Heiser Automotive Group

Review: Heiser Chevrolet of West Bend, WI has failed to provide my credit score disclosure after four good faith attempts were made to request the disclosure on the following dates:

11/30/2015: Date of vehicle purchase,, request made in person to finance department

12/31/2015 (30 days after first request was made, non-compliance with the law): Call made to the finance department at Heiser Chevrolet. Employee informed me that the disclosure would be mailed immediately- confirmed address to mail.

01/09/2016: Left voice message for finance department explaining that I had yet to receive the disclosure, asking them to call me back.

01/13/2016: Left another voice message for finance department explaining that I had yet to receive the disclosure after calling several times. Asked them to call me back.

According to the Dodd Frank Act, after a request for a credit score disclosure is made the business has 30 days to provide the information to the customer. This matter has spanned over 30 days, and I have made four good-faith attempts at reaching-out to the organization in order to receive this information.Desired Settlement: I would like the company to provide the credit score disclosure in compliance with the law.

Business

Response:

First, I apologize for our people not responding to your requests. You should not have to call our dealership multiple times with no return phone calls. That's not what I expect from our employees and I will address that issue with the local staff. Regarding your credit disclosure. I believe what you are referring to is the copy of the "Risk Score" that accompanies the pulling of your credit bureau. I did check and we still have that document in our deal jacket. How would you like us to get that document to you?Sorry again for the inconvenience.[redacted]President

Review: On Monday, October 13th I had visited Heiser Toyota for a used vehicle they were selling. I worked with [redacted] to come to an agreement to buy the car. We then agreed that I would come back on October 18th with money in hand to finalize the deal. After I had arrived that Saturday, [redacted] informed me that an issue with the car's engine. At that point I was willing to walk away from the vehicle, but we had come to an agreement that Heiser will fix the car at no expense to me. We finalized the deal under these terms and after waiting a week for a follow up had not heard back from [redacted]. I then set up my own appointment at Heiser Toyota and called [redacted] about our agreement. He assured me that they were going to fix the car as intended and I took my car in on the 27th of October and Heiser fitted me with a replacement car while my car was in their garage. They kept the car for two weeks and it had been returned to me on the November 7th. Throughout this process I had followed up with [redacted] on the progress of my car. For the first week they stated they were struggling to figure out what the problem with the car was. They then took the car to another automotive group to try to understand the problem. I was told the issue was with a sensor related the fuel injection. For the second week, they were trying to repair the car. I finally received my car back on November 7th and was told by [redacted] that the issue was not nearly as bad as they had thought.

The car was running well for about a week. Right after I filled my gas tank (with the correct fuel) since the repair, on November 18th, the check engine light had reemerged and the car was/is running more poorly than previously when I had taken the car in the first time. I called Heiser Toyota up explaining to the service department that the problem had not been fixed and the car has a related issue to what was supposedly fixed in less time that it took to supposedly repair the car. All the previous signs of the car's issue had reemerged with the light (e.g. failure to accelerate and increase in RPM with pressure applied to the gas pedal, fuel economy dial dropping when coming to a stop, etc.) and the car now shakes vigorously when in idle. The service department told me to come in tomorrow (November 19th) morning at 7:00 AM for them to see what is wrong with the car. I did exactly that and they drove me to work and brought me back at roughly 5:00 PM. The Service Consultant I worked with on this day was [redacted]. He said there would be no issues with fixing my car in the morning, but when I had returned he stated to me that this issue is completely unrelated to what was previously done to the car. When I had asked him to provide proof to me that shows the two issues are unrelated he told me he did not know what the two issues were. I am not quite sure how someone can confidently state that the issues are unrelated without even knowing what the two issues are. After I confronted [redacted] of his lie he than became quite defensive and asked that I give him 24 hours to get his story straight. [redacted] did indeed call me within 24 hours and said that they would be able to take my car the following in again to assess what is the problem the car. After all, that is why I had already taken the car in two days ago and was told that the issue was unrelated. [redacted] responded that he would call me on Friday November 21st (the following day) with a day and time that I will be able to bring my car in. Now, it is November 25th and I have yet to have any further discussion related to this issue with Heiser Toyota and [redacted].Desired Settlement: I would like one of four outcomes in order of what I would prefer most. First, I'd be willing to take it to another automotive company on behalf of Heiser and have the company fix the car for the specific issue and then forward the expense report to Heiser Toyota. No warranty would be expected in this scenario and full transparency of the repair will be disclosed to both parties. Secondly, I'd like Heiser Toyota to fix my vehicle as initially agreed upon and due to the lack of reliability I've already experience would expect a 30 day warranty on the vehicle from the time I receive the car from being fixed. If the car's issue does not last for the duration of this period and falls within the warranty, I'd expect he same outcome to repeat itself. Lastly, if neither of the two actions previously stated are taken or an alternative option that I agree to is presented, I'd take it to another automotive company and have them fix the car for the specific issue and then take the issue in small claims court where I will then be expecting to be reimbursed for repair, hassle, and hardship. Again, no warranty would be expected on the repair of the vehicle.

