DCH Brunswick Toyota/Scion

DCH Brunswick Toyota practiced unethical, fraudulent business during the sales process of a certified pre-owned vehicle I purchased back in At the time of sale, they provided me with a Car Fax report that showed one prior accident There was no indication of structural damage Two years later when I went to trade in the vehicle, Car Fax indicated that there was structural damage as a result of the same accident The value of the vehicle was significantly less as a result I took a loss a several thousand dollarsAfter doing some research, I determined that DCH Brunswick Toyota repaired the damage from the original accident listed on the Car Fax report They did not disclose this factThe damage turned out to be major, appx $15,worth, and included significant structural repairs DCH tried to hide the fact that they did the extensive repairs and even ignored this fact when they certified the vehicle, prior to sale They violated their own pre-owned vehicle certification policyI brought this issue to the attention of the NJ Division of Consumer Affairs and after a month process, including arbitration, a settlement was determined which I consider fair and satisfactory No more, no less The NJ Division of Consumer Affairs, through their arbitration process, found justice in this case and DCH was ordered to pay me for my loss So DCH paid what was due to me as a result There were no fines or penalties There is no record (or at least one that easily located by the public) that DCH was found liable for their unethical and now proven illegal business practices This is how the system works when it’s one person against a large corporation such as DCH Brunswick ToyotaThe public should be aware of this matter when considering making a purchase of a vehicle from DCH Brunswick Toyota, Rt1, North Brunswick NJ If not for my efforts, this issue would have not come to light I know how much time and effort I had to put into this thing I think many people may be intimidated by the process and just take the lossI can only imagine how many other times DCH has engaged in this type of business practice that went unchallenged I speculate that they bank on it I will never shop there and will always strongly recommend others stay away

Mr*** *** complaint is that he leased a vehicle and he is not happy about the residual amount at the end of the lease if he chooses to buy it when the lease is completeUnfortunately, the residual amount is in fact correct at the $and that is set by the manufacturer and the
bankthat amount doesn’t change and can’t be altered in anywayThis is determined by the MSRP and the amount of miles that the customer requires per yearI know this was properly explained to the customer before and after the purchase but obviously he still has concerns

the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has redcived complaint ID [redacted]
The matter is being reviewed by the E-ZPASS new york customer service center. Once we hear back from them on their investigation, I will contact you.
Thank You

Not a good experience. After inspecting and test driving the van, my husband and I were ready to make a deal. We were told by a finance guy that before any deals could be discussed our credit had to be run (red flag). We reluctantly agreed. Now a rude business manager (wish I remembered his name) came and told us we're approved and gives us the numbers. I ask if the #s are based on the sticker price and he says yeah. I tell him we were under the impression there was room for negotiations, he flatly says "no but I'm sure there are 1 or 2 dealers around with a lower price that you can check out" I said ok and we got up to leave. He says "can I ask why you're not getting the vehicle. I thought u were interested" I say "we were but again we thought we could negotiate" He asked our # I told him and he said "yeah you're way off" I said ok and we left. He didn't even try to counter with another offer. He was just SOOO arrogant and condescending!!!! He clearly couldn't care less whether or not we bought the van. We were outright lied to!

DCH Brunswick Toyota practiced unethical, fraudulent business during the sales process of a certified pre-owned vehicle I purchased back in 2012. At the time of sale, they provided me with a Car Fax report that showed one prior accident. There was no indication of structural damage. Two years later when I went to trade in the vehicle, Car Fax indicated that there was structural damage as a result of the same accident. The value of the vehicle was significantly less as a result. I took a loss a several thousand dollars.
After doing some research, I determined that DCH Brunswick Toyota repaired the damage from the original accident listed on the Car Fax report. They did not disclose this fact. The damage turned out to be major, appx $15,000 worth, and included significant structural repairs. DCH tried to hide the fact that they did the extensive repairs and even ignored this fact when they certified the vehicle, prior to sale. They violated their own pre-owned vehicle certification policy.
I brought this issue to the attention of the NJ Division of Consumer Affairs and after a 10 month process, including arbitration, a settlement was determined which I consider fair and satisfactory. No more, no less. The NJ Division of Consumer Affairs, through their arbitration process, found justice in this case and DCH was ordered to pay me for my loss. So DCH paid what was due to me as a result. There were no fines or penalties. There is no record (or at least one that easily located by the public) that DCH was found liable for their unethical and now proven illegal business practices. This is how the system works when it’s one person against a large corporation such as DCH Brunswick Toyota.
The public should be aware of this matter when considering making a purchase of a vehicle from DCH Brunswick Toyota, Rt. 1, North Brunswick NJ. If not for my efforts, this issue would have not come to light. I know how much time and effort I had to put into this thing. I think many people may be intimidated by the process and just take the loss. I can only imagine how many other times DCH has engaged in this type of business practice that went unchallenged. I speculate that they bank on it. I will never shop there and will always strongly recommend others stay away.

