 2016. AS OF TODAY'S DATE I HAVE PAID FOR A TRANSMITTER AND PROGRAMMING THAT WAS PROMISED TO ME, PRICE AT $163.43 AND TIRE PRESSURE SENSOR LIGHT DIAGNOSIS THAT I WAS TOLD WAS TAKEN CARE OF AT $115.00. THIS VEHICLE NEEDS 5 SENORS AND MY LIMITED WARRANT PLUS MY EXTENDED WARRANTY REFUSES TO PAY FOR THESE NOTED REPAIRS THEREFORE, THIS COMPLAINT IS JUSTIFIABLE DUE TO THE UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNETHICAL PRACTICES OF YOUR BUSINESS.Location: 1000 SOUTH FLOWER STREETMake: [redacted]Model: H3Owner/Co-Ownder? YesDesired Settlement: REFUND OF MONEY ON OUT OF POCKET EXPENSES ON NECESSARY REPAIRS AND CURRENT REPAIRS NEEDED ON VEHICLE ASAP.

Consumer

Response:

Please find that within the 5 day option of returning the car I brought the car in and was given a rental (model: charger) in October prior to Dec. repairs and I was assured that everything was fixed (thermostat, tire pressure sensor, and sidings) so that I would not return the vehicle. This is the big issue... After the last repair in Dec. CARMAX Service department refused to return my call; Ernesto who was actually helping at first refused my calls and therefore I had my repairs done at the nearest Dealer.

Business

Response:

April 22, 2016

[redacted],

Operations Supervisor

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Re: Ms. [redacted]

Complaint ID 11234156

2007 [redacted], VIN:

[redacted] (the “Vehicle”)

Dear Mrs. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated March 14, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Burbank, California

(“CarMax”) on or about October 12, 2015.

Ms. [redacted] requested in the desired settlement for CarMax to reimburse

her the cost that she paid to obtain and program a new key fob, in addition to

the cost that she paid to have the tire pressure monitoring system diagnosed by

a Chevrolet dealership. Ms. [redacted] also

requested in the desired settlement for CarMax to reimburse her the cost that

she will soon have to pay to repair or replace five tire pressure sensors on

the Vehicle.

Ms. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax on or about October 15,

2015 to inquire about a noise, jerking concern, check engine light and gas

seal. CarMax diagnosed and repaired each

concern at no cost to Ms. [redacted], under the terms of the Limited Warranty.

Ms. [redacted] later brought the Vehicle back to CarMax on or about

December 3, 2015 to inquire about a check engine light, tire pressure light and

high beam light concern. Ms. [redacted] was

outside of CarMax’s 6-month or 6,000 mile warranty at the time of this

visit. However, as a gesture of customer

service, CarMax diagnosed the Vehicle and made the necessary repairs at no cost

to Ms. [redacted]. All of these repairs

were new concerns, unrelated to the initial visit on or about October 15, 2015. CarMax does not have any record of being in

communication with Ms. [redacted] after this last visit on or about December 3,

2015, but was later informed about her outstanding concerns via the receipt of

this complaint.

Based on CarMax not having been in

communication with Ms. [redacted] since her last appointment date and due to the

fact that Ms. [redacted] was outside of CarMax’s 6-month of 6,000 mile warranty at

the time of her next visit to the Chevrolet dealership, CarMax is declining Ms.

[redacted]’s request to be reimbursed for the repair and diagnosis of the tire

pressure sensors. In addition, CarMax is

also declining Ms. [redacted]’s request to be reimbursed for the cost that she

paid for a new key, as this was not a previously discussed concern between

CarMax and Ms. [redacted].

CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint

and considers this matter resolved.

Please contact me at (804)747-0422 extension

[redacted] with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Nekia W[redacted]

Analyst, Executive Response Team

Review: Brought car in for oil change and upon leaving the facility the air conditioning was not cooling. I was dismissed and requested to speak with a supervisor. They refused to evaluate the problem at that time and set an appointment 2 weeks later. I was told they could not have had anything to do with the problem despite having worked on the car with subsequent malfunction of the Ac. Cause and effect and timing was readily apparent. The fact that they were dismissive and refused to check their work in a timely manor is poor customer service. On return they again were dismissive and delayed checking the car. They should be more conscientious of their work and more courteous and helpful to customers. Poor service overall. I just need them to evaluate and repair whatever problem occurred at the time of their servicing my car.Desired Settlement: Repair my air conditioning and offer addition oil changes and service as restitution for my inconvenience and poor cooling for 2 weeks in 100 degree temperatures

Business

Response:

August

2, 2016

720

Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond,

VA 23226

RE: [redacted]

Dear

Mrs. [redacted],

Thank

you for forwarding the complaint received in your office from [redacted] regarding the Vehicle purchased from CarMax of San Antonio, TX (“CarMax”)

on November 30, 2015. In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] states that the Vehicle’s

air conditioning failed after having the oil changed by CarMax, and requests

that CarMax repair the air conditioning and provide him complimentary oil

changes as restitution.

According

to CarMax records, Mr. [redacted] brought the Vehicle in for an oil change on

July 26, 2016. CarMax completed the oil

change and returned the Vehicle to Mr. [redacted] the same day. A manager spoke with Mr. [redacted] about his

concern with the air conditioning and scheduled the next available appointment,

which was August 9, 2016.

On

August 9, 2016, CarMax inspected the Vehicle and found that the air conditioner

was operating as designed. CarMax did discover that the Vehicle was about

.10lbs low on Freon, and recharged the system at no cost to Mr. [redacted]. Additionally, a CarMax service member

measured the air conditioning temperature alongside Mr. [redacted] and also

explained the functionality of the recirculation button, which was found to be

off at the time of service.

A

member of CarMax management placed a follow-up call to Mr. [redacted] on August

11, 2016 to discuss his experience. Mr.

[redacted] advised that he would need to return the phone call at a more

convenient time. CarMax considers the

air conditioning concern to be fully resolved, but is also happy to discuss Mr.

[redacted]’s experience further with him if he would like.