Business

Response:

Our used car manager ([redacted]) has reached out to [redacted] and set up an appointment for him to bring his vehicle over to a BMW dealership that will work on the issue. I don't know what the outcome will be from that visit yet, but we will work with [redacted] to resolve this issue. I will update this case once I know more about the visit.

Review: On March 3rd, my family and I headed to the Heiser Chevrolet dealership in West Allis to look at a 2009 Lincoln MKX. We called before we drove the 45 minutes to look at the vehicle and was told that is was still availalbe. SO we took our children out and drove the the dealership. We talked to a Jim Fumo and he told us about the car. We took it for a test drive and fell in love with it. When we returned we sat down with Jim and started to talk about purchasing the vehicle. We told them we could not do the full down payment until between the 10th and the 14th and they told us that they were ok with that. We were told that someone was coming in on Saturday the 5th to look at it and if we wanted it to not be sold we needed to put some money down to hold the vehicle. We did then put $200 down to hold it till we couuld get the rest of the down payment together. We then filled out an application to run our credit and such. A contract was drawn with the down payment we would be making plus the trade-in value they gave us for the car we would be trading in along with the $200 we already put down. We signed the contract and was told that basically the vehicle was ours pending finance. The following day we contacted the dealership and talked to a [redacted] in finance and was told they found a bank to finance us but they were off about $1250. We were never asked if we could come up with the extra money, which we can, we were told he was going to talk to the bank and see what he could do and call us back. We never received a phone call back to let us know about the banks decison. On Monday the 7th, we received a phone call that they went ahead and sold the car without notifying us of the sale. They have continued to lie to us about what was said and told to us. They never once disclosed any of the information they are now stating we were told or we would have never put money down to hold the sale. So we are now out of a vehicle we signed a contract on and we have not received our money back from the down payment we put on the vehicle.Desired Settlement: We would like the car we originally put money down and signed a contract for or the same vehicle at the same price

Business

Response:

We are currently working with this customer to try and find a solution. Unfortunately, the 2008 MKX that is described in the correspondence was sold to another customer, who according to our management team, had signed a contract to take delivery of that vehicle prior to the contract signed by this customer. (Our manager said that we told this customer that we would take this contract only as a second, in case the previous customer does not take delivery of the vehicle). I believe we have asked the customer for their credit card in order to credit back their down payment, but have not been able to get that information from the customer. We have reached out to the customer to try and work with them on finding a different vehicle. I will update the file, once we have more information.

Consumer

Response:

