Ganley Toyota

We purchased a 2022 Corolla from Ken Ganley Toyota in June and the vehicle is pure Toyota...a delight. I wish I could say the same for this dealership which seems to be obsessed with short term gain at the expense of long-term relationships. This will be our last Toyota from this dealership, and I have also enlightened many friends with the tricks of Ganley Toyota.

I am also complaining to corporate Toyota as Ganley needs to review the corporate mission statement which begins "To attract and attain customers with high valued products. With their aggressive mark ups this dealer is NOT value focused.

Aside from the new car markups, Jared Fleming stated that our trade in, a 2005 Matrix was so old that their only option was to ship it out to auction. Lo and behold after replacing the rear struts, fuel tank bands, wiper blades and a detailing the "Old" Matrix was incorrectly listed in their inventory as an "XR" model at a selling price of a whopping $7, 321. I believe this "old" Matrix sold in a matter of days for this ridiculous price.

If you are shopping for a Toyota there are many honest reliable dealers out there. Cochran Toyota is superb.

Why did I go along with this Ganley nonsense? I was facing life changing surgery and was in a vulnerable position. My wife was concerned that our "old" Matrix would break down on one of our many hospital journeys.

I suggested to corporate Toyota that Ganley's allocation should be reviewed until they cease with the dealer mark ups and assorted trade in tomfoolery. I hope someone is listening.

Mr [redacted] , I received your letter today with Mr***' responseMy sales manager, [redacted] ***, has told me that he did in fact offer Mr [redacted] an additional $discount off of the price due to his mistakeSincerely, [redacted] President Ganley Toyota

I am rejecting this response because: Dealership did not offer any compensation at the time of purchase The impression that was portrayed was "to bad, take it or leave it" The buyers order was emailed and signed by the dealership, which on the order says that it is binding

I am rejecting this response because: We have already mailed a check for $ and free oil change certificates to this customer I did receive one free oil change certificate, not "free oil change certificates" we are willing to replace the negative battery terminal end and bolt as a means of ending his frustration to this matter Just "replace the negative battery terminal and bolt" cannot solve the issue because it was not only the bolt damaged, but the inside thread in the car’s body frame, in which the bolt was held was also damaged The damaged inside thread cannot hold the bolt anymore and it must have a solution Due to this incident, the car has been unusable for days so far I hope the dealer should consider for some kind of compensation for the inconvenience for our life and work due to this incident Also, there was another jumpstart bill of $in order to start the car to home during this period.Thank their positive response,Lu

Letter delivered by hand to Revdex.com: Ref: case [redacted] Hi Dave,In continuation of this caseI had thought that our customer relations manager had offered the client free oil change couponsThat is my errorI am mailing him more today.I spoke with the technician about the customers complaint of the "inside thread in the car's body frame"The technician is not understanding the issueHe states that there was not an issue when the vehicle was here and that the bolt threaded right inThe customer did state to us that he had the vehicle to another repair facility after he left our dealershipI have no idea what that repair facility may have done to his vehicleThe customer will need to bring the car in so that we can have a technician inspect the "inside thread in the car's body frame"After inspecting it we can advise on if further repairs will be necessary other than the negative battery cable, bolt and/ or batteryAt that point we can also advise if we would be taking care of any other repairs to resolve this issueNaturally if it is something that the next repair facility damaged we would not be participating financially in anything that they damaged.We will not be compensating for any down time from this vehicleWe have the parts here that we said we would order for him and he has not come in for the repairThe customer has also had the vehicle to another repair facility and he has obviously opted to not have them repair the vehicle.Our offering to repair this vehicle is a "goodwill" offer and not any admission of guilt or faulty workmanship to his vehicleYou should also be made aware that this vehicle has been in a collision on the right hand front sideI have no idea if any of his complaints are related to the collision.Sincerely,Michele AFixed Operations Manager [redacted]

