Haldeman Lexus of Princeton

Haldeman Lexus view of the Morales Complaint: [redacted] visited Haldeman Lexus to purchase a used vehicle [redacted] intended to pay for the purchase using a third party bank named [redacted] *** Haldeman Lexus of Princeton did not initiate the loan with [redacted] nor recommend *** [redacted] in any way, this was the customer's bank of choice [redacted] is a sub-prime lender that specializes in making loans to people unable to be financed through conventional sources because of their credit situation Upon reciept of the [redacted] documents our sales manager, [redacted] ***, contact [redacted] via the number on the paperwork Upon speaking with [redacted] ***, [redacted] was given a verbal approval for the loan as long as we paid [redacted] a fee of $ All the terms were agreed upon and we delivered the vehicle to the customer in good faith on Friday October 31st On Monday November 3rd, [redacted] contacted [redacted] again to verify when we would be funded on the loan Only at this point was [redacted] informed that in fact the loan was not approved and [redacted] required additional documentation from the customer before they would approve the loan The salesperson, [redacted] ***, contacted the customer and got the requested documents (proof of income, residence, etc.) and [redacted] forwarded them to [redacted] *** At this point, [redacted] confirmed the approval, but demanded an additional $in bank fees to process the loan We were unwilling to pay this exorbitant amount of money because of this customer's exceptionally poor credit [redacted] contacted the customer to inform her that the loan was not approved and that she needed to return the vehicle [redacted] may believe the loan was approved, but that approval was conditional on us paying $to [redacted] *** Since that was not part of the original deal and we were unwilling to pay, there was no approval [redacted] orginally agreed to return the vehicle, but then sent an email requesting no more contact and that she had retained a lawyer (see attached) Upon reciept of that email, [redacted] forwarded me the information When I recieved [redacted] 's email, I replied that given she has retained a lawyer and wished to take it in that direction, I would pursue our options as well This included voiding her temp tag and filing an incident report with the Lawrence Police Department Despite the fact I laid out our intentions clearly, I was understaning and apologetic in the email, telling [redacted] we were were willing to take the car back "with no penalty" to her [redacted] continued to refuse to return the vehicle, though she did demand we pick it up at the Pensauken Police Department To be clear, we were looking for a simple resolution to an unfortunate situation, but our view of the situation is: - [redacted] initiated the loan with [redacted] with no influence from Haldeman Lexus - [redacted] changed the terms of the agreement Days after [redacted] took delivery of the vehicle -Haldeman Lexus attempted to reverse the deal with "no penalty to" [redacted] - [redacted] refused any attempt to return the car that she was unwiling or unable to pay -Haldeman Lexus attempted to work in good faith with the customer's lender, but was unwilling to obtain the necessary approvals Ultimately, this situation is the result of [redacted] 's ability to get vehicle financing and HER choice of [redacted] as a lender [redacted] attempt to gouge the dealership for $(in addition to the high interest rates they charge the customer), is the reason we were forced to request the car back [redacted] was faced with the choice of returning the car or paying the remaining balance in full via cash or alternative financing She instead chose to refuse either option At the time of this response (11/10/2014), the vehicle has not been returned, nor have we been paid for the vehicle As we have been from the start, we are willing to take the car back, give [redacted] her old vehicle back and refund her deposit It is her reluctance that has prevented this from happening.Sincerely, [redacted] General Sales ManagerHaldeman Lexus of Princetonwww.HaldemanLexus.com [redacted] *** [redacted] ***

Following is our response to complaint #[redacted]  I had submitted a response on the 17th, of September (see attached copy of the information page that I printed after I submitted the complaint response). I do not dispute the fact that [redacted] purchased a...

