Fedder Motors LLC

Business response received via fax to Revdex.com -- scan is attached; text of letter reads as follows: "To Whom It May Concern:These are the facts as we know them:January 21, 2017 -- This vehicle entered our inventory and was a local trade in.January 24, 2017 -- A 27 point visual inspection was...

conducted on the vehicle by Justin [redacted], our mechanic who has completed training through Pine Technical College and is ASC certified. (See enclosure). This report is generally kept in our dealer jacket and provided upon request.January 30, 2017 -- Ms. [redacted] purchased a 2004 Buick Rendezvous from us for a total cost of $3027.75. She worked with Joey [redacted], a Fedder Motors salesman. Ms. [redacted], as with all of our customers, was afforded the opportunity to take the vehicle on a test drive and have her own mechanic inspect it.January 30, 2017 -- Ms. [redacted] completed and signed all paperwork to include the following: a Bill of Sale, a MN Title Application, a Buyer's Guide with AS IS - NO WARRANTY clearly identified, a 'WE OWE' document that indicates 'sold as equipped, no work promised' and finally an ASC warranty agreement.Sometime shortly after January 30, 2017 -- Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] brought to our attention that we had erroneously failed to select the proper vehicle type when purchasing their warranty. That situation was rectified with a phone call to ASC where it was changed.March 25, 2017 -- Mr. James [redacted] approached Fedder Motors salesman, James [redacted], and customers and began to slander Fedder Motors during a sales conversation on our lot. Mr. [redacted] send things like: 'These guys aren't very honest. Be careful what you're buying. You're better off doing business somewhere else.' Mr. [redacted] attempted to redirect Mr. [redacted] but ultimately had to contact local law enforcement. When law enforcement arrived and Mr. [redacted] had left, Fedder Motors was advised to see a temporary restraining order or a no trespass order.Throughout this situation Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] have both indicated that they feel that we are financially responsible for the repairs on this vehicle. We disagree. We sold a vehicle that had been inspected, had been test driven by the customer, and was clearly sold AS IS. Because Mr. [redacted] was a previous customer, (he purchased a vehicle here and we performed service on his other vehicles), we gave him this vehicle at our cost.We have engaged in conversations with Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] and have not been able to come to an agreement. We feel that we have no further financial responsibility on this issue. We paid for the warranty and provided Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] with a vehicle well below current retail prices. Sincerely,[redacted] FedderOwner, Fedder Motors LLC"

Response received via fax to Revdex.com, 1/31/17. Scan is attached -- includes copies of Buyer's Guide, warranty documents.Text of accompanying letter reads as follows: "To Mr [redacted] and the Revdex.com,Here is the information regarding the purchase made on Dec. 2, 2016:1) Mr [redacted] did...

purchase a Volvo AS IS from Fedder motors see attached documentation. As with any AS IS vehicle it is sold as the customer sees it and drives it. Mr [redacted] took the vehicle for a test drive and had the opportunity to have that vehicle inspected by a mechanic or other person of his choice.2) Fedder Motors prides itself in including a 90 day warranty with each vehicle sold. This warranty is a product that Fedder Motors purchases on behalf of the customer through ASC Warranty. Any warranty claims should be initiated with that company. The warranty is attached. It clearly states that it is a Plan 1 - Drivetrain Plus warranty with the coverage listed on the bottom portion of the page. Nowhere does it state on that page that the 'Plus Bonus Coverage' was purchased for Mr [redacted].3) Mr [redacted] spoke with Jada O[redacted], Office Manager on Friday, December 13 and was verbally abusive. He repeatedly used words like 'f[redacted],' 'c[redacted],' and 'b[redacted]' when addressing Ms O[redacted]. This is entirely inappropriate regardless of his frustration. The General Manager and Salesman witnessed Ms O[redacted]'s portion of the conversation. At no time during the conversation did she engage in similar immature vocabulary choices. She conducted herself as we would expect any employee to conduct themselves. She explained the warranty to the customer numerous times.4) Regarding the lack of a spare tire or jack, this is something that should have been immediately brought to the attention of the salesperson (Jada O[redacted]) at the time of purchase. At that time, Fedder Motors would have worked with Mr [redacted] to solve this issue. We simply cannot go back and change this situation five weeks later. We regret if Mr [redacted] had issues and empathize, however we cannot imagine any business offering compensation for this situation.Please feel free to contact me after 4:00 p.m. at Fedder Motors at ###-###-####. We believe we have provided evidence that we conducted ourselves properly in this situation. Mr [redacted] should not expect to have a conversation again with Ms O[redacted], she has been instructed not to engage in a conversation with him again. Should he choose to visit regarding this information, he should contact [redacted] Fedder, General Manager, or [redacted] Fedder, Owner.Thank you,[redacted] FedderGeneral ManagerFedder Motors, LLC"