*SEE ATTACHMENT*Dear Mr***,Mr***s accusations that we were trying to put "another customer's parts" on his truck do not make senseWe had several leaf spring campaign sets in stock when he was here to have his springs inspectedWe were checking to see if we had a set here that were the correct part number for his vehicle per the campaignAnd if the part number was set aside for another customer at the time that he was here or if it was a set that we could use to fulfill his campaignThis was to try and make things easier for Mr***As it was we did not have the correct part number in stockSo I am not how this is relevant to his concern with the frameThe parts are still on a national backorder and when they do arrive we will contact him.I contacted Toyota 8/23/to see who the Limited Service Campaign notice had been sent toIt was mailed to a plumbing company who owned the vehicle when the LSC came out in The date that Toyota shows that it was mailed was July 23, Per Toyota's notification process they are not obligated to send new customers a secondary notice on this LSCThey would have mailed in based upon records from the Department of Motor Vehicle registrationToyota does not send out letters that a LSC is endingPer Toyota they have fulfilled their obligation to the EOD Limited Service Campaign.In November, when Paul *** brought the vehicle in for the frame inspection it clearly did qualify for the EOD LSCI had included the instructions for the LSC in our last communicationThe frame did not have holes in it and would not have received a new frameIt is clearly stated on the repair order that the frame was rustyToyota was very strict on their procedure for this LSCThe customer was to schedule to have the rustproof completedOne would have to think that as upset as he is about this frame that he would have scheduled shortly after the purchase of the vehicle was completedThe customer chose to wait for months to returnThe first Repair Order that we have with his information is May 31, Prior to that our knowledge of the owner of the vehicle was Paul ***.Mr*** states that Jaime knew 100% that if the truck did not qualify for the campaign that it would not be purchasedIt did qualify for the campaign when Mr*** brought it in on November, 14, 2015.Mr*** talks about a comfort level to purchase the vehicleWe were not the selling dealer of this vehicle so I am not sure why he feels that we were a part of his purchasing decisionOur dealership had nothing to gain by his purchase of this vehicleIn fact I am unsure why he passed dealers that were far closer to him to come here to have the frame inspected.Mr*** was confrontationalHe will not accept black and white of the criteria of the LSC EODThis criteria is not something that myself or anyone else at the dealership can modifyWhen Mr*** did not hear what he wanted to hear from me he asked what I was going to do with JaimeI asked him what he wanted me to do fire her? I did not yell at Mr***stated facts plain as dayMr*** made comments about taking further measuresI did instruct him at that point to go ahead and leave the dealershipOn his way out he walked up to Jaime and made a comment that he saved her job for herHer job was not on the line from her interaction with Mr***I only asked him if he wanted me to fire her.If my being direct appalled Mr*** that is not something that I can help.Mr*** states that if this had been a $rim that it would have been cleared up by our dealership by nowI am not sure where he obtained this information fromBut every customer issue is handled on a one on one basisIf a customer requests a new rim and the dealership does not feel that a new rim is warranted to be replaced free by the dealership then it is not replaced for free by the dealership.Another dealership employee also heard Mr*** screaming at Jaime when he was here in May to have the leaf springs checkedSo all of his accusations about his treatment at Ganley are unwarranted in my opinion.Mr*** also states that this issue has nothing to do with ToyotaThis is an odd comment since he had started email correspondence with Toyota's customer assistance line November 17, in reference to his frameThis is the same day that Carfax shows the title transfer from Mr*** to Mr***Toyota also went over the EOD guidelines with himMr*** then contacted Toyota again on June 17, and was informed of the guidelines and expiration of the EOD.The dealership does not understand why Mr*** feels that they should pay for a new frame for this vehicle or pay him any moneyThis is a deal between Mr*** and the previous owner.The dealership can only follow the guidelines that are set by the manufacturer for a Limited Service Campaign. Michele AB*** Fixed Operations Manager Ganley Akron IncEast Market St Akron, Oh 330-733-

