The report that was furnished to and signed for by the customer was an AutoCheck reportAutoCheck is an Experian company with an A+ Revdex.com Rating See [redacted] The AutoCheck report compiles data from several information sources The Glockner Ford Company relies on this same reportGlockner Ford did not knowingly sell the customer a vehicle that was known to have sustained significant damage A copy of the AutoCheck report is pasted to this response The customer acknowledged in writing that Glockner Ford assumed no responsibility for the report's accuracy.Regardless, we are willing to work with this customer for a satisfactory solution and hope that she will soon schedule an appointment to talk with us
I have visited Glockner on separate occasions to address this issue On each occasion, I have given them the opportunity to address the issue professionally but feel I have been treated unfairly On each occasion, I expressed my desire to buy a new car and trade in the car that I have (at fair market value) for a car of my choice My first choice was a Chrysler Town and Country van (used) I was told “That won’t work” because I owe too much on the car that I have now because I paid full value for a car that was in an accident I was steered toward automobiles that were out of my financial range despite my expressing I was not interested in a $40,000-$50,vehicle On my final visit, I was once again steered toward a Ford Taurus, which I had expressed I was not interested in I gave the salesperson other options of vehicles I was interested in purchasing(I would like to express at this time that I have an EXCELLANT credit score and income) I was told on each of these options that “that won’t work” because, even though they stated they were willing to forgo the “mark up” of the car, the rebates weren’t enough to have my payments below $a month (something I expressed I wanted) on a car with a Manufactured Suggested Retail Price of $per Kelly Blue Book and several other price comparison sites I feel that, even though they say they are willing to “work with me”; they only want to “work with me “on the vehicle THEY want me to have This is how this whole thing started!!!! I read the response from the dealership I agree that I signed the paperwork at the time of purchase stating the purchase was “as is” I read the paperwork I signed As a layperson, I have a few issues with the “Detailed Vehicle History” I signed I was told the accident that caused the damaged to the car I purchased happened in and required the vehicle to be towed to a repair shop I don’t understand how the “Detailed Vehicle History” report that was run showed the vehicle as “clear” in SEPTEMBER OF 2014!! That is at least months after the accident if not longer I don’t understand how this could have happened Had I known about the accident, I would NOT have paid $for a car that was valued at $ This has happened to me in the past and I made sure I asked about this I don’t know how the “detail Vehicle Report” is actually prepared Is it possible to only check certain items and, if the dealer knows there has been an accident, leave off items that you know will cause the report to come back as “not clean”? I am in a HUGE financial deficit with this vehicle I realize that part of it is my responsibility but I WOULD NOT have bought this car if I had known about the accident!
The answer to the customer's last question is No. And, that is not the manner in which the Glockner family has conducted business in a small community for the past years. In two statements, the customer has accused Glockner Ford of concealing a material defect in the automobile she purchased, even going so far as accusing Glockner of manipulating a program that is objectively designed to catch issues with automobiles. In her first statement, the customer even stated that she had no proof of this. Although doing the right thing is our first concern, it does not make any sense to mistreat our customers. We rely on repeat business for additional sales and service on the vehicles we sell. We would not still be in business after years if we acted the way we have been accused.Despite these characterizations, we have attempted to work with the customer in a professional manner to obtain a satisfactory solution. We have appraised her car for a travalue that disregards the fact that it sustained damage in a wreck. Its value, in our opinion, is not what the customer opines; however, we have tried to find other incentives to reach the $18,mark that the customer has set. Moreover, the customer's negative equity situation existed prior to the sale of her Ford Escape. We would like to help, but we need the customer to deal with us reasonably as well
We completely disagree with *** *** *** *** bought a Ford Fusion from The Glockner Ford Cn July 15, At that time Ford Motor Credit was offering a day payment defermentMr*** did not qualify for that plan; however, he did qualify for a day defermentMr***