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]

Sincerely,

Jennifer

L[redacted]

Analyst,

CarMax Customer Relations

Review: On date of purchase, 8/14/2014, the salesman misrepresented financing information that I used to base my decision on to purchase my car at a higher payment. I was told I could accept a lower payment around $500 or finance in the GAP Insurance and Extended Service Agreement (ESA) for a higher payment of $724.50 that could be reduced to the lower payment later if I decided to cancel the GAP and ESA or refinance the [redacted] loan with [redacted]. With that understanding and without any disclosures that said otherwise, I accepted the terms of the loan only to find out 2 months later, Santander does not refinance loans and cancellation of the GAP and ESA lowers the principle only, not the payment, even the the GAP and ESA were the cause for the increased payment - the payment will not change regardless of cancellation. As a result, I have been fooled into the higher payment and stuck with it if I am not able to refinance the car soon. Since the car is a 2007, every year its more difficult to refinance it because finance companies do not want to refinance cars older than 8 years. Since CarMax offered a low appraisal on my trade in and financed most of the trade in value with the Jaguar's cost plus GAP and ESA at a 25% interest rate, the payoff exceeds the value of the car and as a result, a finance company is not willing to offer enough to cover the payoff. The difference will need to be paid in cash that creates hardship since my payments are high as a result ofall that was financed in with the loan. CarMax says its not their fault and [redacted] refuses to lower the payment and blames CarMax for misrepresenting the finance information. As a result, I am stuck with a rediculously highcar payment because of what I feel is misrepresented information provided by the salesman at CarMax. I feel they are responsible and should help me to get the lower payment promised for the car I purchased. I feel tricked into a bad loan.Location: Sawmill Road, Columbus, OH 43235Make: [redacted]Model: Vanden PlasOwner/Co-Ownder? YesDesired Settlement: Cash Settlement of $4K to be paid toward the principle on the 2007 Jaguar loan with [redacted] to make it possible for me to refinance the car with another finance company willing to approve a lower payment I would have had if the CarMax salesman had been honest with me about the loan in the beginning at the point of sale.

Business

Response:

April 22, 2016

[redacted],

Operations Supervisor

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Re: Ms. [redacted]

Complaint ID: [redacted]

2007 [redacted] (the “Vehicle”), VIN: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated April 8, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Columbus, Ohio (“CarMax”)

on or about August 14, 2014.

In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] describes concerns with reimbursement

for the cancellation of her MaxCare extended service plan and GAP policy, as

well as the appraisal value for the car she previously traded in. She requests

that CarMax pay $4,000 toward the principal balance for her loan to decrease

her monthly payment amount moving forward.

CarMax’s records indicate that Ms. [redacted] connected with both the

Columbus Sawmill location and the Customer Relations department regarding her

concerns on or about March 28, 2016. Company records state that it was

discussed with Ms. [redacted] that any reimbursement resulting from the

cancellation of her MaxCare extended service plan and GAP policy would be

applied toward the principal balance for her loan, and would not decrease her

monthly payment for the Vehicle. Information regarding the cancellation of

these policies is also included in the contracts Ms. [redacted] signed at the time

of purchase.

To ensure customers receive the best financing options, CarMax

offers three business days to refinance from the date of sale, penalty- and

interest-free. As the Vehicle has now been owned by Ms. [redacted] for longer than this

period, any decisions regarding loan payment adjustments or refinancing are at

the discretion of her lienholder. CarMax’s records note that Ms. [redacted] was recently

presented with the option to have the Vehicle appraised, and to look into

available vehicles that better fit her desired payment amount. While CarMax is

unable to participate in the requested cash settlement, Ms. [redacted] is

encouraged to connect with the sales department for additional questions or to

schedule an appraisal by calling CarMax Columbus Sawmill at 614-799-8077.

CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.

Please contact me at (800)519-1511, extension [redacted],

with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Kristina S[redacted]

Analyst, Executive Response Team

Review: Paid for transfer fee $249 + tax after informed of finance offers for specific vehicle on 05/27/16, they processed payment immediately but never transfered car. After call in on 06/19/16, they admitted to it never being put on the carrier for transfer. After two more weeks of waiting, it arrived ready for me to see on 07/01/16. After driving it and confirming my decision to buy, they ran my financing again because due to their neglegence the finance offer expired. . My inactivity of credit suddenly got me a rate that was over double the apr initially offered by the same lender. The salesman saI'd they could manually enter it to accommodate their mistake and finally refund my transfer fee. NOW, they are refusing to accommodate my original finance offer and told me to find another vehicle even though I have communication proof stating my options from the first finance offer.Location: Make: Model: Owner/Co-Ownder?

Business

Response:

July 14,

2016

720

Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond,

VA 23226

RE: [redacted]

[redacted] VIN: [redacted] (“the

Vehicle”)

Dear Mrs.

[redacted],

Thank you

for forwarding the complaint received in your office from [redacted] regarding

the Vehicle transferred to CarMax of Albuquerque, NM (“CarMax”) on May 27, 2016.

In the complaint, Ms. [redacted] states that on May 27, 2016, she completed a

finance application for the Vehicle and paid to have it transferred. She explains there was a delay in having the

Vehicle transferred, which resulted in the expiration of a favorable finance

offer. Ms. [redacted] would like for CarMax

to honor the original finance offer, which she received on or around May 27,

2016.

CarMax has

assisted Ms. [redacted] with obtaining approval for the original financing offer,

and is happy to report that she has since purchased the Vehicle.

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

Consumer

Response:

Carmax went through hoops with the finance companies and got their corporate office involved for the favorable resolution. The salesman (Carl M.) was beyond outstanding. I am very appreciative of their dedication to my satisfaction as a customer. The vehicle is what I expected and what was advertised. I got the best warranty deductible at $50 and GAP coverage which added to my monthly payment but that was to be expected. HUGE THANKS TO THOSE INVOLVED. [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.]