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/24) */
Dear ***,
I spoke with our sales manager John D***, and he tells me that he spoke with the consumer today and that they have resolved this situationIf you need anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me
Thanks,
Ken
Ganley
President
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 11, 2015/09/11) */
On 9/11/15, Revdex.com received the following from the consumer via email:
Ganley Toyota sent me a check to cover the cost of the brakes.Thank you very much for helping meHave a great weekend

I am rejecting this response because:
There are several statements mentioned in this letter that are and never happenedThis is not acceptableThe person that wrote this statement yelled at me and told me to get my truck out of HER service department while her employee was trying to put another customers parts on my truck-Toyota Cospokesperson says this is never suppose to be happeningHowever--she never even checked that they had adequate parts to do the spring campaign. I was told by Jaime that she would not even rustproof this truck because it would be a waste of timeHer own words--just let it rust--its just a matter of time before holes appear and you get a new frame. I'm suggesting a face to face with the owner of this business as what has transpired now that the program closed when I was told it would be active for several years is being covered up to save an expenditure for this company.Again--several items mentioned in this letter to you are 100% falseI'd gladly submit to a polygraph in my testimony and I'm sure they would deny the same test.Jaime knew 100% that if this truck would not qualify for the campaign it would not be purchasedHer saying---its a good purchase because it would get a new frame was the deciding factor on this purchase NEVER DID I RECEIVE ANY NOTICE OF THE CAMPAIGN ENDING--I WAS TOLD DIRECTLY BY GANLEY TOYOTA THAT IT WAS OPEN FOR A COUPLE MORE YEARS AND THAT THIS FRAME CERTAINLY WOULD FAIL--JUST A MATTER OF TIME.Their inability to check campaign dates and consequently provide me with misleading and untrue statements when they should had been aware (so says Toyota Co.) I would had never purchased this truck I solely went on the professional judgment of what I was told when it was inspected.Because of the cost not being covered by Toyota and it being such a costly repair this is why we are going through thisThe dealership gave the information of which now they are not standing behind it because their employee didn't know the time frame of the campaignThis was solely their responsibility with saying its getting replaced---even taking minutes to show a new frame and speak of all the procedures is more evidence that Jaime was providing a comfort level for me to purchase this truck knowing I'd not be paying for a new frame.Getting yelled at by the service manage because of the truth---totally uncalled forI never raised my voice to her or was disrespectfulWhen she asks me "What would you like me to do--fire her" I responded "No, just fix the problem that has been created by your shop" Her saying--should I fire her--was unprofessional, none of my business, and striking out a person not the situation createdI responded--no don't fire her I just want the mistake correctedWhen I said that I'd swear on a stack of bibles to the truth she got real nasty--told me I was threatening a lawsuit--I responded no I'm not--then she yells--"Get your truck out of my shop" I'm sure the owner of Ganley is not interested in paying for this mistake but that doesn't make the "TRUTH" go away I was told what I was told--time for Ganley to take care of their mistake. This is all about the "cost" of the repairIf it would had been a $rim it would had been cleared up by Ganley by nowThis is about Integrity of individuals that tell you what they should had know and what is in reality not what they told a customer. I'm appalled by the conduct of the service manager but I trust that Ms S*** will bring forth the truth to the owner of the businessMaybe she already has--and someone is trying to make the customer pay or go away. As a former flat rate mechanic and service advisor for Toyota and British Leyland and someone that has shipped a few vintage cars overseas--I double check the deals I deal withI'd not purchase a year old truck for $13, knowing I'd be paying a $14,bill in months I did the math and that is why it was brought in for a frame inspection and now Ganley will not stand by their wordThis has nothing to do with Toyota at this point because I was told it would not end for a few years and this truck would get a new frameSimple--truthful--and I do plan on seeing my rights to what I was told would happen is carried out.Respectfully,David ***