DCH Brunswick Toyota practiced unethical, fraudulent business during the sales process of a certified pre-owned vehicle I purchased back in 2012. At the time of sale, they provided me with a Car Fax report that showed one prior accident. There was no indication of structural damage. Two years later when I went to trade in the vehicle, Car Fax indicated that there was structural damage as a result of the same accident. The value of the vehicle was significantly less as a result. I took a loss a several thousand dollars.
After doing some research, I determined that DCH Brunswick Toyota repaired the damage from the original accident listed on the Car Fax report. They did not disclose this fact. The damage turned out to be major, appx $15,000 worth, and included significant structural repairs. DCH tried to hide the fact that they did the extensive repairs and even ignored this fact when they certified the vehicle, prior to sale. They violated their own pre-owned vehicle certification policy.
I brought this issue to the attention of the NJ Division of Consumer Affairs and after a 10 month process, including arbitration, a settlement was determined which I consider fair and satisfactory. No more, no less. The NJ Division of Consumer Affairs, through their arbitration process, found justice in this case and DCH was ordered to pay me for my loss. So DCH paid what was due to me as a result. There were no fines or penalties. There is no record (or at least one that easily located by the public) that DCH was found liable for their unethical and now proven illegal business practices. This is how the system works when it’s one person against a large corporation such as DCH Brunswick Toyota.
The public should be aware of this matter when considering making a purchase of a vehicle from DCH Brunswick Toyota, Rt. 1, North Brunswick NJ. If not for my efforts, this issue would have not come to light. I know how much time and effort I had to put into this thing. I think many people may be intimidated by the process and just take the loss. I can only imagine how many other times DCH has engaged in this type of business practice that went unchallenged. I speculate that they bank on it. I will never shop there and will always strongly recommend others stay away.

Review: On Dec 19th I drove my car to the dealership to have a noise I experienced at high speeds, checked out. Earlier in the week I had an incident where my car hit a patch of ice and slid into the curb. Except for the splash guard there was no other visible damage to my car at the time and I was able to drive at low speeds but at high speeds I heard a vibration towards the front of the car and since I was heading in the direction of the Dealership I thought it best to have it checked out. It was around 4:30pm when I got there and was assisted by Service Advisor [redacted]. I explained about the incident and the noise, he took a look at the wheel and pointed out it was damaged from the impact, said it was dented and needed to be replaced and possibly the tire. I asked if this can be confirmed but was told it couldnt be done that evening. I was quoted an amount of $700+ for the wheel and alignment and to fix the splash guard which I thought at the time included the tire. I was not given a copy of the quote. I was also advised it may not be safe to drive the car in that perceived condition was offered a loaner and left the dealership. The next day I waited, expecting a phone call from Service Advisor [redacted] to confirm the actual damage and discuss everything that needed to be done but did not hear from him. I finally called and was told that they had started working on the car, I said I was expecting a call to confirm the damage, I argued this saying there was no way you could look at a rim and determine that it was dented and was the cause of the noise I heard. I was told he already explained what the problem was and I signed off authorizing the work. I further asked if the car was test driven to determine the cause of the sound, he assured me all the proper procedures were followed. I drove off later with the problem I arrived with. I am disappointed at the whole experience, s a customer you expect the service at the Dealership to be Professional and Customer Oriented.Desired Settlement: I would like a refund of my money so it can be spent on fixing the problem. I cannot afford to any more assumptions.

