GMT Auto Sales West

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/08/27) */
[redacted] damaged our rental rv while in his care and custody. He has denied doing do so. I have pictures of the metal awning that was bent.The awning was not bent when he left metal does not bend on its own. The balance due is 500.00 plus we...

are directing the deposit to that total deductable amoutnt of 1000. We have a perfect record with the Revdex.com. Ou plans are to persue legal means to recover this money. I have all documents signed showing that [redacted] is fully resopsible,

My name is [redacted] and I am the General Sales Manager and St. Louis RV. On December 29th, 2016, [redacted] purchased a used, 2015 Thor Outlaw 37LS. The used RV warranty that was placed on the used Thor Outlaw, covers major components such as: engine, transmission, drive axle, slide...

out rooms, power steps, etc. for 30 days or 1,000 miles, whichever comes first. The warranty clearly states that all work must be completed or scheduled through St. Louis RV. The warranty does not cover water intrusion, the bed lift system or any incidental damage from any of the covered and non-covered items. We make an exhaustive effort to thoroughly inspect any pre-owned unit that is traded in to our dealership. We cannot however, foresee future malfunctions of any systems or components. In a good faith effort to make sure Ms. [redacted] had a great buying experience from us and was completely satisfied with the unit, we authorized sealing of the passenger side window, and repairing of the overhead bunk, neither of which were covered by the warranty, and repairing of the power step, which was covered by the warranty. Any other repairs that were completed were not covered by any warranty and not authorized by St. Louis RV, therefore, they are the sole responsibility of the customer. I would like to note, we have not seen an invoice for the $895.00 from [redacted] or [redacted]. I would also like to note, St Louis RV has never been contacted by [redacted], the owner of the Outlaw, all the correspondence has been through a third party individual. In order to fulfill our previous commitment, we will pay for the work that was authorized by St. Louis RV if we are contacted by and receive an invoice from Ms. [redacted].

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I CALLED WINNEBAGO AND GOT THEM TO GIVE ME THE PARTS EVEN AFTER THE WARRANTY EXPIRED DUE TO INFERIOR WORKMANSHIP AND PARTS FALLING OFF THE RV  IS NOT SUPPOSE TO HAPPEN.  JANUARY 11TH IS NOT EXCEPTABLE,  THIS PART ORDERING - ST. LOUIS RV DROPPED THE BALL FROM OCTOBER 3RD WE CALLED IN TO GET THESE PARTS ORDERED OCTOBER 3RD UNTIL JANUARY 11TH  REALLY FOR A HOOD LATCHES.   I BOUGHT THE WRONG PRODUCT.  ST. LOUIS RV NEEDS TO BUY THIS UNIT BACK,  WE WASH OUR HANDS OF THIS 4 MONTHS OF MAKING PAYMENTS ON AN RV THAT HAS DONE NOTHING BUT SIT.  THATS ALMOST $4,000  IS ST. LOUIS RV GOING TO REINBURSE OUR PAYMENTS FOR OUR RV SITTING,  BECAUSE WE CAN NOT GET PARTS THAT ARE ON BACK ORDER,  HOOD LATCHES ARE FALLING OFF THESE RV UNITS.  WOULD YOU NOT THINK THAT THEY SHOULD MAKE A ZILLION OF THESE AND KEEP THESE IN STOCK - ITS A MAJOR ISSUE.   BUY THIS UNIT BACK PLEASE,   REFUND US  I WOULD NOT BUY ANY THING FROM THESE PEOPLE AGAIN,  HIGHLY DO NOT RECOMMEND  WORSE SERVICE DEPARTMENT I HAVE EVER BEEN TO.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:Mr [redacted] has been dealing with my partner [redacted], and we actually purchased the unit together. [redacted] knows more about the unit so is better placed to discuss the concerns and I have always been in his company during the conversations. Mr [redacted] is well aware of this and has at no point asked to speak with me directly.Secondly, St Louis RV was issued all job details throughout the service, which had detailed breakdowns of all the works and costs. I will reiterate that St Louis RV then acted behind our backs, without discussing any aspects of the works and authorised only part of the works to be done. The reason St Louis RV is yet to receive the invoice is because the settlement amount is still in dispute and they have zero intention on trying to reach any agreement. They would need to answer and return phone calls for this to happen. I vehemently deny there has been any good faith shown by St Louis RV or that our sales experience has been in any way great. I challenge Mr [redacted] to find me a customer that would think any business acting behind their back on their behalf without authorisation is a great experience? This is made even more evident by the fact that Mr [redacted]'s response in no way addresses the customer service complaint aspect. We're still waiting on that call from [redacted], the owner, some 40 days later. I would also like to repeat, as in the original complaint, that his remark about the service having to take place at St Louis RV was discussed at the point of sale and again prior to the unit being taken in for service. At neither time was this indicated to be an issue and we were actually promised it wouldn't be a problem. It was only once the costings were sent to St Louis RV that any issues were brought to light. Photographs of all the issues we believed to be warranty related were sent to St Louis RV. They had these images for over 30 days and never indicated any concerns to their warranty eligibility or about them being repaired by a different service centre. When I rang to discuss this with Mr [redacted] he indicated that if the work was being done by them they would have been able to cover it as their internal costs are less. This again shows that the reason for refusing the costs is all to do with profit margins and nothing to do with the warranty itself. We were never indicated that the extent of the warranty would be less because we took it to a different service centre.Sincerely,[redacted]

I received the title today and called the Mr. [redacted].  We will pay all sales tax late fee and pay for a new inspection.   If there should be any more question you can reach me at [redacted].  [redacted]Office Manger

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/17) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] GM
Contact Phone: XXXXXXXXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@sbcglobal.net
[redacted] did not purchase an RV he rented a unit from St Louis Rv rental all issues were resolved with customer

I have attached [redacted]'s written response and our buyers guide describing the limited warranty we offer.

We did trade Mr. [redacted] into a different vehicle to resolve the issue at our GMT North location. They are happy and even left our company a 5 star review on Facebook.

So once again, Mrs. [redacted] has selectively failed to mention that she came to our dealership interested in Honda vehicles in general. We discussed several different options for her, hence why she saw several different [redacted] reports. Mrs. [redacted] has a classic case of buyers remorse, and we have been willing to help her trade out of her current vehicle. She has asked for unreasonable compensation towards the purchase of a different vehicle. We have complied with state law, and have fulfilled all of our obligations. The bottom line is that we sold her a mechanically functional vehicle, that was cosmetically pleasing to her at the time of sale. After the sale she decided that it was not up to her standard, so first we repaired the vehicle, then we even went as far as agreeing to trade her out of the vehicle. Our offer still stands.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
since this is an on-going issue with winnabago - they should have kept parts stocked - I called WINNABAGO (NOT ST. LOUIS RV) IN ORDER TO GET THEM TO REPLACE THE HOOD LATCHES,   THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE FALLEN OFF TO BEGIN WITH, SINCE IT WAS PURCHASED MAY 2016 AND THAT WAS A [redacted] WARRANTY TO BEGIN WITH.  JANUARY 11TH IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.  AND I GUESS WE NEED TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY OBVIOUSLY.   I CAN SEE WHERE THIS IS GOING     NO WHERE
Sincerely,
[redacted]