Letter delivered by hand to Revdex.com: Ref: case [redacted]Hi Dave,In continuation of this case. I had thought that our customer relations manager had offered the client 3 free oil change coupons. That is my error. I am mailing him 2 more today.I spoke with the technician about the customers complaint of the "inside thread in the car's body frame". The technician is not understanding the issue. He states that there was not an issue when the vehicle was here and that the bolt threaded right in. The customer did state to us that he had the vehicle to another repair facility after he left our dealership. I have no idea what that repair facility may have done to his vehicle. The customer will need to bring the car in so that we can have a technician inspect the "inside thread in the car's body frame". After inspecting it we can advise on if further repairs will be necessary other than the negative battery cable, bolt and/ or battery. At that point we can also advise if we would be taking care of any other repairs to resolve this issue. Naturally if it is something that the next repair facility damaged we would not be participating financially in anything that they damaged.We will not be compensating for any down time from this vehicle. We have the parts here that we said we would order for him and he has not come in for the repair. The customer has also had the vehicle to another repair facility and he has obviously opted to not have them repair the vehicle.Our offering to repair this vehicle is a "goodwill" offer and not any admission of guilt or faulty workmanship to his vehicle. You should also be made aware that this vehicle has been in a collision on the right hand front side. I have no idea if any of his complaints are related to the collision.Sincerely,Michele A. Fixed Operations Manager[redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:  Dealership did not offer any compensation at the time of purchase.  The impression that was portrayed was "to bad, take it or leave it".  The buyers order was emailed and signed by the dealership, which on the order says that it is binding.

Mr. [redacted], I received your letter today with Mr. [redacted]' response. My sales manager, [redacted], has told me that he did in fact offer Mr. [redacted] an additional $750 discount off of the price due to his mistake. Sincerely, [redacted] President Ganley Toyota

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/16) */
Mr. [redacted] contacted me on May 15th and I wrote an order to document his concerns. I offered him a free synthetic oil change and he demanded I give him 4 or 5. I told him no and left a message for our customer relations manager about the...

situation. Patrick, the customer relations manager also contacted the customer. The customer demanded more than the 1 free oil change from Patrick as well.
There was no oil leaking from the vehicle- as I explained to the customer. There was some oil residue found on the under engine shield from taking the oil filter off of the engine to replace it.
The 2 bolts that were broken were more than likely frozen from corrosion- which is something environmental not the fault of the manufacturer or Toyota. Normally there would be a charge to repair this.
Going through the customer's service file - he has never paid for an oil change on his vehicle. He has managed to somehow get 6 free synthetic oil change certificates since he purchased the vehicle. So his request for more free certificates is characteristic with his service file.
I have sent a copy of the order documenting that he had been here to have the vehicle inspected. I have also attached a copy for your reference.
If Mr. [redacted] would like to schedule a time to come in to have his vehicle put on a lift with myself and a technician available we would be more than happy to do so. When I had spoke with him on May 15th he had not requested this.
I do not know what "damage" he is speaking of since there was no oil leak. There was oil residue in the undercover from taking the oil filter off. With the design of the vehicle it is very hard to not have some oil spill out of the old filter when removing it. Our technician should have cleaned the spilled oil up better before releasing the vehicle to the customer. As far as the shield bolts being broken- when we have a vehicle come in with the bolts already broken- which is very common- we normally tell the customer so they can make the decision to repair it or not. The customer has had work performed at other places per the car fax report. So I'm not sure how he can say that we did the damage. Car fax also shows an accident on the vehicle.
I feel that offering to put the vehicle on a lift for him to view with myself and a technician and sending him the copy of the order that was created to document his complaint fulfill his request.
I will not be sending him any free oil change certificates
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not accept because:
1) They say there was no oil leaking. There was a pool of oil in my engine compartment and oil on my driveway and garage floor. A sign that there was oil leaking.
2) They say the bolts broke from corrosion. They did not tell me this problem when my car was returned from the oil change, nor did they save me the parts they replaced after they worked on the problem. At both junctures, proper procedure on their part would have proved,or disproved, their stance. I believe they broke the parts during the oil change due to lack of care.
3) I paid for all oil changes provided. If they review the records of the sale, they would find that the transaction involved me giving them my old vehicle and a large sum of money and they gave me a new vehicle, floor mats and prepaid oil changes in exchange.
4) I do not want to pay for them to put the vehicle on a lift to view the problem. Also, there was a previous promise to allow me to view the problem in his manner and when I did bring it in, I was denied because they could not allow it. Has there been a policy change since then?
5). I do not want free oil changes for compensation for damages, travel and time spent on this problem. This would not be in my best interest. When total estimate of the damage is assessed, a monetary settlement would be appropriate.