expressly chose NOT to take that option because it raised his monthly payment over the monthly amount he wished to payThe actual difference in the day deferment and the day deferment was $per monthMr*** specifically chose to have his first payment due in days, and signed a retail installment sales agreement that specified his first payment due date.On July 18, 2015, Mr*** visited the dealership and spoke with *** ***, the general manager. Mr*** expressed to Mr*** that he did not like the Fusion because it did not have a spare tireMr*** pointed out that his tradid not have a spare tire either and inquired as to what the real issue wasMr*** advised Mr*** that Mr***'s wife was unhappy about the purchase.The financing was discussed at the July meetingMr*** contacted Ford Motor Credit, who advised that Mr*** could cancel the current financing arrangement and sign up for the day deferment option*** was advised that this must be accomplished on Monday, July 20. At that time, Mr*** told Mr*** that he had been informed by Ford Motor Credit that ***'s payment could be made within a ten day grace period, and after making that payment, *** could reschedule his future payments.On Monday, July 20, Mr*** never appeared at the dealershipMr*** attempted to call *** three times but received no response.We disagree with how Mr*** has presented this information to the Revdex.com. We cannot now agree to rescind his deal. The new car he bought is now a used car and he is obligated to a third party - Ford Motor Credit - to pay for it
I have visited Glockner on 3 separate occasions to address
this issue. On each occasion, I have
given them the opportunity to address the issue professionally but feel I have
been treated unfairly. On each occasion,
I expressed my desire to buy a new car and trade in the car that I have (at
fair market value) for a car of my choice.
My first choice was a Chrysler Town and Country van (used). I was told “That won’t work” because I owe
too much on the car that I have now because I paid full value for a car that
was in an accident. I was steered toward
automobiles that were out of my financial range despite my expressing I was not
interested in a $40,000-$50,000 vehicle.
On my final visit, I was once again steered toward a Ford Taurus, which
I had expressed I was not interested in.
I gave the salesperson 2 other options of vehicles I was interested in
purchasing. (I would like to express at this time that I have an EXCELLANT
credit score and income). I was told on
each of these options that “that won’t work” because, even though they stated
they were willing to forgo the “mark up” of the car, the rebates weren’t enough
to have my payments below $700 a month (something I expressed I wanted) on a
car with a Manufactured Suggested Retail Price of $30000 per Kelly Blue Book
and several other price comparison sites.
I feel that, even though they say they are willing to “work with me”;
they only want to “work with me “on the vehicle THEY want me to have. This is how this whole thing started!!!!
I read the response from the dealership. I agree that I signed the paperwork at the
time of purchase stating the purchase was “as is”. I read the paperwork I signed. As a layperson, I have a few issues with the “Detailed
Vehicle History” I signed. I was told
the accident that caused the damaged to the car I purchased happened in 2013
and required the vehicle to be towed to a repair shop. I don’t understand how the “Detailed Vehicle
History” report that was run showed the vehicle as “clear” in SEPTEMBER OF
2014!! That is at least 9 months after
the accident if not longer. I don’t
understand how this could have happened.
Had I known about the accident, I would NOT have paid $26000 for a car
that was valued at $26000. This has
happened to me in the past and I made sure I asked about this. I don’t know how the “detail Vehicle Report”
is actually prepared. Is it possible to only
check certain items and, if the dealer knows there has been an accident, leave
off items that you know will cause the report to come back as “not clean”?
I am in a HUGE financial deficit with this vehicle. I realize that part of it is my responsibility
but I WOULD NOT have bought this car if I had known about the accident!
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. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] The dealer did not call me on or about 20 July 2015, as of date they made no call to me. The last time talk to the dealer was 18 July 2015. They forget that I have caller idea .
Regards,
[redacted]
The report that was furnished to and signed for by the customer was an AutoCheck report. AutoCheck is an Experian company with an A+ Revdex.com Rating. See [redacted] The AutoCheck report compiles data from...
several information sources. The Glockner Ford Company relies on this same report. Glockner Ford did not knowingly sell the customer a vehicle that was known to have sustained significant damage. A copy of the AutoCheck report is pasted to this response. The customer acknowledged in writing that Glockner Ford assumed no responsibility for the report's accuracy.Regardless, we are willing to work with this customer for a satisfactory solution and hope that she will soon schedule an appointment to talk with us.