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,

Review: I purchased this vehicle on February 12, 2016 and at that time I was told that the car had been fully inspected. I called on February 17, 2016, as I was told I had 5 days to advise of any issues with the vehicle that would be of no cost to me to repair, and advised: there was noise when I would come to a stop as if the brakes needed to be replaced and there was a popping or clicking sound in the front passenger tire area whenever I make a right turn. I took my vehicle in for service on February 26; when I dropped it off I told Gretchen that on my way there I also noticed a rattling noise coming from the hood. I was told that after the initial inspection that same day that there was a part that was rubbing against the brakes that was causing that sound but that it had been adjusted and the brakes did not need to be changed. I was also told that an alignment was done, which was not, to fix the popping/clicking sound that I was hearing in the front of the vehicle. On March 2, I received a call from Gretchen advising that the car was sent out for the rattling noise in the hood area. I received several calls after that advising that the hood issue was still not fixed and had to be sent back a few times. eventually being told that my vehicle would have to go to a body shop for the hood issue to be taken care of. I returned the loaner vehicle and took my vehicle home on March 8th. About 1 month later I started to notice the popping/clicking sound again in the front of the vehicle and a screeching noise in the rear. I called and scheduled for service again and was told that I would not get a loaner because that is only available for the first 30 days after purchase. I could not keep that apptmt as I did not have another running vehicle at the time. Forward to today when I took my vehicle in, I am being told that I will have to pay $499 for brakes and rotors to be replaced because that is the noise that I keep hearing.Location: Make: Model: Owner/Co-Ownder? Desired Settlement: I have expressed my concern with the supervisor of the service department, I have not received a call back yet. I don't feel that I should be paying for something that should have been taken care of when I initially took the vehicle in for service. Not to mention the fact that I am certain that the popping/clicking sound I hear in the front is a ball joint issue and I am afraid that if I keep riding on it this way the tire will eventually fall apart. I find it interesting that when I called this time I told them that my check engine light had come on and I took it to advance auto as soon as it did and was advised that it was the O2 sensors that were bad. I keep being told that if the service person cant duplicate the problem it wont be fixed, however, I was told the same thing about the O2 sensors when I spoke w/ David and my check engine light was not on when I dropped the vehicle off today. It's as if my concerns mean absolutely nothing and that is bad business!

Business

Response:

July 5, 2016

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 8, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Columbus, Ohio (“CarMax”)

on or about February 12, 2016.

In the complaint Ms. [redacted] describes concerns with a popping or

clicking sound in the Vehicle’s brakes and rotors, in additional to a rattling

concern coming from the front end of the Vehicle. Ms. [redacted] also mentions an

unreturned call from a member of CarMax’s service management team and requests

that CarMax repair the Vehicle at no additional cost to her.

CarMax’s records state that the service department corrected the

Vehicle’s alignment and the hood noise concern at Ms. [redacted]’ appointment on

or about February 26, 2016. Service notes indicate that Ms. [redacted] returned

for another appointment on or about June 8, 2016, during which one of the

Vehicle’s O2 sensors, ball joints, upper control arms, and alignment were

addressed under the terms of her MaxCare Extended Service Plan.

Ms. [redacted] later contacted a member of CarMax’s service

management team on or about June 9, 2016 to readdress concerns with the

Vehicle’s brakes and rotors. As a gesture of goodwill, CarMax offered to

replace the front rotors and brake pads at no cost, in addition to offering to

repair the Vehicle’s rear brakes at a discounted rate. CarMax’s records

indicate that Ms. [redacted] declined the offer of assistance for the Vehicle’s

rear brakes.

If Ms. [redacted] would like to accept this offer, CarMax encourages her

to speak with the [redacted] service department by calling

[redacted], option **

CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.

Please contact me at [redacted], extension [redacted],

with any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Analyst, Executive Response Team

Consumer

Response:

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 did not accept the offer for a discounted rate to change my rear brakes and rotors because I feel that it should have been taken care of when I bought it in within the first thirty days of purchase. When I picked up my vehicle this time, I smelled something burning under my hood and one of my tail lights was out. How can you test drive a vehicle and not notice these things? This store has to do better and I will never refer anyone else to this place. I called and left a message on the voicemail because of course when I called at 5:0pm amazingly I got no answer, and I called several times.

Regards,

I bought a truck from carmax and as soon as I go get some food battery dies as well as the brakes and rotors needed be fixed as well as alignment. That was all fixed and taken care of but when I go to get my chimes fixed they insult my intelligence by telling me that the truck is not supose to beep to put seat belt on and when turn signal is on. Well the truck does beep for those functions but stopped working and I was trying to get it fixed but they keep telling me it's not broke and doesn't have that option my advice to everyone stay away from carmax they are a horrible nightmare sorry for the rant I even contacted corporate they are a nightmare as well so steer clear of carmax

Review: Dropped vehicle off for service under my maxcare plan that I paid well over $2000 for and when I use it I get horrible customer service and lies from the service advisor who promised to call me back. I relayed the message y

that I needed to know if I needed to pick up my car or not and that I was leaving work. after getting to the dealership to pick up a loaner vehicle the tried to give me a car that was dirty smelled bad with dog hair.Location: Make: Model: Owner/Co-Ownder? YesDesired Settlement: to take my car to the [redacted] dealership and use my maxcare there

Business

Response:

July 7th,

2016

RevDex.com

720

Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond,

VA 23236

RE: [redacted]

Dear Mrs.

[redacted],

Thank you for forwarding the

complaint received in your office from Mr. [redacted] regarding his purchase of the

Vehicle from CarMax of Greensboro, NC (“CarMax”) on April 19th, 2016.

At

the time of purchase, Mr. [redacted] also elected to purchase a MaxCare Extended

Service Plan (“ESP”) for a term of 60 months or until the Vehicle exceeded

75,000 miles with a deductible of $50.00. In his complaint, Mr. Allen

requested that the ESP be used at a [redacted] dealership as opposed to

CarMax.

Mr.

[redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax on approximately June 28th,

2016, inquiring about a noise concern when braking. CarMax was unable to

duplicate this concern when test-driving the Vehicle and informed Mr. Allen

that no repairs were needed.

Per Mr. [redacted] request

to replace the brake pads and rotors with original equipment manufacturer

(“OEM”) parts from Mercedes-Benz, CarMax elected to do so at no cost to Mr.

[redacted] in an effort of customer service.

Mr.

[redacted] picked up the Vehicle from CarMax on approximately July 1st,

2016, with these repairs completed. In the event that Mr. [redacted] has any

additional repair concerns or any further questions, he may contact me at

[redacted], ext. [redacted].

Thank you for providing

CarMax the opportunity to respond to this matter.