6). They say that Car Fax reports work done at other places. No work has been done on my car at other places. All work has been done at their service department.
7) They say an accident could have caused the problem to the car. The accident to the car was minor and at the most extreme area from the site of the problem. The accident could not have caused the problem. I am certainly willing to meet with their experts to prove this point to them.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/06/26) */
I have offered to have the customer bring the vehicle in so he can inspect it with myself and a technician present. I did not say there would be a charge to do this so I am not understanding his comment about not wanting to pay for this when we never said there would be a charge.
The customer has not made an appointment to I have been advised of.
I explained prior about the oil that he saw and the underpanel bolts.
We have had the policy to show customers their vehicle on a lift with a technician and service advisor/manager present since 1997- I do not know where the assumption that we would not do that come from.
I have attached the page of car fax showing the other repair facility and accident.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would possibly be satisfactory to me only after Ganley Toyota has the inside thread of the frame fixed and they recover the damaged parts to the original manufacturer state.  Here are my answers in red color to their response:I spoke with the technician about the customers complaint of the "inside thread in the car's body frame". The technician is not understanding the issue. As I stated in the previous letter, when driving to Ganley, my car had no any problem and I went Ganley Toyota only for an oil change .  During the service, I was only told the battery needed replacement.  Without telling me and get my approval, the technician damaged the bolt and the inside thread of the frame, which I found out later after I got home.  I found that I could use my two figures easily to remove the replaced bolt without any tool.   The technician did damage them and the Ganley Toyota should take the responsibility.The technician was/is dishonest person because 1) During the service, he had said my battery was bad,.but later, the battery tests in [redacted] all show that the battery was/is in good condition, no need for replacement.  2) He said the negative cable was bad, but it works well without any issue as long as it is connected well. 3)  He knew exactly what he had damaged, but he continues to lie consistently.He states that there was not an issue when the vehicle was here and that the bolt threaded right in. If “there was not an issue when the vehicle was there and that the bolt threaded right in”, Why at that time, the car could not jump-start through the negative cable and had to jump-start from the frame? Why after he could not jump-started through the negative cable, he went back to pick up his tool and tried to tie the bolt?   He exactly knew the damage he made at that time.and he used a more worse damaged one to put in the place of the original one he had damaged in an attempt to show me the cable was bad. I will show you the both bolts when we meet.The statement here is contradictory to his statement in Patrick's email, there "He disputes that he cause any damage to the bolt as it was already damaged.He showed that to you."The customer did state to us that he had the vehicle to another repair facility after he left our dealership. I have no idea what that repair facility may have done to his vehicle. The facts were:I have never told any person in Ganley Toyota that “he had the vehicle to another repair facility after he left our dealership.”, including Michele and Patrick.  Please show your evidence about when, where, and who I told that to.  Please see the attached email I replied to Patrick.After getting home on that day, I drove my another car with the so-called bad battery and went to [redacted] (not a repair facility)  to buy a new battery and a new cable because I still thought and trusted the Ganley Toyota might be right at that time.  Only after the battery test confirmed that the battery was/is good and later the bolt could be pulled out with my two figures without any tool, I realized that I had been scammed by the technician. Only after the car could not started in the parking lot of a restaurant, a tow truck was called for a jump-start (not a repair facility).The customer will need to bring the car in so that we can have a technician inspect the "inside thread in the car's body frame". After inspecting it we can advise on if further repairs will be necessary other than the negative battery cable, bolt and/ or battery. I am available in the morning on Dec. 27, 28, 31 or January 2, 3, and 4.  