DexYP

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2017/03/15) */ We dispute the complainants claims All of our used vehicle ads clearly state in the content of the ad "price reflects a $ [redacted] financed here credit" which we honour ***% of the time when the purchaser finances the vehicle at one of our locations through a bank or financial institution of the client's choice Banks fund referral of loans, we believe it is in the best interest of our clients to pass this on as a reduction in pricing but only if it is indeed financed as described above We also clearly identify in our ads that we will not hold a vehicle unless it is paid in full or finance contracts approved and signed by all partiesUntil one of these conditions are met the vehicle remains on the market for sale on a first to the post basis During the complainants initial indecision and then the delay due to complications in acquiring an approval the vehicle was sold to another individual that met the terms and conditions of the sale agreement and price on a first to the post basis Our used vehicle are aggressively priced and with very few exceptions are either the best priced or best value when compared with similar contented vehiclesIt is a regular occurrence to have multiple individuals on the same vehicle in a very short time frameThe complainant is welcome to continue reviewing our ads and should there be an item of interest the process to follow should now be quite clear Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2017/03/16) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) According to the email from Internet manager [redacted] , the car had sold in the afternoon and they still applied for financing and he me get a co-signer [redacted] in finance called me at 7:and said everything was good to go for the car [redacted] stated on the phone she would put a hold on the car and send me the bill of sales to sign and hold the vehicle until I could get to Moncton and sign the bank papers, so they do hold vehicles or some staff doesn't follow the business rulesThe story doesn't match up timewiseBelow is the email from [redacted] stating the car was sold before they put through financing for meMy sales rep [redacted] even called Wednesday morning to apologize saying what happened was wrong Good Morning ***, Just letting you know that the [redacted] that you were interested in was sold yesterday afternoonLet me know if you see any other vehicle you might be interested in [redacted] Internet Sales Specialist Rallye Motors Auto Group [redacted]

Good Afternoon,SJWD would like to dispute the claims made in the claim to the Revdex.com on 12/7/ SJWD believes they have met and exceeded the customer's needs and expectations regarding their account and will provide no further billing assistance or fee reductions for the following reasons:1) The customer was already given a $credit to their account on 9/23/ It was their first service disconnection for non payment (days in arrears) and staff decided to provide a courtesy adjustment as it was their first service disconnection.2) The customer was disconnected for non-payment (days in arrears) on 11/30/ The customer disputes the service was ever interrupted, but our records indicate is wasAlthough the records and the customer's story do not align, what remains irrefutable is the fact that the customer was days past due on their water bill and should have been disconnected3) In our efforts to please the customer on 11/30, we waived the $reconnect fee we typically charge for a technician to restore water service.4) The customer has been carried a past due balance the majority of the time they have used our services, dating to 6/2015.5) On 12/1/2015, we allowed the customer to pay a portion ($100) of their total bill ($221.76) to keep their water service on The customer was told to pay the remaining balance by 12/ As of 1/7/2016, this account is still not currentPlease take these absolute facts into account as you consider adjusting our "grade" with your agency SJWD believes they have provided a level of leniency that is uncommon If you require the billing history of this customer or any other documentation to corroborate the information contained in this message, please feel free to contact me.Thank you, [redacted] ***Chief Information OfficerSJWD Water District [redacted] 864-[redacted] ***

I am rejecting this response because:The ad stated onstar Available, the email from their employee stated onstar available
The Merrium-Webster dictionary definition of Available:present or for immediate use
The ad and the email constitute expressed and implied warranty according to consumer affairs, I relayed on this information in making my decision to purchase this vehicle,my wife was present when I asked the salesperson,*** *** if everything worked on the vehicle, and her response was that everything was working,I was unable to try the onstar as it was not activated with a subscription
On January 09/I contacted *** ***,general manager at Rallye Motors and discussed the matter with him and informed him it was being delt with presently by Revdex.com ,he was not aware of it,he called me back later that day and says they are sticking with their offer to pay half the cost.I refused and advised him if it was not settled by the Revdex.com that I am proceeding to small claims court.I have spoken with *** ***,Enforcement officer with Consumer Affairs and received information to help me guide my way to Small Claims Court,I have filled out the proper forms to proceed but will wait until after the Revdex.com finalized the present complaint