vehicle on July 27th and as of the 9/2/2015 had not received his plates.  The reason for the delay in the plate arrival is based upon the way [redacted] purchased his car.  [redacted] did not come to our dealership and purchase a stock vehicle that we had advertised for sale.  [redacted] some sort of connection to one of our long time customers [redacted] had leased the vehicle in question from our dealership in 2011.  At the end of his lease, [redacted] had the option to purchase the vehicle he had been leasing.  Based upon the fact that [redacted] had driven less than anticipated mileage, plus the general strength of the current pre-owned market meant that the option price [redacted] had on the 2011 [redacted] was a very competitive price.  [redacted] did not want to purchase the 2011 RX350 from the leasing company, but came to an arrangement to let [redacted] purchase the vehicle.  In order to accomplish this, [redacted] would have had to write a check for the full balance of the purchase option for the 2011 RX350 plus the 7% NJ taxes applicable and the registration costs associated with taking ownership of the vehicle.  Once that was complete, he could sell the vehicle to [redacted] (passing on the purchase option cost, plus the NJ taxes plus the NJ registration fees), who would then need to take the title to ** motor vehicle, pay the applicable tax and registration costs for **.  Doing it this way created a double taxation issue and would have ended up costing [redacted] a minimum of $1800 more to take possession of this vehicle.  [redacted] asked us to facilitate the transaction on behalf of him to avoid the additional taxes.  As a courtesy to [redacted] (who is a long time valued customer) we agreed to process the transaction to save them the additional monies involved.  As such, when we processed the paperwork for [redacted] we did not have the title for the vehicle in house.  When we facilitate this type of transaction, we do not pay off the bank the amount owed onto the car until we receive the funds from the customer.  Once [redacted] paid for the vehicle, we proceeded to pay off the lease and waited for the title from Lexus Financial to be sent to us.  Because of this unusual nature of this transaction, we were not able to complete the new ** title work prior to [redacted]’s temporary running out.  NJ DMV does not permit re-issue of duplicate temporary plates for out of state customers so we were unable to extend his temporary.  Since the time of original complaint, we did obtain [redacted]’s plates and sent them to his home.   It is unfortunate that we were not able to get the motor vehicle done in the 20 days that was provided by the temporary plate.  In hindsight, we should have not agreed to facilitate the transaction, there was no financial interest for us and it has only created dissatisfaction with the very people we were trying to assist.  Had [redacted] purchased a stock vehicle of ours in the normal manner, we would not have incurred this problem (though he would have paid substantially more for the vehicle at true market prices).  I apologize for the delay and inconvenience this caused for [redacted] and I can promise that is will not happen again.  Hopefully the significant savings [redacted] achieved by purchasing the 2011 RX 350 substantially below market and avoiding the double taxation situation compensated him for his time and inconvenience.

[redacted] did visit our dealership on the day in question. She did spend quite a bit of time in the store, until well after close. The reason [redacted] spent so much time in the store was due to her requests, not due to the dealerships desire to lengthen the process. [redacted] was combative and...