Please advise what is the best time for you and also I would like to meet with your general manager and the owner,. as well.Our offering to repair this vehicle is a "goodwill" offer and not any admission of guilt or faulty workmanship to his vehicle. No matter whether you admit or not, the truth and the wrongdoing your technician did will not change.You should also be made aware that this vehicle has been in a collision on the right hand front side. I have no idea if any of his complaints are related to the collision.The battery and the negative connection are all on the left,frontal side, and there was nothing to do with the collision almost four years ago on the the right frontal side.[redacted]The following is the email to Patrick:Hello, Patrick,Here are my answers to your irresponsible email:1. "The tehcnician stated that he explained the issue with the battery connection to the frame and that you choose not complete the repair. "Before the car was returned to me, Randy was the only person who talked with me and the dead battery was the only issue Randy had talked to me; therefore, there was no place and no time, “he explained the issue with the battery connection to the frame and that you choose not complete the repair”.  This statement is a lie and false statementIf it was true, you still have to take the full responsibility because If you insisted that his statement was true, after customer declined the repair, any repair action and damage would be against customers' right and a good business protocol.  Without customers approval, you have to take all the responsibility for any work and damage you took by yourself.2. "He disputes that he cause any damage to the bolt as it was already damaged.He showed that to you."As I said, before the car was returned to me, I had never met with him and there was no place and time “he showed that to me also.”Since 2010, The car has never had any issue on battery and connection; therefore, there have nobody touched that part. When I drove into your facility, it was in the original manufacture state.  The new damaged marks on the bolt clearly indicates it was damaged by your technician.  This dispute is just another lie which approves further his dishonest personality.3. "Once you refuse the repair we recommend, it is your responsibility to have the repair completed elsewhere. "Before the car was returned to me, the battery replacement was the only recommended repair and I did refused.  But after the oil change, you returned my car in a damaged and unusable state.  In fact, the battery is in very good condition and your technician touched the parts beyond the oil change without telling me and my approval; therefor,  your irresponsible statement here further shows your bad business management and dishonest practice.4. You brought a concern to a manager and we replaced that bolt before you left and you were satisfied.It was not "before I left" and the time was after I left and at about 3:10 PM, I came back again.  After I found the problem at home, I came back to buy a new bolt and brought the problem to one of your manager.  It did not mean I was satisfied.  Satisfied or not satisfied should be said by customers themselves, not from you, as a manager!5. The underlying problem that caused the electrical failure is still there.  Yes, I absolutely agree!  Just because your technician dishonest action without my approval.6. You declined the recommended repair and took your car from our dealership.Yes, I am glad that I declined the recommend battery and cable replacement repair, which were/are in very good working condition.  I am glad I took my car from your dealership to avoid more damaging and finally find the cause why my car suddenly stopped working.7. Since then, another facility has looked at your vehicle.  Therefore, we are not responsible for supplying your son with a rental car.I need your evidence to show what time and where the another facility has looked at my car? 8. Therefore, we are not responsible for supplying your son with a rental car.Your irresponsibility only shows how bad your business practice is against the business protocol and standard, as well as the highly moral.Will not your irresponsibility and bad business practice will be harmful to customers, but also your business![redacted]