Review: In August/September of 2013 I purchased a 2009 Chevy Impala from Heiser Chevrolet. During the sales presentation, we worked with [redacted], who was a new employee at the time. He represented to us that the car was in good condition and the only defect was a few scratches from an accident the car had been in with [redacted]. He stated the car passed all of its maintenance checks and was in good condition. As we were going through the financing paperwork and the terms of the sale, the car was sent to the body shop to make sure everything was in good working order and give it a car wash. In November of 2013 I noticed my car was slipping and sliding all over the roads and had the tires looked at by a mechanic. The mechanic informed me that the tires were bald and I would need new ones. Unfortunately, since my wife and I had our first child in April of 2013, we couldn't afford new tires for the car. We were forced to take my wife's car everywhere when we had our son since my car wasn't safe. I didn't complain to Heiser at the time because my wife and I were going through a difficult adjustment with the new baby and my wife's severe post partum depression. We eventually went to Tires Plus and got new tires put on our car through a 0% financing offer by opening up one of their cards. My wife and I discussed filing a complaint at that time, but decided it wasn't worth the hassle. However, I had my car in for an oil change at a Chevy dealership (not Heiser) and they identified that my car needed 3 new wheel bearings, all new brakes and rotors, and that the axle had been rusted through and needed to be replaced. My car is with the mechanic right now and he identified that we also need new rear calibrators. The total for just parts is $1,545, not including labor. I feel that Heiser sold us a car in poor condition. The mechanic we are currently working with stated that the car was most likely in this shape when I bought it and that it looked like the car had been sitting in standing water for some time, and not recently (looks like older damage). He stated any mechanic that looked under the vehicle would have noticed these things.Desired Settlement: My desired outcome is that Heiser reimburse us for the new tires we had put on the car seeing as they sold us a car with bald tires as well as reimburse us for the repairs for the brakes and rotors, rear calibrators, 3 wheel bearings, and axle. The total reimbursement would be $2,368.43 ($1545 for the current car repairs and $823.43 for the cost of the tires).

Business

Response:

the vehicle was purchased in August of 2013 with 82,000 miles. at that time the vehicle had 7 32nd on each of the tires and according to the pre sale inspection everything else was ok except for the battery which we replaced. the next time we saw the vehicle was on October 25th 2013 with 84,000 miles when it came into heiser Toyota for an oil and filter change. we performed a vehicle inspection at that time and the tires were at 7 32nd. everything else at that time checked out ok. the vehicle returned to heiser Toyota on march 10, 2014 for a oil and filter change with 89,000 miles. at that time the customer told us that the left rear tire was loosing air and we checked it and could not find a leak. we also performed a vehicle inspection and the tires at that time were at 6 32nd. mr. [redacted] does not mention the date the tires were replaced or how many miles are on the vehicle at this time. if mr. [redacted] would like to contact me and if the repairs are not completed at the repair shop the vehicle is at now I would be happy to give a discount if he brought the vehicle to one of our stores. I can be reached at ###-###-####. [redacted]

Review: We were loyal customers of Ford and the last three vehicles we purchased were Ford. In July my sister moved here with her 2000 F150 extended cab truck that needed repairs. We took it to the Ford dealership and was told the cost to fix it would surpass the price to get another car. We shopped around and she found a 2003 PT Cruiser for $3,200. It only had 95,000 original miles. She is a [redacted] and had no job. She was supposed to get $500 trade in value for her truck and we worked out a sale price of $3,000. When the salesman went to talk to the Used Car Mgr he refused the offer. Since the car needed extra repairs. We finally settled on $3,100. We paid $1,000 down and left the car to get the repairs that were needed. We picked it up and paid the remainder and was told to come back for the second pair of keys. When we picked up the car immediately the squeak that was heard started again. When were took the car back in again, we were supposed to pick up the extra set of keys. We were informed that the previous owner wouldn’t turn in the extra set of keys and actually wanted the key my sister already had. Excuse me, that isn’t her car, she traded it in. Now I have a woman in Milwaukee with a spare key to my car? They did make me an extra key to the car, but it was told to me when we bought the car. Then the check engine light came on and the squeak is still there. Just recently took it back to Ford were I was told the squeak would be fixed and some of issues. We were quoted a price of $403 plus tax. Then after 4 days of waiting for the car get a call that the total price was $477.71. I argued what I was quoted and he agreed to correct the bill. My husband and I had a credit of $83 dollars and wanted that to be applied to this amount. The service person told me over and over we had no credit, he didn’t see any credit. He stated he went upstairs to Business office and no one could find the credit we had. Thank God for the ladies in the service department. I asked her to look and she found it within a few seconds. We Paid $336…and now two days later the check engine light is now back on. The used Car mgr would only tell me and my sister that the car was as is, but the issues with the car that was worked into the price was never fixed. He then said "Come in let me access the car and give you a quote on what it is worth and we can then find you a newer car. After it was all said and done, it would have cost less to just have the truck fixed and not dealt with Ford any longer. I have never had such terrible service from the salesman, managers, and service department. No longer a loyal Ford customer. We were taken advantage of by Ford Employees.Desired Settlement: Would like to see them make good on the sale of this car or refund the money we spent on the car and the repairs.