argumentative about virtually every aspect of the transaction. We did our best to accommodate [redacted] requests including but not limited to: having one of our senior diagnostic technicians speak with here regarding the reconditioning process, speaking with my used car manager regarding the condition of the vehicle, performing a vehicle alignment at [redacted] request (she felt it was not properly aligned), and replaced the cabin air filter. [redacted] also wanted us to remove the window tinting, which we agreed to do. She had a few other requests that we could not agree to such as: remove the deductible on the powertrain warranty that comes with the car, use other specific chemicals to detail the vehicle and guarantee the airconditioning drain was not clogged. We did our best to accommodate [redacted] requests even though our technicians did not believe the car needed an alignment or needed a new air filter. In order to accomplish these things we had to put the vehicle in our shop and have our technician take the time to do the repairs requested. In addition, we had to get the air filter she requested from the Toyota dealership nearby. Ultimately, when the vehicle was finally complete, and it came time to do the paperwork, it became even more problematic. I can't stress enough that up until this point, [redacted] was combative and argumentative in all her requests. She was condescending and dismissive of several of my associates including my used car manager and my senior diagnostic technicians. When the time came to do the paperwork, my Finance Director Kelly L[redacted], went into the salesperson's office to discuss the closing of the transaction with [redacted] continued to argue over every possible item. With regard to the motor vehicle in question, we charge the exact amount the state charges us for the title/registration/plates. The only charges are the sale price and the documentary fee of $349 which we charge, we collect on behalf of the state the exact cost of the motor vehicle costs and the NJ sales taxes. As we were getting ready to close, Ms. Lyall made several attempts to collect payment from [redacted]. Given [redacted] was paying by check, we wanted to have our cashier run the check through our verification process to ensure the funds were available. [redacted] continued to find reasons to no produce the check. Keep in mind that [redacted] had been in the store since 2:00. We did everything we could to accommodate [redacted], but we had reached the limits of our patience. After 6 hours of non-stop combativeness and her unwillingness to complete the deal, we told [redacted] there was nothing more we could do and we asked her to leave. She continued to be combative and it was now 45 minutes after closing time. Due to [redacted] combative nature, I felt it was in the best interest of all parties involved to have a 3rd party escort her from the building. As such, we called [redacted] PD. I didn't want any unwarranted accusations levied at any of the associates or at our dealership. Due to [redacted] combative nature and a cursory "googling" of her name that raised other concerns, we felt legal protection was in our best interest. [redacted] continued to argue with the Police for another 20-30 minutes after their arrival. According to the officer involved, all of their interaction was captured on body cam vide in the event there was any claims made by [redacted] in the future. In my 24 years at the dealership, we have only called the police 3 times. Once was a case of clear identity theft, the second was for a person who demanded a car for free and made implied threats to an associate and this case. I've kept to the facts and avoided any characterizations of [redacted] capacity or state-of-mind. Without delving into personal assumptions about [redacted], I can only say that in 24 years, being involved with 10,000+ vehicle sales, and over 100,000 customers through the door, this is only one of 3 instances that we felt there was no other alternative than to call the [redacted] Police. In conclusion, we did all we could to facilitate the transaction for [redacted]. We made the repairs to the vehicle she requested and were clear in the items we could not address. We did not overcharge here, the numbers were clearly laid out. [redacted] combative nature was the only thing that kept her from completing the transaction in a reasonable time. [redacted] returned her loaner car and the only reason she did not take delivery of the used Camry was because of her unwillingness to complete the transaction. I understand people may have apprehensions about auto dealerships, but we operated above an beyond what we needed to do to attempt to close the deal. And I can assure you we would not lose a deal because of the $25 that [redacted] claims we were overcharging. If that was the only item remaining, we would have agreed to the $25 less for the transaction. I would not waste the [redacted] Police's time with such a trivial matter, unless I felt there was no other recourse. Unfortunately, in today's society, that is what it came down to. We assume no responsibility for [redacted] loaner car or lack thereof. We were willing to complete the transaction, but she made that impossible. It was an unfortunate situation for all, and I wish we had put and end to the transaction earlier in the day by just refusing to accommodate [redacted] escalating demands. That was really our only failing in our interaction with [redacted]. Because of that, I would be willing to reimburse [redacted] $100 for her time and trouble. Sincerely, David J D[redacted] General Sales Manager Haldeman Lexus of Princeton [redacted]

Haldeman Lexus view of the Morales Complaint:[redacted] visited Haldeman Lexus to purchase a used vehicle.  [redacted] intended to pay for the purchase using a third party bank named [redacted].  Haldeman Lexus of Princeton did not initiate the loan with [redacted] nor recommend [redacted]...