After checking with my employee, it appears that the customer did not want to pay the cost to package the two pairs of shoes I questioned the employee several times and got the same story every time that she had tried just wrapping in a plastic pack but would not fit and when she told the
lady that the cost would be almost $13.00, the customer declined packaging Since this was a Saturday and only one employee working, it turned into a he said she said situation I have emailed the customer that since I was not here, I would reimburse her for the costs of the shoes She needs to bring me the shoes, the original receipts and I will pay her

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/03/14) */
The complainant's vehicle is a *** with *** kmsThe alleged recall is actually a technical service bulletin or known as a "TSB"
TSB's are not a recall and not a warranty service repair nor are they necessarily an indication of an unsafe
vehicle, they are simply a bulletin to *** mechanics of a possible cause of a suspected service issue
The complainant visited the shop on the 7th with a steering column issueIt was discovered the front strut bearing was binding as the steering wheel was turnedThis potentially could be a safety issue if not repaired as it could cause springs to breakThis repair was completed with the complainants permission
There remains a clicking noise, this is identified by the TSB, there is no safety issue if the item is not replaced nor is it a warranty or recall repair as explained to the complainant
The TSB was not included in the initial repair quote or order, nor was it paid for by the clientThe vehicle was repaired to correct an unsafe mechanical issueThe TSB bulletin is not as the complainant says, a saftey problem that is well known to cause accidents
If the client would like this repair completed we will be happy to provide that service for him at our current shop rates, however it will not make the car any safer than it is currently
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2017/03/14) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I just want it to be known that I will never give them any business ever again and will make sure I post the video now that I have before I ever went to *** I made a video saying I know what the issue is and that its not strut bearings that it was a coupler issue I made this video march 7th before I ever went I told them many times that is the issue they did not listen and said it was strut bearings but yet the issue is still there only after they admitted that yes I was right it is the coupler good thing ppl warned me about them n I made a couple videos before and after so its ok i'll just make sure ppl know from now on thx *** for living up to your bad reviews

Good Afternoon,SJWD would like to dispute the claims made in the claim to the Revdex.com on 12/7/2015. SJWD believes they have met and exceeded the customer's needs and expectations regarding their account and will provide no further billing assistance or fee reductions for the following reasons:1)
The customer was already given a $credit to their account on 9/23/2015. It was their first service disconnection for non payment (days in arrears) and staff decided to provide a courtesy adjustment as it was their first service disconnection.2) The customer was disconnected for non-payment (days in arrears) on 11/30/15. The customer disputes the service was ever interrupted, but our records indicate is wasAlthough the records and the customer's story do not align, what remains irrefutable is the fact that the customer was days past due on their water bill and should have been disconnected3) In our efforts to please the customer on 11/30, we waived the $reconnect fee we typically charge for a technician to restore water service.4) The customer has been carried a past due balance the majority of the time they have used our services, dating to 6/2015.5) On 12/1/2015, we allowed the customer to pay a portion ($100) of their total bill ($221.76) to keep their water service on. The customer was told to pay the remaining balance by 12/9. As of 1/7/2016, this account is still not currentPlease take these absolute facts into account as you consider adjusting our "grade" with your agency. SJWD believes they have provided a level of leniency that is uncommon. If you require the billing history of this customer or any other documentation to corroborate the information contained in this message, please feel free to contact me.Thank you,*** ***Chief Information OfficerSJWD Water District***864-4*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. SJWD DID NOT disconnect my service at any point in timeTheir service technician did not complete the job as he was supposed to & therefore there should have never been any reconnection fee to "waive"This company is the absolute worst when it comes to customer serviceCharging a $"delinquent" fee every time my bill falls past due is ridiculousI am a single mother on a fixed incomeThe bill gets paid as it can be, and always before it's due for disconnectionThe grade of this company should be a big F for failure for the way they conduct business & the treatment to their customers.
Regards,
*** ***

Our ad clearly stated "On Star available"
 
We will stand by our original offer to the client.

Good Afternoon,SJWD would like to dispute the claims made in the claim to the Revdex.com on 12/7/2015.  SJWD believes they have met and exceeded the customer's needs and expectations regarding their account and will provide no further billing assistance or fee reductions for the following reasons:1)...