Received at Revdex.com via email: Revdex.comAttention Dave D.Case [redacted] Dear Mr. D.,We have already mailed a check for $55.00 and 3 free oil change certificates to this customer.  I see that he is still not satisfied.  He did purchase the vehicle at our dealership and we...

are willing to replace the negative battery terminal end and bolt as a means of ending his frustration to this matter.  I believe that this is what he is talking about as “damaged inside thread of the frame and recover the vehicle to its original state Replace the damaged bolt with an original manufacturers bolt”I have ordered the parts for his car VIN specific from Toyota and they should be here December 14, 2016 at 7am. Please advise me if I should contact the customer upon the arrival of the parts or if the Revdex.com would be doing so. Sincerely, Michele A. Fixed Operations ManagerGanley Akron Inc. 330-733-7511

*SEE ATTACHMENTS* Dear Mr. [redacted],I am responding to your case number [redacted] on a David [redacted].Mr. [redacted] had made a complaint with AUTOCAP prior to his contact with your organization. AUTOCAP has closed their case #[redacted] and had not found fault in the dealerships handling of the...

situation. I can forward the emails if you would like.On November 14, 2015 the 2006 Tacoma VIN [redacted] was brought into the dealership to have the frame inspected for rust perforation. The person who brought the vehicle in and signed the repair order is a Paul [redacted].It is clearly typed on the repair order that I have attached that there was no perforation found. Frame was very rusty and would probably perforate when cleaning the frame- is also typed on the Repair Order. Customer was to contact the dealership when he had time to have the rustproof completed. No rustproof was scheduled before the campaign expired. The campaign number was EOD. it was a limited service campaign. This Limited Service Campaign expired March 31, 2016. The campaign is very clear that the frame must have holes 10mm or larger in certain locations on the frame that Toyota diagrams out for any frame replacement to be considered. If there were no holes present then the frame was to be cleaned and treated with a compound as outlined in the EOD Limited Service Campaign. The cleaning of the frame and treatment of the compound had to be completed by March 31, 2016.A customer's failure to comply to a Limited Service Campaign cannot be controlled by the dealership. The dealership also cannot extend Toyota's time frame of a Limited Service Campaign.I am unclear as to why the customer would not bring the vehicle in for the frame treatment before the expiration date. We schedule day by day and there was over a 4 month window to bring it in. The customer states that he would not have purchased the vehicle if it was not going to get a new frame. I am unclear on why he did not read the data on the Campaign to see the expiration date. He states that he knew all about the Campaign prior to bringing the truck in for the inspection with the previous owner.David [redacted], in his claim states that Ganley guaranteed that the truck would receive a new frame. On the documentation from the inspection, that is not stated anywhere. In his complaint withAUTOCAP, David [redacted] also claims that Toyota pulled the program. The "program" was not pulled. It was a Limited Service Campaign with an expiration date. David [redacted] did not bring the vehicle in for the frame treatment until after the program expired. The dealership cannot make a customer bring a vehicle in prior to a campaign expiration. In fact the dealership did not even have information for David [redacted] on file. The information that we had on file shows the owner of the vehicle as Paul [redacted].From looking at car fax the title transferred on November 17, 2015. We inspected it on November 14, 2015 for the previous owner. Carfax also shows that Mr. [redacted] had the vehicle in for a transmission issue at a transmission shop on June 15, 2016.David [redacted] brought the truck in May 31, 2016 to have the leaf spring campaign performed. The leaf springs were ordered at that time for him. This is a campaign that is unrelated to the Limited Service Campaign EOD. It was made clear to him at that time that the Limited Service Campaign for the frame treatment or replacement had expired. Jaime S[redacted] had written up the repair order for the leaf spring campaign on that date. He had asked to speak with me and I explained the Campaign information to him in regards to the frame. He was very difficult and rude. Jaime claimed that on his way out the door he told her that he saved her from being fired.Even if the EOD campaign was still in effect the truck still did not qualify for a frame replacement. There were not holes in it over 10mm in the areas on the Toyota diagram for the Limited Service Campaign. The previous owner should have received the customer letter on the campaign stating the expiration date as well. But it does not appear that Mr. [redacted] is faulting him for not making it clear to him.Feel free to contact me if you need any other documentation.Michele A. B[redacted] Fixed Operations Manager Ganley Akron Inc. 1395 East Market ST Akron, OH 44305 330-733-7511

Dear Mr. [redacted], I am in receipt of your letter regarding the complaint of Mr. [redacted]. I met with the management team at the dealership to discuss the matter. When the purchase agreement was emailed to Mr. [redacted], our sales manager did not add the payoff of Mr. [redacted]' trade in to the bottom line. When...