[redacted] in any way, this was the customer's bank of choice.  [redacted] is a sub-prime lender that specializes in making loans to people unable to be financed through conventional sources because of their credit situation.  Upon reciept of the [redacted] documents our sales manager, [redacted], contact [redacted] via the number on the paperwork.  Upon speaking with [redacted], [redacted] was given a verbal approval for the loan as long as we paid [redacted] a fee of $700.  All the terms were agreed upon and we delivered the vehicle to the customer in good faith on Friday October 31st.  On Monday November 3rd, [redacted] contacted [redacted] again to verify when we would be funded on the loan.  Only at this point was [redacted] informed that in fact the loan was not approved and [redacted] required additional documentation from the customer before they would approve the loan.  The salesperson, [redacted], contacted the customer and got the requested documents (proof of income, residence, etc.) and [redacted] forwarded them to [redacted].  At this point, [redacted] confirmed the approval, but demanded an additional $1500 in bank fees to process the loan.  We were unwilling to pay this exorbitant amount of money because of this customer's exceptionally poor credit.  [redacted] contacted the customer to inform her that the loan was  not approved and that she needed to return the vehicle.  [redacted] may believe the loan was approved, but that approval was conditional on us paying $2200 to [redacted].  Since that was not part of the original deal and we were unwilling to pay, there was no approval.  [redacted] orginally agreed to return the vehicle, but then sent an email requesting no more contact and that she had retained a lawyer (see attached).  Upon reciept of that email, [redacted] forwarded me the information.  When I recieved [redacted]'s email, I replied that given she has retained a lawyer and wished to take it in that direction, I would pursue our options as well.  This included voiding her temp tag and filing an incident report with the Lawrence Police Department.  Despite the fact I laid out our intentions clearly, I was understaning and apologetic in the email, telling [redacted] we were were willing to take the car back "with no penalty" to her.  [redacted] continued to refuse to return the vehicle, though she did demand we pick it up at the Pensauken Police Department.  To be clear, we were looking for a simple resolution to an unfortunate situation, but our view of the situation is:     -[redacted] initiated the loan with [redacted] with no influence from Haldeman Lexus     -[redacted] changed the terms of the agreement 4 Days after [redacted] took delivery of the vehicle     -Haldeman Lexus attempted to reverse the deal with "no penalty to" [redacted]     -[redacted] refused any attempt to return the car that she was unwiling or unable to pay     -Haldeman Lexus attempted to work in good faith with the customer's lender, but was unwilling to obtain the necessary approvals Ultimately, this situation is the result of [redacted]'s ability to get vehicle financing and HER choice of [redacted] as a lender.  [redacted] attempt to gouge the dealership for $2200 (in addition to the high interest rates they charge the customer), is the reason we were forced to request the car back.  [redacted] was faced with the choice of returning the car or paying the remaining balance in full via cash or alternative financing.  She instead chose to refuse either option.  At the time of this response (11/10/2014), the vehicle has not been returned, nor have we been paid for the vehicle.  As we have been from the start, we are willing to take the car back, give [redacted] her old vehicle back and refund her deposit.  It is her reluctance that has prevented this from happening.Sincerely,[redacted]General Sales ManagerHaldeman Lexus of Princetonwww.HaldemanLexus.com[redacted]  [redacted]
[redacted]

Review: 10/28 went to dealer to test drive 2014 Acura TL SH-AWD $35531, advised dealer of price range I was looking for along with negotiating value of trade in. on 10/29 & 10/30 kept negotiating and notice dealer website had dropped price to $34378 advised dealer that we are interested due to price drop, salesman advised that was an error but he would honor price. advised him that I already had approved financing from my bank, emailed approval packet to him. on 10/31 went to dealer to sign contract and dealer advised they also received authorization code from bank to proceed with deal. salesman states that bank was charging a bank fee $788 which he put into the sale price of car. we signed agreement which states $5000 down payment and $4200 trade in value along with title to trade in. we drove off in new vehicle. on 11/5 A.M. received text messg from salesman that bank needs add'l papers such as proof of income, I supplied that to him in email. on 11/5 P.M. received another text messg from salesmans stating I need to bring car back because bank charging add'l fees and that I was never approved from bank. I immediately called bank and bank states everything is fine, that the fees are between bank and dealer and not consumer. bank states that fees went up because dealer failed to mention trade in which cause a restructure in the numbers, I advised bank that dealer was trying to make me pay for those fees and that I had already paid the $788 because dealer put into the cost of the car. Bank states that they will not fund the dealer because its illegal for dealer to pass off any bank/dealer fees to consumer. I have my lawyer involved because dealer is rescinding on contract, they want new vehicle back, which is fine, but they have not mentioned returning my trade back to me with title, nor my $5000 deposit. new vehicle is parked in my driveway not being used. they state they have contacted lawrence police but I have done nothing wrong.Desired Settlement: I have contacted Lawrence police, they tell me dealer has not contacted them, which the dealer is again fraudently making up lies, I advised that I will bring car back if they have my trade in they same way I gave it to them along with title of trade in hand and my $5000 deposit in certified funds. I will not take the new vehicle back if they don't give me back my car and certified funds. I contacted the dealer stating that we can meet at Pennsauken police department to make the exchange and they refused. they are accusing me of being a fraud and none of this is true. they are rescinding on the signed contract deal. all I want is my trade back with title, and certified funds of $5000, they will get there car back and I walk away, never dealing with them again. the new vehicle is sitting in my driveway and I refuse to drive a car that is not mine because the dealer was never funded by bank and I don't want anything happening to car. they are fraudently charging me the bank fees