Sincerely,

Curt

D[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

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,

This noise started before the 30 day warranty period and it continues to make noise. Yes it did not make this noise while the vehicle was at the dealership. It stops and starts. I am going to take a recording of this noise when it happens again. I want to be able to enjoy my vehicle without taking it in constantly.

Review: I bought this car from carmax three years ago(2013) for $40,000.00 Recently I went to carmax 8/11/16 to get an appraisal, I was offered ($15,000.00) they didn't give me the [redacted] price($22,000.00). I went to [redacted] to get another appraisal,[redacted] informed me that my car has a safety recall, which carmax did not informed me when I purchased it,or when I went to get it appraised. I called the [redacted] customer service about the recall they said the parts are not made yet. So now me and my family are scared to ride in my car. Our lives are in danger, so now all I want is to trade in the car but no dealers including carmax is willing to give me a [redacted] price because of the recall. my frustration/complaint is my family don't want to ride in this car with me and I want to trade in for a fair price but due to the recall i'm stuck with this unsafe car. I feel like nobody is taking responsibility for this mishap, so the consumers are stuck with a death trap. I don't know who should be responsible for this. so if you could help me find a solution to this situation I would greatly appreciate this. Thank you in advance.Desired Settlement: a fair [redacted] price. As soon as possible because I'm afraid to drive this unsafe car.

Business

Response:

September 1, 2016

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Re: [redacted]

Complaint ID: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated August 19, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Henderson, Nevada

(“CarMax”) on or about July 25, 2013.

In the complaint, Ms. [redacted] expresses concerns with a recall on

the Vehicle, as well as the written offer she received after her recent appraisal

from CarMax. Ms. [redacted] requests that CarMax provide an offer aligned with

[redacted] pricing.

CarMax completed a recall search for the Vehicle (on the [redacted] website) on September 1,

2016, which listed one open recall on the Vehicle. This recall was reported by

the Vehicle manufacturer after the previously stated date of purchase for the

Vehicle and is listed on the [redacted] website as February 5, 2016. A member

of CarMax’s purchasing team called Ms. [redacted] on September 1, 2016 to talk

about her recall questions and factors that may have impacted her written appraisal

offer, including mileage, Vehicle features, the interior and exterior condition

of the Vehicle, and market trends. CarMax’s records indicate that Ms. [redacted] was provided with direct contact information for the associate she talked with,

should she have additional questions after that call. For details about how

CarMax addresses recalls, Ms. [redacted] is encouraged to visit this site, [redacted]

As the original written offer is now beyond the seventh day from

the date of appraisal and is no longer valid, Ms. [redacted] is encouraged to

return to CarMax to have the Vehicle re-appraised. Should Ms. [redacted] wish to

visit for an additional appraisal, CarMax will be happy to extend a written

offer for the Vehicle.

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

Review: When I first purchased my vehicle, I reported an issue to Carmax regarding my suspension. Carmax has a policy to make repairs to vehicles you purchase. They made other low cost repairs to my vehicle including the blown speakers and paint on my hood. They identified a suspension issue and leaks but said "it wasn't that bad" and refused to fix the suspension. I also took it to [redacted] to have actual [redacted] certified mechanics do the diagnosis and they also identified the same issue and advised that I should schedule repair. I gave Carmax this information and they still refused to repair it because it was costly. This issue has now become more pronounced and needs to be fixed immediately.Desired Settlement: I would like Carmax to honor their agreement and fix issues that arise with its vehicle. This issue was brought up when I first brought my car from them and they have refused to honor their agreement. It's not fair that they pick and choose which types of repairs they will honor if it is cost effective to them. I am a repeat Carmax buyer and this situation has been frustrating as I never had an issue with their warranty repair program with my previous vehicle.

Business

Response:

July 11, 2016

Review: On February 28, 2016, I purchased the [redacted]. I noticed immediately that there was an oil leak and loud noises coming from the truck in and contacted the CarMax Auto motive department to fix the problem, which was said to be a major oil leak and a broken belt. After I left the car with CarMax for a week, I later then had noticed the same issues with the vehicle. I will be taking the car in again for the same issues on April 21, 2016.Location: riverside,CaMake: 2013Model: [redacted]Owner/Co-Ownder? YesDesired Settlement: I would like a dealership underwind.

Business

Response:

May 4, 2016

Review: I was sold a car with an altered odometer, without my knowledge and carmax refuses to refund total of what I have spend in financing and repairs.

I bought a [redacted] from carmax on march 2014. At that time the odometer read 87k miles. Ever since I bought the car Imhave been taking it to the mechanic to get the car fix for different issues. Finally toyota suggested to get a different car because of the vast issues that are coming up with the car. They offered me an appraisal on the sequoia to began the process. There response was that they wouldnt be able to offer me not even $2000 for the car because the car had a major issue. They showed me the carfax and explained to me that the car had a roll back. The carfax showed that at one time it had 222K miles on it and thee was a drop to 40k miles. I went back to carmax to resolve this issue and they refused to accept the fact that they were at fault. I then spoke to carmax headquarters about my complaint it was then that the were able to set an appointment to have the car checked. I took it in, the checked the odometer and asked me what I wanted. I told them I wanted my money back. they offered to give me my deposit back $500 and I could start fresh with a new car. I refused that settlement because I have spent money on payments and repairs and loss of work.Desired Settlement: I am seeking the total of what I have spent on this vehicle. that includes my deposit, payments made towards financing, repair costs, and loan to be payed off and not reflect on my credit as a negative. I i to return the car.

Business

Response:

April 13, 2015[redacted], Operations Supervisor 720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, Virginia 23236Re: Ms. [redacted]Complaint ID [redacted], VIN: [redacted] (the “Vehicle”)Dear Ms. [redacted]:Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated March 31, 2015 regarding the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in Ontario, California on or about March 29, 2014. Ms. [redacted] requested in the desired settlement for CarMax to take full possession of the Vehicle and pay off the remaining balance of her loan. Additionally, Ms. [redacted] requested that CarMax refund her down payment, any payments made towards her loan, and reimburse her any costs associated with the repair of the Vehicle.Ms. [redacted] took the Vehicle to a [redacted] dealership to have it appraised, and was advised that there was a mileage discrepancy according to the CarFax report.Ms. [redacted] brought the Vehicle to CarMax on or about March 21, 2015 to inquire about the mileage discrepancy concern. CarMax inspected the Vehicle and was not able to identify any reason for the mileage discrepancy on the CarFax report. CarMax also reviewed a corresponding AutoCheck report for the same Vehicle and that report did not indicate this discrepancy. In the interest of customer service, however, CarMax is willing to take full return of the Vehicle, pay off the remainder of her loan and refund any monies Ms. [redacted] paid toward the purchase and repair of the Vehicle.CarMax encourages Ms. [redacted] to contact the Business Office to return the Vehicle and to pursue reimbursement for any amount owed to her.CarMax apologizes for any inconvenience Ms. [redacted] may have experienced and 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

Review: My wife and I drove 3 hours yesterday ( two days after my surgery ) to pick up the [redacted] we had shipped in from Charleston SC. Upon arrival, I asked for Mike as you instructed me to and when he came to meet me, he said " I was just getting ready to send the car around to have it detailed".