Business

Response:

Response:

Prior to receiving the notification from Revdex.com we had learned that Ms. [redacted] was not satisfied with her previous service with us. Our Service Manager had already had contacted her directly for resolution. She had already decided to file a claim with her insurance company. DCH Brunswick Toyota had refunded Ms. [redacted] the dollar amount that she initially paid. We worked with her insurance company CURE to repair the vehicle at an agreed price along with her deductible. We received the Revdex.com notification long after the resolution / repairs was achieved . The delayed response to close this case was our to need to reconfirm with our customer their level of satisfaction with the outcome. As of January 19th we have received written confirmation via email from Ms. [redacted] that she is truly appreciative the initiative that we took in resolving the issue.

Sent on: 1/25/2014 2:48:41 PM

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I was not "refunded the dollar amount," I was offered a discount on the wheel from the initial cost of $549.55 I paid $392.66. Everything else pretty much remained the same. I am hoping my complaint would encourage others to communicate similar experiences.

Regards,

Review: I received a "Notice of Violation Enforcement Action" from The Port Authority of NY & NJ stating that an unregistered car drove through a toll using my EZ Pass tag. I looked carefully at the complaint and noticed that this is not my car or my license plate and that I couldn't have been on the Outer Bridge Crossing that day because I was at work as a school teacher in [redacted] The car that went through the toll is a [redacted], but I own a [redacted] and a [redacted] I have called four times and written a letter explaining that I am not in violation and I have requested that the fine and toll be removed, and that this car be unaffiliated with my tag number. The Port Authority suggested I call the DMV of NJ to double check that the car isn't registered to me; I complied, and learned that it is someone's company car, but it's not a rental and is not registered in my name. I have received no response from the Port Authority and am still getting violation notifications. Please help me. Here is the information: Violation Number: [redacted] License Plate: [redacted] Date: 03/23/14 Time: 12:54:15 Toll: $13 Fee: $50 Total: $63 Thank you for your time and effort.Desired Settlement: The toll and fine be removed from my name and the car be unaffiliated with my EZ Pass tag.

Business

Response:

the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has redcived complaint ID [redacted]

The matter is being reviewed by the E-ZPASS new york customer service center. Once we hear back from them on their investigation, I will contact you.

Thank You

Review: I leased a rav 4 on wed. of last week and I believe that the contract is written a wrongful manner.

the end of year lease is stated that if I I want to purchase the vehicle it would cost 16,915.00.

the dealer calls this price a residual payment. that is they use this figure to calculate my periodic base payment.

the dealer says it's common practice, I say i'm being ripped off.

Business

Response:

Mr. [redacted] complaint is that he leased a vehicle and he is not happy about the residual amount at the end of the lease if he chooses to buy it when the lease is complete. Unfortunately, the residual amount is in fact correct at the $16915 and that is set by the manufacturer and the bank. that amount doesn’t change and can’t be altered in anyway. This is determined by the MSRP and the amount of miles that the customer requires per year. I know this was properly explained to the customer before and after the purchase but obviously he still has concerns.

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Regards,

Review: Per purchasing agreement, DCH was given the power of attorney to act on my behalf proceed with ALL DMV registrations and all my licensing plates issues, which was standard of all car dealerships. I've purchased the vehicle weekend before labor day. It's been a bit over a month and my plates still aren't here. There reps there did not give me the status on the plates. I've called everyday since 9/30/13, my calls go into voice message system, and no one called back. All I needed was status and info of whats going on on my vehicle and license plate issue.Desired Settlement: I need info and my license plate, will not do bushiness with these guys again.

Business

Response:

[redacted], On behalf of DCH Brunswick Toyota I would like to apologize for the amount of time it took for you to receive your plates and registration. As you already know we had to find your vehicle at another dealership, and that other dealership never sent us the title for the Tundra. We spent several weeks trying to get the title from that dealer, and then had to wait several more weeks to apply for a brand new one from DMV when they were unable to produce it, and thus creating the delay. We did eventually get the proper paperwork and I see that you have picked up the plates on October 25, 2013. Please accept our sincerest apologies for the lack of communication. Feel free to call on me directly if I could be of any further assistance. Thanks

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Regards,