Business

Response:

Haldeman Lexus view of the Morales Review:[redacted] visited Haldeman Lexus to purchase a used vehicle. [redacted] intended to pay for the purchase using a third party bank named [redacted]. Haldeman Lexus of Princeton did not initiate the loan with [redacted] nor recommend [redacted] in any way, this was the customer's bank of choice. [redacted] is a sub-prime lender that specializes in making loans to people unable to be financed through conventional sources because of their credit situation. Upon reciept of the [redacted] documents our sales manager, [redacted], contact [redacted] via the number on the paperwork. Upon speaking with [redacted], [redacted] was given a verbal approval for the loan as long as we paid [redacted] a fee of $700. All the terms were agreed upon and we delivered the vehicle to the customer in good faith on Friday October 31st. On Monday November 3rd, [redacted] contacted [redacted] again to verify when we would be funded on the loan. Only at this point was [redacted] informed that in fact the loan was not approved and [redacted] required additional documentation from the customer before they would approve the loan. The salesperson, [redacted], contacted the customer and got the requested documents (proof of income, residence, etc.) and [redacted] forwarded them to [redacted]. At this point, [redacted] confirmed the approval, but demanded an additional $1500 in bank fees to process the loan. We were unwilling to pay this exorbitant amount of money because of this customer's exceptionally poor credit. [redacted] contacted the customer to inform her that the loan was not approved and that she needed to return the vehicle. [redacted] may believe the loan was approved, but that approval was conditional on us paying $2200 to [redacted]. Since that was not part of the original deal and we were unwilling to pay, there was no approval. [redacted] orginally agreed to return the vehicle, but then sent an email requesting no more contact and that she had retained a lawyer (see attached). Upon reciept of that email, [redacted] forwarded me the information. When I recieved [redacted]'s email, I replied that given she has retained a lawyer and wished to take it in that direction, I would pursue our options as well. This included voiding her temp tag and filing an incident report with the Lawrence Police Department. Despite the fact I laid out our intentions clearly, I was understaning and apologetic in the email, telling [redacted] we were were willing to take the car back "with no penalty" to her. [redacted] continued to refuse to return the vehicle, though she did demand we pick it up at the Pensauken Police Department. To be clear, we were looking for a simple resolution to an unfortunate situation, but our view of the situation is: -[redacted] initiated the loan with [redacted] with no influence from Haldeman Lexus -[redacted] changed the terms of the agreement 4 Days after [redacted] took delivery of the vehicle -Haldeman Lexus attempted to reverse the deal with "no penalty to" [redacted] -[redacted] refused any attempt to return the car that she was unwiling or unable to pay -Haldeman Lexus attempted to work in good faith with the customer's lender, but was unwilling to obtain the necessary approvals Ultimately, this situation is the result of [redacted]'s ability to get vehicle financing and HER choice of [redacted] as a lender. [redacted] attempt to gouge the dealership for $2200 (in addition to the high interest rates they charge the customer), is the reason we were forced to request the car back. [redacted] was faced with the choice of returning the car or paying the remaining balance in full via cash or alternative financing. She instead chose to refuse either option. At the time of this response (11/10/2014), the vehicle has not been returned, nor have we been paid for the vehicle. As we have been from the start, we are willing to take the car back, give [redacted] her old vehicle back and refund her deposit. It is her reluctance that has prevented this from happening.Sincerely,[redacted]General Sales ManagerHaldeman Lexus of Princetonwww.HaldemanLexus.com[redacted]