I had communicated with Mike prior to our arrival to let him know we were going to be there today ( Sunday at 2:30 pm). We got there at 2:00 pm.

I have so many questions and concerns about my experience at CARMAX that it is over-whelming. Bare with me as I cover these:

1). Why was the car not detailed and ready for us to test drive prior to us arriving?

2). When we looked at the car, it had rusted lug nuts, a left front scratched wheel and every decal on each wheel was faded?

3). The right front tire was dry rotted and had visible cracks in it.

4). The drivers side door has a scratch on it ( that probably could have been buffed out ) if anyone had cared enough to take the time to do this -prior to our arrival.

5). We told Mike the wheels and tires were unacceptable and that something needed to be done for us to take delivery of the vehicle today.

6). He got a lady named Cindy and brought her to us and told us she was one of the managers. We also were greeted by this same lady when we came into your location> So evidently she is a greeter and a manager also??

7). Cindy was not pleasant, nor showed any compassion for our request,or the hour and a half we just spent driving from Chattanooga to your location. She looked at the tires and wheels and then said she had to let someone else look at the tires and the wheels and would let us know something in about 5 minutes.

8). I was placed at a desk inside your showroom and 15 minutes later, I still had not heard anything from Cindy. Mike came up and said that she ( Cindy) was talking to the "Operations Manager" about what she could do to resolve our problem. I suggested that they just swap out the wheels from the other [redacted] SUV and let us be on our way. Mike said :quote" its not that easy-it is a process"???????? I followed up and asked if our concerns could be resolved today and he said "no" not on Sunday.

I told Mike, that there was another 2012 [redacted] SUV sitting 5 spots away from our vehicle with the same type wheels ( in good condition) and good tires. I asked him to just swap these wheels and tires out on our vehicle and we would be on our way. His response was "this is a process" and it takes time???????

First: I retired from both Bridgestone and PepsiCo, I had Senior Management positions with both of these companies. I am knowledgeable about what a "good and safe tire" looks like and what is not> The tires on this vehicles ( other than the left front that was replaced due to the car arriving with a flat ) were dry rotted and not safe. The right front tire was not safe for anyone to drive on-yet it was part of the "Car max Certification"?

Cindy's offer to correct our concerns were as follows:

1). Carmax agreed that the left front tire needed to be replaced as well on the vehicle and you wold replace it.

2). Carmax would recondition the wheels. When I asked for clarification of "what reconditioning really meant". I was told that the [redacted] emblems would be replaced and the wheels polished. When I asked about the rusted lug nuts I was told by Mike that CARMAX would paint the lug nuts ? I said "Paint them""? And he said yes. I told him they were chipped and needed to be replaced. He ( Mike ) said you ( CARMAX) would not do that?

When I got home, I looked up the cost of a new set of lug bolts for the [redacted] .

[redacted]-Benz chrome lug bolts: 14 x 1.5 (45mm) - set of 20

3.9 out of 5 stars

Available from these sellers.

14 x 1.5 / 45mm lug bolts (ball seat) - no locks

Set of 20 new chrome wheel lugs

Triple chrome plated finish

1 Year Warranty on chrome finish

Factory replacement lugs

1 new from $87.00

The cost is $87.00 for the complete new set?

So, for one new tire, reconditioning the wheels and $87 worth of lug nuts, you could have sold me a $27,658 car and made a customer happy, instead you sent me and my wife back home with nothing but a terrible experience at your location. All of this is unacceptable, however, the most concerning issue and one I intend to pursue with your home office and the Revdex.com, is that before the close of business on Sunday,( the same day we looked at this vehicle and your management team agreed that the left front tire needed to be replaced and did not meet CARMAX standards) you had this same car back listed on your website for sale? This tells me that you as a company were willing to let some less experienced buyer, drive off with a right front tire that was dry-rotted and unsafe. I know this for a fact, because we were told "numerous" times that "nothing" could be done in your shop today to correct our concerns with the tires or the wheels because it was Sunday.I have a real concern about this type of business practices as a consumer.

I have purchased three cars from CARMAX and never had any of the issues I have had with trying to purchase this vehicle. I will reach out to whomever necessary in the Atlanta area to make sure that this type of experience is shared and what I have expereinced "first hand" at your location.

[redacted]Location: Kennesaw, GA / Town Center Make: 2012 Model: [redacted]Owner/Co-Ownder? NoDesired Settlement: Refund the $199 transfer fee and repair the items that are bad and need to be corrected. Transfer the car to the Chattanooga CARMAX for purchase-after proper repairs have been made.