The customer was already given a $25 credit to their account on 9/23/2015.  It was their first service disconnection for non payment (60 days in arrears) and staff decided to provide a courtesy adjustment as it was their first service disconnection.2) The customer was disconnected for non-payment (60 days in arrears) on 11/30/15.  The customer disputes the service was ever interrupted, but our records indicate is was. Although the records and the customer's story do not align, what remains irrefutable is the fact that the customer was 60 days past due on their water bill and should have been disconnected. 3) In our efforts to please the customer on 11/30, we waived the $35 reconnect fee we typically charge for a technician to restore water service.4) The customer has been carried a past due balance the majority of the time they have used our services, dating to 6/2015.5) On 12/1/2015, we allowed the customer to pay a portion ($100) of their total bill ($221.76) to keep their water service on.  The customer was told to pay the remaining balance by 12/9.  As of 1/7/2016, this account is still not current. Please take these absolute facts into account as you consider adjusting our "grade" with your agency.  SJWD believes they have provided a level of leniency that is uncommon.  If you require the billing history of this customer or any other documentation to corroborate the information contained in this message, please feel free to contact me.Thank you,[redacted]Chief Information OfficerSJWD Water District[redacted]864-4[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  SJWD DID NOT disconnect my service at any point in time. Their service technician did not complete the job as he was supposed to & therefore there should have never been any reconnection fee to "waive". This company is the absolute worst when it comes to customer service. Charging a $25 "delinquent" fee every time my bill falls past due is ridiculous. I am a single mother on a fixed income. The bill gets paid as it can be, and always before it's due for disconnection. The grade of this company should be a big F for failure for the way they conduct business & the treatment to their customers. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/03/15) */
We dispute the complainants claims.
All of our used vehicle ads clearly state in the content of the ad "price reflects a $[redacted] financed here credit" which we honour [redacted]% of the time when the purchaser finances the vehicle at one of our...

locations through a bank or financial institution of the client's choice.
Banks fund referral of loans, we believe it is in the best interest of our clients to pass this on as a reduction in pricing but only if it is indeed financed as described above.
We also clearly identify in our ads that we will not hold a vehicle unless it is paid in full or finance contracts approved and signed by all parties. Until one of these conditions are met the vehicle remains on the market for sale on a first to the post basis.
During the complainants initial indecision and then the delay due to complications in acquiring an approval the vehicle was sold to another individual that met the terms and conditions of the sale agreement and price on a first to the post basis.
Our used vehicle are aggressively priced and with very few exceptions are either the best priced or best value when compared with similar contented vehicles. It is a regular occurrence to have multiple individuals on the same vehicle in a very short time frame. The complainant is welcome to continue reviewing our ads and should there be an item of interest the process to follow should now be quite clear.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2017/03/16) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
According to the email from Internet manager [redacted], the car had sold in the afternoon and they still applied for financing and he me get a co-signer. [redacted] in finance called me at 7:20 and said everything was good to go for the car. [redacted] stated on the phone she would put a hold on the car and send me the bill of sales to sign and hold the vehicle until I could get to Moncton and sign the bank papers, so they do hold vehicles or some staff doesn't follow the business rules. The story doesn't match up timewise. Below is the email from [redacted] stating the car was sold before they put through financing for me. My sales rep [redacted] even called Wednesday morning to apologize saying what happened was wrong.
Good Morning [redacted],

Just letting you know that the [redacted] that you were interested in was sold yesterday afternoon. Let me know if you see any other vehicle you might be interested in

[redacted]



[redacted]
Internet Sales Specialist
Rallye Motors Auto Group
[redacted]

The vehicle was built by the manufacturer with On Star controls wired into the vehicle hence the terminology "On Star ready". The controls are operational but require a software upgrade and then an annual charge for the services On Star provides, none of which was advertised nor offered to the...

client as part of the transaction.
The terminology is direct from manufacturer sites and is how we advertised the unit. In the interest of good public relations and realizing the clients confusion over the terminology we offered  partial compensation for the upgrade. We feel the offer was reasonable and would continue to honor that initial amount.