Review: On July 27, 2013 I arrived at Lawrence Lexus to test drive an Acura MDX (I was told it had a tech package--none); therefore, I starting looking at other options. I saw a 2007 RX 350 and requested a test drive--it had an alignment issue. My sales person, [redacted] agreed. [redacted] said they will fix alignment on car. [redacted] called and assured me the alignment was fixed, front brake pads was changed, oil change done, air filter, etc. completed. Once the purchase was finalized on July 29, 2013, as I am leaving the dealership, I brought the squishing/squeaking noise to friend of mine attention. I should have returned the vehicle to the dealership however, instead I called the dealership and no one returned my call. I called the next day left a voicemail for [redacted] --no call returned. I spoke to [redacted] , not only is the alignment still off, as I stepped on the brakes, there's was a squeaking/squishing noise emanating from the wheels. This squishing/squeaking noise problem did not exist prior to the purchase of vehicle. I called [redacted] Aug. 2, 2013 and spoke to him. He indicated that the noise will go away after driving and excess water will go away ceasing the quirky noise. The noise persisted even in dry weather just not as bad when wet. I called and scheduled an appointment at [redacted]n Long Island for Aug. 19, 2013. They did a thorough check and reported to me that the car needs an alignment (copy of picture provided) which is wearing down my front tires as well as replacement of rotors. I contacted Lawrence Lexus and spoke to [redacted] (used sales manager) to request that Lawrence Lexus absorb the cost. He spoke with [redacted] (service advisor) at [redacted] and requested to talk back to me which he advised me to bring the car back to Lawrence Lexus to be fixed by them since they did the prior alignment and am able to replace rotors. I arrived Aug. 20, 2013 for appt. No repairs were done; however, suggestion was offered for me to pay half. I said NoDesired Settlement: Since Lawrence Lexus is dishonorable, lacks integrity, I would like Lawrence Lexus to absorb the cost to fix my SUV by another dealership, reimburse me for gas, tolls and mileage incurred. Thank you in advance. I can be reached at [redacted]

Business

Response:

The vehicle in question was traded to Lawrence Lexus, our reconditioning (see attached RO #[redacted] consisted ; of:

-1 Hour Used Vehicle Inspection

-Replaced Front Brake Pads & Shims and resurfaced rotors -Changed Engine Oil & Filter -Replaced Air Filter (Engine) -Rep|aced Cabin Air Filter

-Replaced Wiper Blades

-Detailed Vehicle For Sale

We spent a total of $1079.63 on reconditioning with 70% tire wear remaining front and; rear and 4 mm brake : wear remaining on rear brakes with new front brakes. [redacted] drove the vehicle and was not satisfied with the alignment. We put the vehicle in the shop to have it checked out (see attached RO #[redacted]. I had two technicians drive the vehicle and there was no pulling noticed. I drove the car to confirm the condition and personally called [redacted] to tell her that we found there was no pull present. 0bvidusly we disagreed ‘with [redacted] about the alignment and I specifically told her that the steering was going to be the same as when she previously drove and if that was not acceptable, to not further pursue the vehicle. did tell her that if she

still did come down and test drive the car and found it unacceptable, l would reimburse: her for tolls and gas for

the wasted trip. [redacted] did drive the car and chose to purchase the vehicle (so we idid not reimburse for gas

and tolls). [redacted] purchase the vehicle with a 3 month/3000 mile powertrain warranty and declined E ' purchasing any extended coverages for the vehicle (see attached). Approx 20 days later, [redacted] spoke to our used car manager, [redacted] to complain about a brake noise and vibration. When a customer

complains about condition, we always have to bring the vehicle to our dealership for diagnosis and repair. We brought the vehicle back to Lawrence Lexus, and diagnosed that there was noise from rear brake pads when the I car was brought to a stop and then put in reverse (attached RO #[redacted]). This was not§a safety or performance issue (it was not the case that they did not work, or worked unsafely), they were simply; noisier than the

customer liked. Brakes are a wear item and are not automatically replaced, we had previously replaced the front brakes because they were below minimum specifications. We offered the custorrier to split the cost for

new rear brakes (as we did not represent the vehicle having all new rear brakes, we were not prepared to absorb that cost). [redacted] declined the 50% offer and requested reimbursement for gas/tolls and I did pay her $30 in cash (only because I had previously offered that before she purchased the vehicle).