Business

Response:

May 18, 2016

Review: We purchased the vehicle back in august 2015 and within the first 30 days had problems with the driver window, passenger window and rear hatch regulators. We took the vehicle in and they replaced the driver door and passenger window regulators but insisted that the rear hatch was fine and had no problems. We told them the window would just roll itself down and then wouldn't roll back up for a while after several tries. A few months ago the window went down and would come back up. I took the rear gate inside panel off to see if I could fix the problem myself. All of the parts inside where so rusted they just feel part in my hands and inside and and the exterior is full of rust. I called the dealer ship and no one would return my calls so finally I wrote and email to the corporation and within hours the location was calling asking how they could fix the problem. I told Kelly the problem and that I had to spend 300 to fix window and that I was concerned that my vehicle was a flood vehicle. Carmax prides themselves on selling cars with only clean titles with no frame or flood damage. Kelly advised me to bring the vehicle up and they would refund the money I spent on the parts to fix window and the passenger window was acting up again and they would fix it as well. I took the parts up to show them how rusted it was and how concerned I was that I had spent thirty thousand dollars on a flood vehicle. They had my car for three weeks and said the car is not and a flood vehicle. They said that ther body shop D&T would sand the rust and repaint it and that [redacted] the owner of D&T said it would solve the problem. I went and met with [redacted] and asked him what he thought and he told me that it would be a temporary fix and would probably last about a year and that he told Carmax that the only way to fix the problem correctly is to replace the whole entire tailgate and asked me if the car was in a flood. I told Carmax what [redacted] had said and they told me that it was not saiDesired Settlement: I have since spoke with several professionals and that they are saying this is a flood vehicle. Between all the rust and the weep holes in the bottom of the tailgate being clogged is a true indication that this vehicle is a flood vehicle. I would like a 100% guarantee that it is not a flood vehicle and if not the tailgate be replaced with a new one.

Business

Response:

August 25th, 2016[redacted]Revdex.com720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23236RE: C[redacted]Dear Mrs. [redacted], Thank you for forwarding the complaint received in your office from Mr. [redacted] regarding his purchase of the Vehicle from CarMax of Dayton, OH (“CarMax”) on August 31st, 2015. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] requested that CarMax guarantee that the Vehicle was not flood damaged at the time of sale. Conversely, if CarMax is unable to guarantee this, Mr. [redacted] requested for CarMax to eplace the tailgate component of the Vehicle, which contained rust.After Mr. [redacted] purchase, CarMax replaced his driver and passenger side window motor – under the terms of CarMax’s 30-Day Limited Warranty. CarMax had no contact with Mr. [redacted] until on or about June 29th, 2016, when Mr. [redacted] mentioned the repair concerns listed above. At that time, CarMax completed an inspection of the Vehicle and found no existing signs of flood damage. In addition, CarMax sent the Vehicle to a third-party vendor ([redacted]”), who completed a diagnosis and determined that a sanding of the rust would address his concern. In an effort of customer service, CarMax offered to have these repairs completed at [redacted], or a vendor of Mr. [redacted] choosing, at no cost to him. Mr. [redacted] declined CarMax of Dayton’s offer and contacted myself in CarMax’s Customer Relations Department on or about August 15, 2016. CarMax’s Customer Relations Department is continuing to research this matter for Mr. [redacted] and will continue to stay in communication with him regarding any new updates. Therefore, based on the above, CarMax is unable to make any offers at this time, as it pertains to his requested settlement. Mr. [redacted] is welcomed to contact me at [redacted], ext. [redacted] with any additional questions or concerns that he may haveThank you for providing CarMax the opportunity to respond to this matter.Sincerely,Curt D[redacted]

Analyst,

CarMax Customer Relations

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11632231, 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,

The response from Carmax does not resolve the issue at hand. I spoke with [redacted] the owner of [redacted] and his answer is the problem will come back in a year or sooner and that he told Ashley at Carmax that the correct way to resolve this is to replace the whole entire hatch. What I feel that they are wanting to do is basically put a bandaid on the problem to get me out of there hair. I asking for the problem to be fixed the correct way and issue a statement guaranteeing that my vehicle is not a flood vehicle. [redacted] D&T body shop showed me both estimates showing the bandaid repair and the correct way to repair and said he gave both of them to Carmax. [redacted] also explained that he never would have given both estimates if it wasn't a major issue and that if it could be solved by just painting it. According to Carmax standards and philosophy this vehicle should have never made there lot as a sellable vehicle. I'm not asking for a full replacement of the vehicle just the hatch to be replaced and letter guaranteeing that it has never been in a flood. I do appreciate your time helping me resolve this issue.

Review: I purchased [redacted] that had been advertised through Carmax online with approximately 12,000 miles. I contacted store and agreed to have vehicle transferred after paying the required $750 fee. Just about a full month passed before I was notified that the vehicle had arrived and was finally ready for me to observe and drive for the first time. I visited the store next day to find the vehicle had almost 3,000 more miles than was shown in the listing, in addition to a couple of other electrical issues. I was dismayed upon this revelation, due to the fact the vehicle was advertised for substantially more than its market value with mileage being a key factor in determining this. I immediately raised this issue with the sales representative that referred me to management who ultimately cited their "no haggle" sales tactics as a defense for the price. I stressed that it was not appropriate for the vehicle to have been priced in a way that didn't reflect the its actual condition. Discussions with management continued for almost an hour, but I reluctantly agreed to proceed with purchase despite their refusal to adjust the price. The next day I returned to pick up the vehicle, then returned home and parked it for several days. Also, owning a couple of other cars and working from home 12hrs a day I didn't have the opportunity to drive much before I noticed the vehicle's left-rear tire had deflated. This, in addition to concerns I had about the vehicle's tendency to pull to the left when cruising on the highway, I knew something was either wrong with the steering or suspension. I immediately filled the tire with air and which appeared to be holding, at least for the time being, then called Carmax to schedule a service appointment within their 30 day warranty window. On the date of the appointment one of their representatives took a test drive with me while in the vehicle and noted my concerns, but stated he believed it was characteristic of all cars. I stressed that was not the case, especially with this high-end performance vehicle with, world renowned as a super car. We returned to the service center where I had to exclaim that I would escalate the issue before the representative finally agreed to have me visit the manufacturer of the vehicle who was much better equipped to service the [redacted] than Carmax. I drove to [redacted] of Katy located right down the street for an inspection, much like the one that should have been completed by Carmax. After keeping it overnight I was called the next day to discuss that the car had been equipped with a tire that had been repaired with some sort of plug and had been leaking air. [redacted] did not replace the tire and allowed me to take the vehicle that day. I was furious at this point and called the representative I had been working with at Carmax directly and left a message regarding the discovery when no one answered the phone. The conditions that day, May 26th were rainy and while making my way home, someone ran a red light and pulled in front of me. I did everything I could to stop the vehicle, but the car underperformed and an accident ensued. The vehicle was totaled and I know had the tires been in the condition they'd been advertised, up to the manufacturer's specification, the likelihood of me being able to maneuver in such a way to decrease the severity of the damage or avoid it altogether would have been possible. I was immediately hospitalized and have been since attending regular physical therapy in an effort to recover from injuries sustained.Desired Settlement: Carmax should accept responsibility for their negligence and consider any balance on the account a concession for their misrepresentation of the vehicle's condition. Their "no haggle" sales approach doesn't relinquish sales representatives from predator practices all used car sales men are notorious for, such as preaching the need for extended term warranties and neglecting to divulge the importance of certain coverages. These tactics increase the sales price, which generate higher commissions for sales people, increase the amount of interest charged through the life of the sales contract and disenfranchise customers should an issue arise.