The report that was furnished to and signed for by the customer was an AutoCheck reportAutoCheck is an Experian company with an A+ Revdex.com Rating See [redacted] The AutoCheck report compiles data from several information sources The Glockner Ford Company relies on this same reportGlockner Ford did not knowingly sell the customer a vehicle that was known to have sustained significant damage A copy of the AutoCheck report is pasted to this response The customer acknowledged in writing that Glockner Ford assumed no responsibility for the report's accuracy.Regardless, we are willing to work with this customer for a satisfactory solution and hope that she will soon schedule an appointment to talk with us
I have visited Glockner on separate occasions to address this issue On each occasion, I have given them the opportunity to address the issue professionally but feel I have been treated unfairly On each occasion, I expressed my desire to buy a new car and trade in the car that I have (at fair market value) for a car of my choice My first choice was a Chrysler Town and Country van (used) I was told “That won’t work” because I owe too much on the car that I have now because I paid full value for a car that was in an accident I was steered toward automobiles that were out of my financial range despite my expressing I was not interested in a $40,000-$50,vehicle On my final visit, I was once again steered toward a Ford Taurus, which I had expressed I was not interested in I gave the salesperson other options of vehicles I was interested in purchasing(I would like to express at this time that I have an EXCELLANT credit score and income) I was told on each of these options that “that won’t work” because, even though they stated they were willing to forgo the “mark up” of the car, the rebates weren’t enough to have my payments below $a month (something I expressed I wanted) on a car with a Manufactured Suggested Retail Price of $per Kelly Blue Book and several other price comparison sites I feel that, even though they say they are willing to “work with me”; they only want to “work with me “on the vehicle THEY want me to have This is how this whole thing started!!!! I read the response from the dealership I agree that I signed the paperwork at the time of purchase stating the purchase was “as is” I read the paperwork I signed As a layperson, I have a few issues with the “Detailed Vehicle History” I signed I was told the accident that caused the damaged to the car I purchased happened in and required the vehicle to be towed to a repair shop I don’t understand how the “Detailed Vehicle History” report that was run showed the vehicle as “clear” in SEPTEMBER OF 2014!! That is at least months after the accident if not longer I don’t understand how this could have happened Had I known about the accident, I would NOT have paid $for a car that was valued at $ This has happened to me in the past and I made sure I asked about this I don’t know how the “detail Vehicle Report” is actually prepared Is it possible to only check certain items and, if the dealer knows there has been an accident, leave off items that you know will cause the report to come back as “not clean”? I am in a HUGE financial deficit with this vehicle I realize that part of it is my responsibility but I WOULD NOT have bought this car if I had known about the accident!
The answer to the customer's last question is No. And, that is not the manner in which the Glockner family has conducted business in a small community for the past years. In two statements, the customer has accused Glockner Ford of concealing a material defect in the automobile she purchased, even going so far as accusing Glockner of manipulating a program that is objectively designed to catch issues with automobiles. In her first statement, the customer even stated that she had no proof of this. Although doing the right thing is our first concern, it does not make any sense to mistreat our customers. We rely on repeat business for additional sales and service on the vehicles we sell. We would not still be in business after years if we acted the way we have been accused.Despite these characterizations, we have attempted to work with the customer in a professional manner to obtain a satisfactory solution. We have appraised her car for a travalue that disregards the fact that it sustained damage in a wreck. Its value, in our opinion, is not what the customer opines; however, we have tried to find other incentives to reach the $18,mark that the customer has set. Moreover, the customer's negative equity situation existed prior to the sale of her Ford Escape. We would like to help, but we need the customer to deal with us reasonably as well
We completely disagree with *** *** *** *** bought a Ford Fusion from The Glockner Ford C
n July 15, At that time Ford Motor Credit was offering a day payment defermentMr*** did not qualify for that plan; however, he did qualify for a day defermentMr***