Since we already reimbursed for gas/tolls and did offer a 50% split on repairs, I feel we did our part to try to resolve the situation. In order to resolve the situation, I would be willing to offer [redacted] a cash payment of $200.

Regards, '

General Sales Manager

Review: I bought a Lexus through these people and they were suppose to do all the paper work for the plates to be sent to me at my address .

That was on July 27 th ,it is now September 2 nd and I still have no plates , so I can not drive my car. They would not issue a new Temp cert for me . So I have a car sitting in my drive and cannot drive it.

My kids went back to school today and my wife needs to be able to drive the car. What can I do about this situation ?

Please let me know,thank you.

[redacted]Desired Settlement: To be able to drive my car

Business

Response:

Following is our response to complaint #[redacted], [redacted] I had submitted a response on the 17th, of September (see attached copy of the information page that I printed after I submitted the complaint response). I do not dispute the fact that [redacted] purchased a vehicle on July 27th and as of the 9/2/2015 had not received his plates. The reason for the delay in the plate arrival is based upon the way [redacted] purchased his car. [redacted] did not come to our dealership and purchase a stock vehicle that we had advertised for sale. [redacted] some sort of connection to one of our long time customers [redacted] had leased the vehicle in question from our dealership in 2011. At the end of his lease, [redacted] had the option to purchase the vehicle he had been leasing. Based upon the fact that [redacted] had driven less than anticipated mileage, plus the general strength of the current pre-owned market meant that the option price [redacted] had on the 2011 [redacted] was a very competitive price. [redacted] did not want to purchase the 2011 RX350 from the leasing company, but came to an arrangement to let [redacted] purchase the vehicle. In order to accomplish this, [redacted] would have had to write a check for the full balance of the purchase option for the 2011 RX350 plus the 7% NJ taxes applicable and the registration costs associated with taking ownership of the vehicle. Once that was complete, he could sell the vehicle to [redacted] (passing on the purchase option cost, plus the NJ taxes plus the NJ registration fees), who would then need to take the title to ** motor vehicle, pay the applicable tax and registration costs for **. Doing it this way created a double taxation issue and would have ended up costing [redacted] a minimum of $1800 more to take possession of this vehicle. [redacted] asked us to facilitate the transaction on behalf of him to avoid the additional taxes. As a courtesy to [redacted] (who is a long time valued customer) we agreed to process the transaction to save them the additional monies involved. As such, when we processed the paperwork for [redacted] we did not have the title for the vehicle in house. When we facilitate this type of transaction, we do not pay off the bank the amount owed onto the car until we receive the funds from the customer. Once [redacted] paid for the vehicle, we proceeded to pay off the lease and waited for the title from Lexus Financial to be sent to us. Because of this unusual nature of this transaction, we were not able to complete the new ** title work prior to [redacted]’s temporary running out. NJ DMV does not permit re-issue of duplicate temporary plates for out of state customers so we were unable to extend his temporary. Since the time of original complaint, we did obtain [redacted]’s plates and sent them to his home. It is unfortunate that we were not able to get the motor vehicle done in the 20 days that was provided by the temporary plate. In hindsight, we should have not agreed to facilitate the transaction, there was no financial interest for us and it has only created dissatisfaction with the very people we were trying to assist. Had [redacted] purchased a stock vehicle of ours in the normal manner, we would not have incurred this problem (though he would have paid substantially more for the vehicle at true market prices). I apologize for the delay and inconvenience this caused for [redacted] and I can promise that is will not happen again. Hopefully the significant savings [redacted] achieved by purchasing the 2011 RX 350 substantially below market and avoiding the double taxation situation compensated him for his time and inconvenience.