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/03/05) */
Ms. [redacted] was approved for a loan NOT by Fedder Motors but through Members Cooperative Credit Union of Cloquet, MN. Fedder Motors does not do loans. We work on behalf of the customer to help them procure financing.
Ms. [redacted] was approved...

and required to provide documentation for her income. Upon receipt and investigation of the verification, MCCU rescinded their approval for financing. Ms. [redacted] and her husband were unable to provide proof of the income listed on the credit application for Mr. [redacted]. MCCU was unable to continue with the loan.
Because Fedder Motors had a credit application signed by both parties, we pursued financing on her behalf. It is our belief that the credit application is valid for 30 days and we worked in good faith to acquire financing for her. They were in possession of the 2014 Dodge Grand Caravan the entire time.
We were able to obtain financing through Nationwide, a company that specializes in loans for sub-prime customers. It is our belief that they fell into that category Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] fell into that category.
We contacted them when the loan was approved. When told of the new interest rate and loan payment, Mrs. [redacted] simply said she would talk to her husband.
A couple of days later, they returned the van.
Regarding the $500 it was not a deposit it was a down payment and taken off the total cost of the loan. They had the van for 14 days, put over 800 miles on it, damaged a storage compartment door on it, and returned it quite dirty.
Our detailer spent four hours deep cleaning the van to prepare it for the lot at $50 per hour and at 50 cents per mile that total comes to over the $500 down payment.
Fedder Motors feels that they were the middle man on this issue and that Mr. and Mrs. [redacted]'s complaint should be directed elsewhere. We did our best to provide them with a vehicle and provide financing.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/03/07) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I was not going to take a 17.9 interest rate when they had me approved at 4.9 I have the paper saying that I was approved it is the credit paper from the bank they had all our income before we started the process why would Fedder's give me the van if I was not approved, I would have not taken it I did drive it for a week before they even called me and told me my loan did not go through I then waited days before they returned a call saying that I was approved at a different place I then tried getting my own financing and was told no for that van so I went to a different dealer and got financed with way lower apr then 17.9 I put 500 down on the first loan and that loan did not work they said so I took the van back in same condition I received it I have pictures from the day I got it and the day I took it back I did add miles to it but that is because they called a week later I had no other vehicle to drive and four kids to get back and forth to school that is why it was not vacuumed out Fedder's told me when I called it needed to be back right away so I stopped what I was doing and took it back which is 45 minutes one way I carried car insurance on the vehicle for 2 weeks which they are not willing to pay back, I am asking for my 500 dollars back as they did not go through with the first loan which is what the down payment was for it was not for them to find me different financing I would walked away and not took the van if the first loan did not go through like the paper says it did I have all the loan papers to show that it was approved. Fedder's has been rude and no help when I call, and the owner Jake refuses to address the issue or talk to either my husband or I about it I have never done business with people like this.

I am rejecting this response because:Employees of Fedder Motors misrepresented themselves and the vehicle I purchased. I was told by 2 employees that the vehicle needed a minor exhaust repair. I met with the general manager after I purchased the vehicle, which is not noted in the response. She stated that the mechanic's report should have been shown to me before I purchased the vehicle, since this was their normal policy. I was not shown the report, and the GM showed it to me and it stated the exhaust was fine, and it was. If I would have seen this report, then I would have know that the employees were lying or greatly misinformed, and I would have looked at other vehicles, or taken the car to an independent mechanic before purchasing. The employees misrepresented the vehicle, and the GM apologized and told me that the salesman was new,and they would rectify this, but starting with the next customer. The report that was shown to me was not the report sent to the Attorney General's office. The report I saw, after my purchase, was not nearly as extensive. The salesman told me that their mechanic checked out the vehicle and it was good to go. I guess that does not necessarily mean 'safe to drive' to Fedder Motors. I could have lost a wheel or been stranded at any time, but took to another mechanic before I had issues. In regards to the warranty, I phoned Fedder Motors and the salesman, Joey, who explained the warranty to me, told me that it was 'too bad, that it was not covered', and he refused to help me. I did not get any assistance until I spoke to the GM.  I am asking Fedder Motors to reimburse me for only half of the repair costs that would not be considered normal maintenance. Their response stated that we are not able to come to an agreement. I am attempting this before I take any other actions, and Fedder' response has been too bad since I signed the 'as is' and they will do nothing. [redacted]