expressly chose NOT to take that option because it raised his monthly payment over the monthly amount he wished to payThe actual difference in the day deferment and the day deferment was $per monthMr*** specifically chose to have his first payment due in days, and signed a retail installment sales agreement that specified his first payment due date.On July 18, 2015, Mr*** visited the dealership and spoke with *** ***, the general manager. Mr*** expressed to Mr*** that he did not like the Fusion because it did not have a spare tireMr*** pointed out that his tradid not have a spare tire either and inquired as to what the real issue wasMr*** advised Mr*** that Mr***'s wife was unhappy about the purchase.The financing was discussed at the July meetingMr*** contacted Ford Motor Credit, who advised that Mr*** could cancel the current financing arrangement and sign up for the day deferment option*** was advised that this must be accomplished on Monday, July 20. At that time, Mr*** told Mr*** that he had been informed by Ford Motor Credit that ***'s payment could be made within a ten day grace period, and after making that payment, *** could reschedule his future payments.On Monday, July 20, Mr*** never appeared at the dealershipMr*** attempted to call *** three times but received no response.We disagree with how Mr*** has presented this information to the Revdex.com. We cannot now agree to rescind his deal. The new car he bought is now a used car and he is obligated to a third party - Ford Motor Credit - to pay for it
I have visited Glockner on 3 separate occasions to address
this issue. On each occasion, I have
given them the opportunity to address the issue professionally but feel I have
been treated unfairly. On each occasion,
I expressed my desire to buy a new car and trade in the car that I have (at
fair market value) for a car of my choice.
My first choice was a Chrysler Town and Country van (used). I was told “That won’t work” because I owe
too much on the car that I have now because I paid full value for a car that
was in an accident. I was steered toward
automobiles that were out of my financial range despite my expressing I was not
interested in a $40,000-$50,000 vehicle.
On my final visit, I was once again steered toward a Ford Taurus, which
I had expressed I was not interested in.
I gave the salesperson 2 other options of vehicles I was interested in
purchasing. (I would like to express at this time that I have an EXCELLANT
credit score and income). I was told on
each of these options that “that won’t work” because, even though they stated
they were willing to forgo the “mark up” of the car, the rebates weren’t enough
to have my payments below $700 a month (something I expressed I wanted) on a
car with a Manufactured Suggested Retail Price of $30000 per Kelly Blue Book
and several other price comparison sites.
I feel that, even though they say they are willing to “work with me”;
they only want to “work with me “on the vehicle THEY want me to have. This is how this whole thing started!!!!
I read the response from the dealership. I agree that I signed the paperwork at the
time of purchase stating the purchase was “as is”. I read the paperwork I signed. As a layperson, I have a few issues with the “Detailed
Vehicle History” I signed. I was told
the accident that caused the damaged to the car I purchased happened in 2013
and required the vehicle to be towed to a repair shop. I don’t understand how the “Detailed Vehicle
History” report that was run showed the vehicle as “clear” in SEPTEMBER OF
2014!! That is at least 9 months after
the accident if not longer. I don’t
understand how this could have happened.
Had I known about the accident, I would NOT have paid $26000 for a car
that was valued at $26000. This has
happened to me in the past and I made sure I asked about this. I don’t know how the “detail Vehicle Report”
is actually prepared. Is it possible to only
check certain items and, if the dealer knows there has been an accident, leave
off items that you know will cause the report to come back as “not clean”?
I am in a HUGE financial deficit with this vehicle. I realize that part of it is my responsibility
but I WOULD NOT have bought this car if I had known about the accident!
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. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] The dealer did not call me on or about 20 July 2015, as of date they made no call to me. The last time talk to the dealer was 18 July 2015. They forget that I have caller idea .
Regards,
[redacted]
The report that was furnished to and signed for by the customer was an AutoCheck report. AutoCheck is an Experian company with an A+ Revdex.com Rating. See [redacted] The AutoCheck report compiles data from...
several information sources. The Glockner Ford Company relies on this same report. Glockner Ford did not knowingly sell the customer a vehicle that was known to have sustained significant damage. A copy of the AutoCheck report is pasted to this response. The customer acknowledged in writing that Glockner Ford assumed no responsibility for the report's accuracy.Regardless, we are willing to work with this customer for a satisfactory solution and hope that she will soon schedule an appointment to talk with us.