Business

Response:

Customer purchased a used 2003 vehicle with 95,000 miles on the vehicle. This vehicle was sold "as is" which means it does not come with any additional warranty and the customer is purchasing the vehicle "as is." There were several items that were identified before the customer took delivery of the vehicle that we agreed to fix. Those were the squeaky belt noise and the air bag light. We replaced the serpentine belt and we also replaced the air bag sensor. Those items were approximately $750 worth of repairs that we agreed to fix and were completed. The customer has since had some additional concerns with the vehicle, including a bulb needing to be replaced, and a purge valve replacement which did cost the customer an additional $336. The vehicle is currently back in our service shop and there are two items that have been addressed. There was an additional part that needed to be replaced (tensioner) that addressed the squeaking noise associated with the serpentine belt. We will not charge the customer for that additional work since it had to do with the original squeaky belt that we agreed to address. The other item is called a Natural Vacuum detection valve - which is the cause for the check engine light issue. This repair will be charged to the customer as this was not part of the items that were addressed as a condition of the sale. I do not know the exact price of this repair but I believe it will be between $300-$400.We believe that we have taken steps to repair the items that were identified as part of the original sale of the vehicle. The additional items, are not something Heiser is responsible for. Repairs should be expected with a vehicle that has almost 100,000 miles and is 12 years old. Sincerely,[redacted]

Review: On FRI 29th of may 2015 @ APPROX 11:35AM I located a vehicle for $1 listed on the business website that they have control of and have a responsibility to honor advertised sales prices. If they are not willing to stand behind an AD on a publicly available website they should not be allowed to sell something as pricey as a car. Airlines a few years ago had to honor fares that cost them thousands per ticket. Same kind of situation. I have copies of a chat transcript as well as a print out of the AD and a text from A sales person confirming the vehicle is available.Desired Settlement: I am more then willing to pay $1 + all normal fees for closing a cash transaction at a WI licensed dealer.

Business

Response:

First of all, we apologize for the problem occurring. There was a vehicle that was inadvertently listed online for $1 which is a $15,000 vehicle. Occasionally, there are errors that occur whether they are keypunch or "syndication" errors which occur when prices are being published to all the various 3rd party websites. There are disclaimers listed on all the websites that address pricing errors. Clearly, we do not knowingly publish prices that are incorrect. Once we learned that there was a problem, we immediately removed the vehicle from the website, and have corrected the pricing issue so when the vehicle is pushed out to the 3rd party websites it will now be accurate. We do not have any legal responsibility to sell the vehicle for $1 as that pricing was obviously incorrect.Sincerely,[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Review: We bought a 2006 Lexus February of 2014 and this dealership forgot to tell us or write it in the WI check list that the rear axle oil seal had been leaking with what looked to be for a long time. After finding out in April about this problem we went back to heiser ford and they fixed the seal since they knew it was a problem with the car since day one. Than on July 25th when I took it to get an oil change at Lexus-Northshore the mechanic reported that the leak was still there, that is was a minor but needed to get fixed. We called several times before going on vacation on 7/29 and we kept leaving voicemails with the [redacted] Kayla and she never called back and when she did she reported that they did not have any time available to see the car. We left on vacation out of the USA and came back about a week and a half later. We tried calling again and they kept saying they were busy. On 8/25 my car broke down and the rear end went out and the car did not run at all anymore. When the seal originally was fixed we received a warranty covering for a year, due to this bad seal the car than had bigger damage. Heiser told us that since we didn't take the car after being told that there was a small leak they were not going to cover the entire fix just half even though we called several times requesting a time to bring in the car and not receiving any kind of feedback from the employees. We have phone records and car fax records indicating that we had been attempting to take the car in and they were not helpful at all. They are being very rude and do not want to help us at all and keep treating us like we are criminals when we were not the ones who fixed the car initially. Now we are having to pursue legal matter because they are suppose to be liable for their wrong doing and don't want to take the fault for it. We also bought a warranty with the car and they wont cover since Heiser is responsible for fixing the part just 4 months back.Desired Settlement: We want our car to get fixed at their expense since they were liable for completing work that caused this failure to happen. We do not want them to fix it because they are unreliable and unprofessional and do not trust the expertise in car mechanic since they were not able to do the job initially and caused severe damage to the car.