Business

Response:

[redacted]

RevDex.com

720 Moorefield Park

Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, VA 23236

RE:

Customer Complaint of [redacted]

Dear Mrs.

[redacted],

Thank

you for sharing Mr. [redacted] complaint and affording us the opportunity to

respond. In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states

that he was unhappy with the condition of the [redacted] (“Vehicle”) he

purchased from CarMax Auto Superstores of [redacted] on April 13,

2016. In particular, Mr. [redacted] alleges

that as a result of a tire not being in proper condition he was unable to avoid

a car accident. He requests that CarMax

Auto Finance waive the remaining balance on his retail installment account. While

we are disappointed to hear about Mr. [redacted] experience, we are unable to

provide Mr. [redacted] with the relief that he seeks.

Mr.

[redacted] alleges that shortly after he purchased the Vehicle, he brought it back

to CarMax to address his concerns with its condition during his 30-day warranty

period. CarMax was unable to resolve Mr.

[redacted] issues and directed him to a [redacted] repair facility (“[redacted]”). Mr. [redacted] states that the [redacted] repaired the

tire. On May 26, 2016, the day Mr. [redacted] picked up the Vehicle from [redacted], another vehicle ran a red light resulting in a

collision. Mr. [redacted] speculates that the

tire, which had just been repaired by [redacted], did not perform as it should have to

allow him to avoid the other vehicle.

The Vehicle was deemed a total loss

and it is our understanding that the other party was deemed at fault for the

accident. After the insurance proceeds and

a refund of ESP were applied to Mr. [redacted] account, he had a remaining balance

on his account of approximately $4,300.

CarMax prides itself in providing a

transparent and customer-friendly retail experience. For example, any vehicle purchased can be

returned within 5 days with no questions asked and at no cost to the

customer. In addition, CarMax provides a

limited 30-day warranty on any used vehicle purchase. This means that within the first 30 days of

purchase, CarMax would remedy – at no cost to the customer – any breakdown

issue identified. Here, the Vehicle had

just been repaired by [redacted] and there is no indication that it was not performing

properly. While we are sorry to learn

Mr. [redacted] was involved in an accident, it appears it was the result of the

other driver running a red light and not as a result of the Vehicle’s

condition.

Thank you, again, for bringing this

complaint to our attention and affording us the opportunity to provide this

explanation. If Mr. [redacted] has any

further questions, he is welcomed to contact me at [redacted], ext. [redacted].

Sincerely,

Curt

D[redacted]

Analyst,

CarMax Customer Relations

Consumer

Response:

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. Contrary to what was stated in Carmax's response, no repair had been completed by "[redacted]", but in fact, it was identified that the state of the tire had been a contributing factor in the issues I'd brought to Carmax's attention concerning the driving characteristics of the vehicle. Technicians made me aware that after placing the M5 on their lift that the tire had been "plugged" prior to my purchase. This further confirmed my concerns about the condition of the vehicle upon reception in April, which had been negated by Carmax. Carmax's negligence is bordering on treachery and considering the multi-point inspection and guarantee under which this vehicle was offered I wouldn't have ever expected to have been put at risk by something as important as the tires, but that's been the case. They had already accepted fault for the tires and unbeknownst to me scheduled a follow-up appointment days weeks later, however, the incident had already occurred. If it hadn't been properly inspected in the first place, why was it offered for sale? Regards,

Review: Rolls back when you take your foot off brake on incline. Transmittion shudders when accelerating from a stop from first to second gear then smooths out. Keeps saying Transmittion fault service and Transmittion not in park. The car will not start when this happens. It has been to 2 different [redacted] dealerships 4 times now and is at a dealer right now. Everytime they say they fixed the problem and it still does the same thing continuously. The problem started 1 day after the 30 day Carmax warranty and has been stranding me ever since. I am now paying over 30.00 dollars a day for car rental while another [redacted] dealership try to fix the problem. I researched the problem online and found this to be the same problem numerous other people are having. I was sold a Lemmon and would like all of my money back. This car has cost me work and money by randomly stranding me in addition to the shifting problems ect described above. Single working mom in military. The car only has 50000. Miles on it.Desired Settlement: Refund my entire purchase price or exchange it for a different vehicle that has the same value of what I paid originally

Business

Response:

July 21, 2016

Review: Went to purchase a vexhicle from dealership price of car was 28,998 in Illinois you get get charged tax for where you live and where the car is being registered which for me is dupage county at 7%. Carmax was charging me over 7% for sales tax the sales manager mentioned that since your are purchasing from cook county we need to add .25% which is fine but their system was charging me almost 9% in sales tax. The sales manager said it is all automated and there is nothing her can do about it. I called and complained to Carmax corporate they called back with no real answer I feel they may have and still might be continuing this practice of over charging sales tax to unknowing customers. Desired Settlement: I would like to know why their system wanted to charge me almost 9% sales tax when it should only have been 7% and is this practice being done on other unknown customers.

Business

Response:

August 1, 2016

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Re: [redacted]

Complaint ID: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated July 19, 2016 regarding

Mr. [redacted] visit to the CarMax store located in [redacted] (“CarMax”)

on or about June 11, 2016.

In the complaint Mr. [redacted] expresses concern with CarMax’s

policies with the rate of sales tax charged as part of the purchase process,

and therefore requests an explanation of this rate.

Company records indicate that Mr. [redacted] called the CarMax Home

Office on or about June 14, 2016 regarding his concern, and spoke with a Customer

Relations Analyst. CarMax’s notes state that Schaumburg’s Business Office

Manager called Mr. [redacted] on this same date and explained to him that any

purchase of a vehicle in Cook County (where CarMax of Schaumburg is located) includes

an applicable 7.25% sales tax. This rate is set and regulated by the

appropriate government agencies.

