Ford of Hoopeston

I am rejecting this response because:The only option giving was to trade into a brand new jeep....which is not an option as the truck is used for work and the truck I was attempting to trade for in Indiana would work out fine but giving that when a car fax is pulled on the fit showed that the title was branded because of a mileage issue if a dealer using car fax will not trade because of that I have no other options I offered to split the difference of just over dollars in attempt to be able to trade into another truck but was told that the dealership couldn't loose that much money on a vehicle with the offset that would put my payment around a month which was acceptable on a comparable truck

I am rejecting this response because:The only option giving was to trade into a brand new jeep....which is not an option as the truck is used for work and the truck I was attempting to trade for in Indiana would work out fine but giving that when a car fax is pulled on the 2005 f350 it showed that the title was branded because of a mileage issue if a dealer using car fax will not trade because of that I have no other options I offered to split the difference of just over 10000 dollars in attempt to be able to trade into another truck but was told that the dealership couldn't loose that much money on a vehicle with the offset that would put my payment around 550 a month which was acceptable on a comparable truck

To The Dispute Resolution Department: In Response to the complaint from Kevin [redacted], complaint ID: [redacted]) Mr. [redacted] originally purchased his truck from Crown Ford on August 8, 2016. At that time I owned 49% of the company and by December of 2016 I purchased 90% of the dealership with...

Rick Martinez owning 10% - that ownership model still stands. At the time of Mr. [redacted]'s purchase Joe [redacted] was the general manager but he has not been with company since October 31, 2016 so anything pertaining to what he may or many not have said I am unable to address at this time. I dug out all the paperwork from the original sale and the paperwork that Rick Martinez tracked down when Mr. [redacted] first came to us with his complaint on May 12, 2017. Mr. [redacted] told Rick that he had been in another dealership trying to trade in his 2005 Ford F150 that he purchased from us in August and was told that the vehicle had a "branded title" he has stated that we knew about this. We absolutely did not, and I still state today that we knew nothing of any problem with the title. The title to the 2005 F150, which Mr. [redacted] signed and I am including a copy of, shows no "branding". In the automotive industry a branded title is clearly stamped "SALVAGE" across the front of the title. Mr. [redacted] stated that his was about the "Not actual mileage" stamped on the title. And for a vehicle of that age, the actual mileage is not required on the title. I have included a document from the Illinois General Assembly stating that fact. I have also included another bulletin from the Illinois Secretary of State discussing how one corrects and incorrect statement of "Not actual mileage" - we have put the pieces together to show that the mileage was likely not entered into a transaction accurately before we ended up with the vehicle. In fact, that title went to the bank where we secured financing for Mr. [redacted] and they had no concerns with the title either. When Mr. [redacted] came in with this issue we immediately began the forensic work in the title. The truck came to us via a trade in from a Michael [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] bought the truck at Watseka Chrysler on December 12, 2012. Watseka Chrysler had purchased the truck on Oct. 30, 2012. On October 30, 2012 the odometer statement read 132,261 and as you can see from the copy of the odometer statement that Watseka Chrysler provided that number had been enter into their computer system thus it is type written. On 12-12-2012 when they sold it to Mr. [redacted] the odometer reading on that statement (also included) was exactly  the same. That is highly unlikely based on test drives, inspections, etc. that a vehicle undergoes while in inventory for two months. We called Mr. [redacted] on May 12, 2017 to see what he could remember of the transaction. He said that the truck had over 140,000 miles on it when he purchased it, but it went uncorrected because on a truck of that age with that many miles 8000 more miles or so does nothing to the value, nor is there any warranty that it would effect so he didn't ask them to correct it. On December 27, 2012 Mr. [redacted] took the truck to Davan's body shop because he had been in accident. They reported the mileage at the times as 142,969 and I have included the page they faxed to us showing that information. He did service work with our Ford store and on January 24, 2013 we show it coming in for an alignment and we recorded the mileage as 142,979. That repair order is included. In looking further, he brought it back into our shop on 11-12-2013 for normal maintenance and we recorded a mileage of 149,758, so the odometer has always been working to our knowledge.To look further into the we ran AutoCheck, report is included. It shows no accident, and no odometer problem on the first page, but later lists that the car was taken to Watseka Ford with a broken odometer. All of the mileage makes sense in the rest of the report and we are seeing what we can get from Watseka in regard to a repair order when that broken odometer showed up in the report. The Ford store in Watseka was where it was leased as a new truck, all the renewals show up, etc. on the AutoCheck report. We called Watseka Ford and they are telling us that they have two records on it being in their service department on 6-22-2007 with 49,750 miles on it, and on 2-2-2010 with 103,793 miles on it. They have no record of any issue, ever, with the odometer.Rick Martinez has offered to trade Mr. [redacted] out of that truck into a different vehicle. This poses new issues because Mr. [redacted] having owned the truck for such a short time, and having owed more on his trade in back in August than it was worth at the time, is currently in a second situation where he is not in an equity position. This makes trading harder to do, and apparently it is not appealing to Mr. [redacted]. This part is not something that I have any control over. We have done our diligence and tried to resolve this issue. I am sorry it is not to Mr. [redacted]'s liking.Respectfully submitted,Jennifer ShelbyPresidentFord of HoopstonChrysler Dodge Jeep Ram of Hoopston