Business

Response:

the vehicle was purchased 2-25-14 with [redacted]00 miles on the vehicle. the vehicle was brought back on 4-18-14 with a concern of a leak. we replaced the axle seal with [redacted] miles on the vehicle. on 7-25-14 with [redacted] miles the vehicle was taken in to a Lexus dealer to have a oil change performed. the [redacted] advised the customer that there was a leak coming from the axle shaft in the rear that needed to be repaired and they gave them an estimate to have the work done. the customer declined to have the work done at that time. the customer brought the vehicle to our service department on 9-2-14 with [redacted] miles and the rear end was locked up and the vehicle would not move. the customer told us that they were at Lexus and they had told them it had a leak. we inspected the vehicle and saw that there was fluid under the vehicle and all the differential fluid had leaked out of the rear end. we asked them why they did not have it repaired or call us to look at. they said they did call us and we never called them back. our service manager checked and could not find that any of our advisors received a call. we informed them that the leak needed to be repaired and the vehicle should not have been driven in that condition. the vehicle was driven 975 miles since they were told it had a leak. we informed them that we did not feel responsible for the repair since they drove the vehicle since July and 975 miles. we have discussed with the customer our offer of paying the labor for the repair and half of the parts. we advised the cost would be $700.00 plus tax. we think that when the customer found out that there was a leak they should have brought the vehicle back to us or had the vehicle repaired. the reason the rear differential is damaged is because the vehicle was driven since April with the leak. the customer says in there statement that they called and left a message with [redacted] our [redacted]. I have talked to [redacted] and she did not receive a call or message on her voice mail. please feel free to contact me if there are any questions. [redacted] thank you[redacted]

Review: My husband and I contacted thus business about purchasing a used vehicle. When my husband went to check out 2 vehicles (I wasn't there as it was an hour away and I was working) he settled on one and advised that we were already pre approved through a certain bank. I already told than this on the phone too. They told my husband no worries....they work directly with that bank and would get it all squared away. We made an appointment to pick up the car on a Saturday afternoon. On our way we get a call saying the bank never got back to them with the approval...However another bank would approve us for double the interest. I said no because the other bank approved us and asked why they submitted our credit to another bank. She said just to try to get an approval and we could always refinance. In the end we cancelled the appointment and went back that following Monday after our original bank got back to them with the approval. Then a day or so later we get a letter from another bank denying our credit. Looking on our credit statement heiser submitted a request for credit to 3 different banks without our approval. We never authorized this as we told them the other bank already had us approved. Why wouldn't they have called and asked us permission before submitting a request to other banks? We want to buy a house next year and 3 additional hard inquiries is not good on the credit. We've been working very hard to build this up. I've sent several emails with no response.Desired Settlement: I would like heiser to send a letter to the credit bureau and advise it was their error and get them removed from our credit. I feel I should not have to do this.

Business

Response:

I spoke with the finance department from our Chevy West Allis location, and they acknowledged that we did not know that the [redacted] (which is where the customer wanted us to get financing) closes their "indirect" loan decision-making by 12PM on Saturdays. We did not submit the application until after 12PM - which was our mistake. We did call the customer and offer them the option of postponing the delivery of the vehicle until Monday (in order to make sure the loan went thru Summit) or that we could deliver the vehicle on Saturday thru a different lending institution but at a higher interest rate - and then they could re-finance thru Summit. The customer chose to take delivery on Monday in order to avoid the higher rate with a different lender. We did acknowledge to the customer that we should have submitted the paperwork to Summit on Friday evening instead of waiting until Saturday to submit. We gave the customer some money towards gas on the wasted trip from [redacted], and I believe we filled the tank of the used vehicle they purchased. Also, I have checked the Consumer Finance website and have provided the summary and links to the actual page which shows the credit bureaus do not negatively affect a customer's credit score when multiple bureaus are pulled for loan shopping. Here is the information and link:"For specific types of loans -- auto, mortgage, and student loans - credit scoring models are also designed to take shopping for a loan into account. Let’s say you are looking around for an auto loan and you authorize five lenders to check your credit score. All those credit checks -- the industry calls them “inquiries” – should either count as zero or one inquiry, if the inquiries are made in a short period such as fourteen days. If you shop for a mortgage loan at the same time you are shopping for an auto loan, the shopping you do for those two loans should count as two inquiries. " The link for the consumer finance website is: [redacted]We do apologize for the inconvenience this has caused the customer in making the trip from [redacted] on Saturday. If there is anything else we can do to help, please let us know. [redacted]

Business

Response:

I am confused about this request. The customer responded as follows on the last update:Additional Comments from Consumer: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I don't want to put personal information here so please have them contact me via email for my address. I will then mail the documents to the credit bureau if an address is provided. Regards, [redacted] We did provide the customer with the documentation we promised. If this update came back to me because we did not formally respond that this has been handled on our end, then please accept this communication that from our perspective, we have complied with our previous commitments.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. This has been resolved.

Regards,

Review: I wanted to purchase a Ford Edge Heiser Ford had advertised in stock, stock #F8567, for their advertised Heiser price of $23,873.00. When I spoke to the sales manager he said they made a mistake and listed the wrong price and they could not sell it to me. I want the car for the price that was advertised fair and square. They have miss-represented Ford, their dealership and the public. This is against the law. They said it would take 24 hours to correct the price. I have printed off the advertised price on their website and can fax it to you.Desired Settlement: I would like to be sold the Ford Edge stock #F8567, VIN2FMPK4J95GBB61428, for $23,873.00 including all options as stated on their website. I understand I would have to pay sales tax, destination and delivery, and license fees in addition to this base price.

Business

Response:

This was an error made by one of our office staff. They posted the incorrect invoice price for this particular stock number. The customer called our dealership and spoke to [redacted] one of our sales managers. [redacted] indicated to the customer that this must have been a mistake. [redacted] immediately looked into the issue and made the appropriate correction. It can take up to 24 hours for all the websites pricing to be updated. The pricing online for that particular stock number now shows the correct sale price. We make every effort to ensure that our on-line pricing is always accurate. Mistakes do occur once in a while, and we make sure they are corrected immediately. Unfortunately we cannot sell this vehicle for the price that the customer is requesting. The current on-line pricing for this vehicle is what we are able to sell the vehicle for.

Review: I was told an oil change would cost $24.95 but was charged $39.95. I tried to contact them first but didn't receive a response.Desired Settlement: I would like the business to refund the difference in price. I would also like them not to continue this practice of overcharging with other customers.

Business

Response:

we have contacted the customer and refunded them the money and apologized for the confusion. customer was satisfied thank you

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Regards,

Given run around by service dept. [redacted] told me car might not get fixed for three days. Then called and told it would be fixed that day next day at the latest. He stated he had a tech free for the day. I asked again to be sure. He repeated it sarcastically he had a free tech. Now four days later. He might get to it. He never guaranteed it would be fixed. So Heisers word is worthless unless you get a written guarantee. I will never buy a general motors car again. I don't care where my dads pension comes from.

Review: I called Heiser Chevrolet Cadillac about trading in my 2004 Chevy Blazer for a newer 2012 Chevy Colorado. We worked out price and other details and I paid a $500.00 deposit they required to "hold" the vehicle while I get paperwork to my bank for a loan. After period of five days, I left three different departments,( internet sales, business, and finance), voicemails regarding the exact price of the vehicle after trade in. It worried me that I just paid $500 down and was not getting any communication from Heiser. After a week went by I was contacted by the finance department and when going through the loan, they had told me the price of the vehicle before the trade in that resulted in myself having to call back my bank and have them fix the laon amount. I told heiser it would take a few days to mail everything in and to have it processed and then sent back to me. During the next few days called once to check in with the dealer. Several days later I missed a call from the dealer and immediately called back but got not answer so I left a voicemail. Over a period of a week I called three more times and left messages at the business and finance departments. I never received a call back. I called today to let them know that I would be arriving to pick up the vehicle and their response was "we already sold the vehicle." Im furious that I took a loan out for 30K, had a hard check on my credit and also put a deposit down. I demanded my refund of the $500.00 deposit and told them Ive never had a car buying experience where I had to call repeatedly to get a response from a dealship.