Should Mr. [redacted] have additional questions about purchasing a

vehicle that he would like assistance with at this point, he is encouraged to

call CarMax Schaumburg at [redacted]

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]

Review: In early June I went to Car Max in St. Peters, Missouri to see about trading in my car. Car Max done an appraisal and offered me $12,000.00 for my 2007 Corvette. I also submitted a credit application and picked out my new Corvette (a 2014). Car Max submitted my credit application, with a $12,000.00, down payment. Within minutes a Car Max said I had been approved if I could supply the following documents before I picked up the car: 1. A pay stub (proof of income). 2. A utility bill (proof of residence), 3. An insurance card (proof of insurance). The car I wanted was in Colorado Springs, CO and I was asked to pay a $449.00 fee (non-refundable) to have the car transferred to Missouri. The dealer said before I pay the fee I should fax over a copy of my pay-check stub over for final approval. I faxed my pay stub over the following day. The following day the sales person told me the everything was ok, and that I should pay to have the car transferred. I paid the transfer fee in cash and 10 days later the car arrived. I signed all the papers and picked up the car. About 5 days later I got a call from the Car Max business office, saying there was something wrong with the withholding on my check stub. The Car Max person asked me if I could do her a big favor, "send 3 months of bank statements." I told her I didn't use a traditional bank. I use an electronic fund source bank and get paid on a pay card. I contacted by accounting office and had them send a 90 day report showing deposits to my pay card. I didn't hear anything for another week. A week later Car Max called back and told me that was not good enough. The gave me 3 choices: 1. supply more banking, records, 2. bring the car back, or 3. find your own bank. I sold my car to another dealer for $15,000.00 and used the money for my down payment. Car max told me I would get a refund of my down payment in 10 days by check and that I would have to take a bus or find a way home.Desired Settlement: Car Max sold me the car without even having the title and then after all the papers were signed stated asking me to come up with more documents, after taking my $12,000.00, plus $449.00 for the transfer fee. The dealer I sold my car to told me he would sell my car back to me for $24,000.00, $7,000.00 more than I got. Car Max has refused to give me the license plates that are in my name and have lied to me over and over about weather the car has actually been registered. Car Max has violated the Missouri Merchandising and Practices Act by selling me the car without a title, as well as several state and federal truth in lending statutes. A local attorney told me what they done in my case is called "Spot financing.," which Car Max has been in trouble for in the past. I have the most beautiful car now, and it makes me sick to the stomach every time I think about giving it back and the way Car Max has treated me. I just want my l plates and for Car Max to honor our signed contract.

Business

Response:

July 15, 2016

720 Moorefield Park Drive, Suite 300

Richmond, Virginia 23236

Complaint ID: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Thank you for forwarding the complaint dated July 3, 2016 regarding

the Vehicle purchased from the CarMax store located in St. Peters, Missouri (“CarMax”)

on or about June 22, 2016.

In the complaint, Mr. [redacted] describes concerns with financing

for the Vehicle, including stipulations required by the financial institution.

Mr. [redacted] requests that CarMax honor the purchase agreement and allow him

to keep possession of the Vehicle.

CarMax’s records indicate that Mr. [redacted] elected to retain

legal representation after submitting his complaint, and has filed a petition regarding

his concerns.

CarMax appreciates the opportunity to respond to this complaint.

Sincerely,

Kristina S[redacted]

Review: I explained I had been approved for my own private financing. While discussing pricing with the salesperson, Rhonda, I verbally answered the demographic questions. Without knowledge, she ran my credit. I was not informed she was doing this. I did not sign or consent anything.Location: Make: Model: Owner/Co-Ownder? Desired Settlement: Removal of inquiry and further education regarding verbal and writte communication for employees.

Business

Response:

June 23, 2016

Revdex.com Serving Central Virginia, Inc.

720 Moorefield Park Drive

Suite 300

Richmond, VA 23236

RE: [redacted] Complaint

Complaint

ID: [redacted]

Dear Sir/Madam:

Thank you for sharing Mr. [redacted]’s complaint and

providing us with the opportunity to respond.

Mr. [redacted] alleges that we submitted

a credit application without his consent, resulting in an inquiry on his credit

file. Mr. [redacted] accordingly demands

that we remove this inquiry and educate our associates on properly obtaining consent. Based on a review of our records and a

recollection of events provided by the associate identified in Mr. [redacted]

complaint, it is our conclusion that Mr. [redacted] allegations are without

merit.

Our Dealer Affiliate’s records reflect that,

on June 2, 2016, Mr. [redacted] first visited our Dealer Affiliate’s store in Naples,

Florida. On this visit, Mr. [redacted] requested and received an appraisal of his [redacted] Subsequently, on June 6th, Mr. [redacted] contacted the Naples store and arranged for the transfer of a [redacted] (the “Vehicle”) from another store. Once it arrived, Mr. [redacted]

returned on June 8th to test drive it.

Even though Mr. [redacted] was interested in

purchasing the Vehicle using a pre-approval with Capital

One, our associate nevertheless recommend that Mr. [redacted] apply for credit with

us in case he received a more competitive offer. Mr. [redacted] agreed to do so and this is

confirmed by our records. Specifically,

Mr. [redacted] (1) voluntarily provided us with

a substantial amount of personal information necessary for a credit application

– e.g., name, address (and length of time at residence), phone number, date of

birth, social security number, current employer (and employer contact

information) and income; and (2) reviewed and agreed to our Credit Application

Terms and Conditions (“Consent Form”).

Under the Consent Form, Mr. [redacted] authorized us and our finance sources

to “use your credit reports and verify your application information.”

We accordingly decline

Mr. [redacted] request to remove any inquiry resulting from his credit

application. Additionally, we have

instituted substantial training and procedures to ensure our associates only

submit credit applications with customer consent and, based on our review, our

associate adhered to them with respect to Mr. Barile.

If Mr. [redacted] has any further questions or concerns regarding our

explanation, he is welcome to contact me by phone at [redacted], Ext. [redacted] or

by email at [redacted]. Thank you for bringing Mr. [redacted] complaint to our attention. If you need

any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at

the contact information provided above.

Sincerely,

Myron M[redacted]

CarMax

cc: [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

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,