I asked him why, he said that he simply made a mistake and it was nothing more than human error. In an effort of goodwill, Mr. [redacted] was offered an additional $750 discount but declined. Sincerely,  [redacted] President Ganley Akron, Inc.

I am rejecting this response because:
1. We have already mailed a check for $55.00
and 3 free oil change certificates to this customer. 
I did receive one free oil change
certificate, not "3 free oil change certificates".
2. we are willing to replace the negative
battery terminal end and bolt as a means of ending his frustration to this
matter. 
Just "replace the negative battery terminal
and bolt" cannot solve the issue because it was not only the bolt damaged, but the
inside thread in the car’s body frame, in which the bolt was held was also
damaged.  The damaged inside thread cannot
hold the bolt anymore and it must have a solution.
3.  Due
to this incident, the car has been unusable for 20 days so far I hope the
dealer should consider for some kind of compensation for the inconvenience for
our life and work due to this incident. 
Also, there was another jumpstart bill of $55 in order to start the car
to home during this period.Thank their positive response,Lu

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2016/02/16) */
Dear Mr. D[redacted],
Aproximately 7-10 days ago, I had sent you an email with my response to this complaint, I'm guessing the email did not reach you, I apologize. My response will be identical to the response that I provided AUTOCAP, and Ms....

Deanna Z[redacted].
I have met with my staff regarding the complaint of Mr. D[redacted]. The salesperson, George D[redacted] reviewed a hand written purchase agreement with Mr. D[redacted] prior to the paperwork being completed by our finance office. The paperwork clearly shows the price of the vehicle and the amount of his trade in, documentation fee, registration, and sales tax. These are all clearly written out on the agreement. The customer then met with one of our finance managers, Jason B[redacted]. Mr. B[redacted] then reviewed the information again with Mr. D[redacted] on the paperwork. Again, the customer signed a second, typed purchase agreement with Mr. B[redacted]. The customer at this point had reviewed and signed the paperwork twice. We actually do this to avoid any type of discrepencies. At some point after leaving the dealership, the customer contacted the salesperson George D[redacted]. George referred the customer to his sales manager, John D[redacted]. Mr. D[redacted] apologized for any miscommunication and discussed an equitable solution with Mr. D[redacted]. Mr. D[redacted] suggested a refund of $500, and Mr. D[redacted] offered him $250 and a free oil change. The customer agreed and a check was sent to him. It is important to also note, that Mr. D[redacted] offered to rescind the entire transaction at no cost to Mr. D[redacted], and the customer turned the offer down.
Obviously, Mr. D[redacted] feels there was miscommunication regarding the pricing. We would not have agreed to sell the vehicle for what Mr. D[redacted] is saying he wanted to buy it for. I feel the dealership has done everything possible to resolve this issue, including the offer at the time to simply rescind it.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact myself or John D[redacted].
Thank you,
Ken Ganley
President
Ganley Toyota
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2016/02/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The offer they extended was not accepted and I have not cashed the check for $250. In fact, they have since contacted me and offered an additional $250 ($500 total) in which I believe is also not fair. I am willing to negotiate on this as I am at some fault for signing the paperwork, despite it being deceiving and inaccurate per my verbal agreement with the Ganley employee. I have been in contact with AUTOCAP on this as well. Unfortunately, if I cannot find a resolution through Revdex.com or AUTOCAP, I will explore additional options to notify the public of this horrible experience. I am a stand-up citizen and Veteran of the US Army and have never been treated this poorly as a customer in my entire life.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2016/03/03) */
Mr. D[redacted],
The position of the dealership has not changed in this case. Mr. D[redacted] also filed a complaint with Autocap, who has since closed the complaint and I believe feels the dealership has done everything we could to rectify it, including offering to rescind the transaction at the time.
Sincerely,
Ken Ganley
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 18, 2016/03/28) */
Received from consumer on 3/28 via email:
Hi, I wanted to confirm that issue is now resolved. Thanks