Business

Response:

This customer did put down a $500 deposit on this vehicle on the dates indicated in the complaint. However, from our records - we did attempt to contact this customer multiple times to work thru the financing from the bank. We sent contract documents to this customer on or about 9/4 and followed up with him multiple times subsequent to that. Ultimately we left the customer a message on 9/19 indicating that we needed to hear back from him, or that we were no longer holding the vehicle and that we would be selling the vehicle to someone else. We never heard back from the customer until 10/3 indicated he was upset that we did not contact him to let him know the vehicle had been sold. The customer was issued a credit (refund) on his credit card on 10/5/15 for the amount of $500. We consider this issue to be resolved.[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

Review: I bought a 2005 Chevy Equinox from Heiser back in August, 2007. The salesman told me the car was a trade in from a couple on another Chevy when in fact the car was obtained by Heiser from an auction house. I traded in my car in September, 2014 and [redacted] indicated that my odometer had been turned back some 60,000+ miles. Heiser wants me to believe that [redacted] made an error and they refuse to work with me to rectify the situation. I lost a considerable amount of money on the trade in due to the fact that instead of the 115,000 miles I had on the car may really be over 200,000 miles.Desired Settlement: I want Heiser to pay to have the odometer pulled to see if the code on the back is correct. That's the only real true way to find out if it had been in fact turned back and they refuse to do this. If the odometer had indeed been tampered with, I desire the difference between the blue book price quote and what I actually got on the trade in from Heiser.

Business

Response:

this vehicle was leased in 5/15/04 in [redacted] with 3 miles on the odometer. between 2004 and 2007 the vehicle is listed as being taken to service facilities in [redacted] and in [redacted]. On January 18, 2005 the vehicle is listed with mileage of 6,218. Then on May 3, 2005 the vehicle is serviced in [redacted] and the mileage is recorded as 68,787. The Island Lake service center continued to increase the mileage from the 68,787 miles. The dealer in Merrill, WI recorded no mileage at all after the jump in miles. The vehicle's plates were renewed continuously in Merrill, WI until the vehicle was taken to the auction. Our dealership, Heiser Chevrolet, purchased the vehicle from the auction in 2007. the auction listed a mileage of 26,931 which was also the mileage that was on the vehicles odometer. We sold the vehicle to [redacted] on August 14, 2007 with 26,961 miles. After the vehicle was purchased by Ms. [redacted] the vehicle was serviced by [redacted] in Fox Lake, IL and Island Lake, IL. Ms. [redacted] contacted us when she traded the vehicle in to another dealer. The dealer told her that the [redacted] showed a mileage discrepancy. When she called us we ran a [redacted] on the vehicle and saw the disparity in mileage from the Merrill service facility and the Island Lake facility. We contacted [redacted] who agreed with us that it looked like an error. [redacted] told us they would investigate the concern and correct the mileage based on their findings. In their opinion it looked like someone at the Island Lake facility had entered the incorrect VIN attaching the mileage and the work performed on the vehicle that was Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle. A week later [redacted] adjusted the [redacted] report and took out every Island Lake entry on the report previous to the vehicle being sold at auction. I have talked to Ms. [redacted] and told her that if she had the dealer in IL pull the odometer from the vehicle and they found a discrepancy I would pay for the odometer check as I firmly believe that there is not a problem with the odometer. Ms. [redacted] did not find this acceptable and wanted the money up front. I informed her Heiser never touched the odometer. We did have [redacted] repair their report so now it shows the correct progression of mileage.thank you and if you have any questions please contact me[redacted]###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

Review: The management team at Heiser Ford are very rude and demeaning. I was told that I would have to pay a $500 deductible in which the warranty states that I have a $0 deductible but says in () a $100 deductible would apply if zero was listed. I was mislead into believing that my vehicle was fully covered. I brought my car in to have it serviced and was informed that I only had a power train warranty.

Then I was accused of fraud I felt insulated and humiliated on how they question me on how I used my car since the purchase of the warranty. They stated that since my car had only been driven a mile that my warranty wouldn't cover my issue with my engine due to me not driving a certain number of miles. They stated that my car had a preexisting condition. I am basically being told that I might have to pay for something I was told should be covered under warranty. A customer should never have to be hassled or suffer through accusations for purchasing a product.Desired Settlement: I would like for them to honor the warranty no matter what the mileage is. I purchased this warranty to cover my vehicle and I expect to get that coverage. A warranty is a warranty and I don't recall having driven less mileage being a stipulation of the warranty.

Business

Response:

I have been talking to mr. [redacted] about his concerns and we are trying to resolve the concern. I will respond back when we talk again In the next few days thank you

I purchased two cars from Heiser and have had them serviced there since their purchase. The last two times I have brought vehicles in, information was not provided to me of pending issues. I was told everything was good with the cars. The last time I brought my car in I was again told everything was fine, only to find when I reviewed the paperwork at home that I needed new tires. I let Heiser know of this, and I was contacted with the offer of tires installed at cost to make amends. I accepted. I have called and e-mailed a number of times to set up an appointment to have these installed, but nobody responds to my correspondence.

Review: In December 2014, we went to Heiser Ford in Glendale, WI to lease a new vehicle. During the discussions and while negotiating agreement, the sales representative continued to emphasize that we would be able to take advantage of the tax credit for hybrids and that the new Lincoln hybrid that we were leasing was eligible. This was factored into the discussion and was brought up multiple times in front of my spouse and myself during the discussion. I believed it to be part of the overall agreement package and a was part of our financial consideration before leasing a new vehicle. I reached out to Heiser multiple times asking for their manager or sales representative to contact me about this issue. I never received any contact from their management. I continued to email the original sales representative for a response and have emails dated Feb 1,13, and 21 to prove this discussion. The correspondence back stated "Your tax preparer should be able to find out all you need to know in regards to hybrid tax credits. As for the amount of the credit, it varies by vehicle and by state of residence. If you do your own taxes, you will be able to find the information at irs.gov."While I did do some research online, I relied on the experts at Heiser Ford to disclose honestly what was part of the agreement and what should be considered for hybrid tax credits. The Sales representative was very nice and helpful but the difference of a few thousand dollars as to what was disclosed is a very large gap. This large financial gap based on the tax relief that I believed to be available is too large for me to walk away from , and the fact that I believe that this constitutes a verbal agreement and breech of that contract is just not good business or fair for us and to others after us, and why I am moving this forward.Desired Settlement: Heiser to refund the difference of $2500 which was the value used during the agreement and disclosed as the hybrid credit.

Business

Response:

I did speak with the sales associate ([redacted]) regarding this issue. He does acknowledge having a general discussion with the customer regarding tax benefits of certain hybrid vehicles. However, he does not recall offering any details about this specific vehicle and whether it would qualify for any tax credits. I also believe [redacted] referred the customer to an IRS website that would provide more information. We tell our salespeople to not offer any tax advice as every customer situation may be different and we are not experts in that field. Additionally, if there had been any tax credits available on this vehicle (which I do not believe there were) then those benefits would have been figured into the monthly lease payment and not become a one-time credit available to the purchaser of the vehicle. The lessor (which in this case was Ford Motor Credit) would have been entitled to any of those credits. But again, I do not believe this vehicle would qualify for any tax credits.We do apologize for any confusion this has caused. While I don't want a customer to be upset, I don't believe that we are responsible for the $2,500 referenced in this complaint. I am more than willing to provide the customer with a goodwill gesture of adding $100 to their Consumer Advantage card (which is a customer loyalty card that we offer all of our customers) which can be used for future service visits. Sincerely, [redacted]

Consumer

Response: