Jaguar Land Rover Mission Viejo

In response to the complaint , Yes a 3rd Party , CRAIGS LIST, had bad data Autotrader and Cars Com as well as Dealerships website all three have correct info posted on them regarding this vehicle We have contacted AutoFusion which is the company we pay to post our Craigs listing and all they could say was it was a error on thier in and vin# pulled the wrong data we do apologize client saw that on line in errorAutofusion who is the vendor we pay to post all our Craigs listing and we have made them aware of this matter on this particular unit and they only offered a apologie and as of today they still have not corrected thier FeedThe unit is posted correctly though on Our Dealer Website, and on Autotrader and Cars.com which are the other two Main Large Advertising 3rd party vendors we use Definatlly we apologize for a vendor we rely on posted this incorrect information and client drove far as many of our customers du travel from afar and out of state due to our Every Day Low Pricing

I appreciate the feedback on this concern and have done some research on this one with parties involved We have attempted to ask prior customer to bring in the 2nd key as he said he would look for it at this time the 2nd key has not been located by prior client, this is not uncommon that we get only one key on a trade in and we do try and take that into consideration when we price our cars to the market as keys these day can run few hundred dollarsI do see we gave a $discount on this vehicle at purchase as well I have pulled the File and do see a the DUE bill was signed and clearly states vehicle was sold as equipped nothing else promised or implied we can call the local dealer to see if they can pass along any savings for dealer to dealer to client that may assist in this matterWe have also sent a letter to prior client asking once again if he could search for the spare key in a last attempt to try and obtain it and will advise if we get a response

the California required documents have not been met in order to avoid paying the sales tax in this matter, client has been advised of that , thus the reason why sales tax was collected and paid to the state

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [I do not think I agree with the resolution provided because they did NOT resolve anythingThey said "As we have agreed" - the agreement was that my 3rd month payment will be returned to me via [redacted] or if not, they will take of refunding itAll the facts were stated in original conversation and I got proofsThey did not go out of the way to take car back because I did not like its color (example) - they took it back because it was hitting California Lemon Law Clause in few more days and also car needed a lot of welding work to be done at a body shop, for which I would have reacted negatively anywaysThe corporate was also in favor of taking the car back, when I was talking to them at the same time (dealer asked me to escalate it to corporate)I think them giving back my 3rd month over payment is fair because they misguided (specifically ***) that their quote is NOT showing the 3rd paymentThat is NOT a good business practiceIf they would have upfront told me we are sorry, we can't give your 3rd payment back, I would have kept the car until end of February and returned it them on March 12, using my full rent (I will be driving their loaner all this time anyways because car needed a lot of work)Instead, they probably already put the car for sale and sold the car again for more profitI believe that also justifies them refunding my 3rd month back because they used my rent to make more money from it.Revdex.com, I feel strongly truth is on my sideFeel free to send this reply again to business and see if they would consider these facts or if I should move to court, where they will also pay all extra amounts for my time and energy spending on this.] Regards, [redacted] ***

We have been advised that Mr, *** is to deal directly with the State Board of Equalization ( BOE ) to resolve his concern and file for his tax credit. required docs were not in line at the time of This transaction from Mr .*** for him to qualify to avoid paying taxes and he did not allow the dealer to be in control of the asset in its entirety with the required shipping and docs needed in a Tax audit. He has disputed his *** charges twice and lost the case both times as the *** agreed to the charges being valid as well

In response to this concern we have pulled the original file and reviewed the transaction in full, we see that the customer purchased a car that was not a Special advertised vehicle, customer signed and agreed to all terms and conditions on the loanvehicle customer purchased was dramatically
reduced as well; however was not advertised online not was it advertised for lessin fact we pulled our files and the Manufactures online file and the vehicle was posted with a MSRP of $44,865. I do see where by the vehicle was sold for much less than that to MR *** for $40,after a $rebate was provided by the dealership as well. their are many online avenues that you can see this was sold for well below the manufactures MSRP and Below the Manufactures Invoice.Once again this unit the customer purchased was not posted as a advertised special on line, yet a substantial discount was still given to customer , signed and agreed by customer in order to earn their business

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This business have advertised multiple lease offers on their website (see attached), including an ad other than the special offersThese offers show that for a car with the same value as the car I purchased the lease offer is substantially lessWhen I asked the salesman about the online ad, he refused to offer a lease term according to the online ad (see attached)As a result, I ended up paying the down-payment about $more than the ad and the monthly payment of $vs $in the ad which results in collectively paying more than $compared to the advertised ad
Regards,
*** *** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
The response by the Jaguar Land Rover dealership plainly admits they are falsely advertising their vehicleIt should be the dealership's responsibility to ensure anyone they contract with to accurately advertise their vehicle. An apology is simply not a resolution after being treated as though we drove ten minutes to purchase their falsely advertised vehicle
Regards,
*** ***

this fact that Dealerships do have specials is correct and the specials are VIN specific, not MSRP specific in this matter. the special being referred to was not the vehicle that was purchasedSpecials also come with disclosure in many cases demo units ect or in service dates have started sing the vehicels have been RDR, thus allowing the specific unit to be advertised lower, in some cases additional factory incentives may apply that allow the vehicle to have that passed along as a saving resulting in a lower advertised special, this why they are Vin specific not MSRP or like for like specific.In this case I se clien test drove the car he purchase, signed the Maroni label agreeing to all the equipment ect on it and this unit he purchase Was NOT advertised as a special or discount.,As stated earlier in our response we even discounted the vehicle below Manufactures invoice to earn customer business.we have reviewed and concluded no additional refund due, and under Ca Legislation their is no cooling off period

In response to the complaint , Yes a 3rd Party , CRAIGS LIST, had bad data.  Autotrader and Cars . Com as well as Dealerships website all three have correct info posted on them regarding this vehicle . We have contacted AutoFusion which is the company we pay to post our Craigs listing and all...

they could say was it was a error on thier in and vin# pulled the wrong data.  we do apologize client saw that on line in error. Autofusion who is the vendor we pay to post all our Craigs listing and we have made them aware of this matter on this particular unit and they only offered a apologie and as of today they still have not corrected thier Feed. The unit is posted correctly though on Our Dealer Website, and on Autotrader and Cars.com which are the other two Main Large Advertising 3rd party vendors we use.
Definatlly we apologize for a vendor we rely on posted this incorrect information and client drove far as many of our customers du travel from afar and out of state due to our Every Day Low Pricing.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in...

reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
This dealership has been terrible to deal with in every way.  It is extraordinarily difficult to get anyone to return a call and on the rare occasion that I am able to reach anyone they inevitably direct me to someone else who is equally as nonresponsive. This response that they have issued is focused on their internal dealership issues with their auditors. I spent a lot of time trying to help them get the information that they needed when they dropped the ball on documents that they should have collected from transporters (among other things), but inevitably they would always have another officer in another department that would have another requirement. The dealership is simply tasking me with cleaning up their mess while they hold my deposit hostage (or now claim to have given it to the state of CA). This is frustrating to me because the agreement did not even involve me paying a deposit until I make sure the dealership has all necessary documents to satisfy their obligations to the state of CA.  The agreement was very simple and thankfully it was detailed in an email so we have proper documentation, which I have attached to this response in both HTML and Word format.  The agreement as specified by the sales manager to me on April 24, 2015 is described as the following:  "At the time we receive the actual docs that the vehicle is on a ship we will promptly refund the amount".  These terms are very clear and much simpler than the dealership would like to admit.  One of the many items I provided to the dealership is the proof of export of the vehicle.  This is the only item that is required to satisfy the terms of my prompt refund, however, there were many other demands (of which I further satisfied) that were issued subsequently and now they have resorted to vague comments such as the response they submitted regarding this complaint.  Usually just saying that all of the tax requirements weren't met so they couldn't refund.  In reality, this was not part of the agreement so should not be used as an excuse, nor should I be held responsible for the many things that the dealership staff failed to properly handle so that the dealership could be in compliance with their auditors.Please let me know if there are any further supporting documents that you would like me to provide.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[I do not think I agree with the resolution provided because they did NOT resolve anything. They said "As we have agreed" - the agreement was that my 3rd month payment will be returned to me via [redacted] or if not, they will take of refunding it. All the facts were stated in original conversation and I got proofs. They did not go out of the way to take car back because I did not like its color (example) - they took it back because it was hitting California Lemon Law Clause in few more days and also car needed a lot of welding work to be done at a body shop, for which I would have reacted negatively anyways. The corporate was also in favor of taking the car back, when I was talking to them at the same time (dealer asked me to escalate it to corporate). I think them giving back my 3rd month over payment is fair because they misguided (specifically [redacted]) that their quote is NOT showing the 3rd payment. That is NOT a good business practice. If they would have upfront told me we are sorry, we can't give your 3rd payment back, I would have kept the car until end of February and returned it them on March 12, using my full rent (I will be driving their loaner all this time anyways because car needed a lot of work). Instead, they probably already put the car for sale and sold the car again for more profit. I believe that also justifies them refunding my 3rd month back because they used my rent to make more money from it.Revdex.com, I feel strongly truth is on my side. Feel free to send this reply again to business and see if they would consider these facts or if I should move to court, where they will also pay all extra amounts for my time and energy spending on this.]
Regards,
[redacted]

the California required documents have not been met in order to avoid paying the sales tax in this matter, client has been advised of that , thus the reason why sales tax was collected and paid to the state.

As we have agreed we have gone out of our way as a dealership and bought back the vehicle under customer satisfaction. While trying to assist client we even gave back full refund on deposit.  We agreed to pay of the banks Payoff that we were provided from the bank If client has sent in a extra...

payment then a refund would be due for overpayment. just as if the payoff was send in short we would not receive title until payoff in full is made.  Any overpayment that was made if any would be refunded once Title is received .   Additionally facts are that we did this as a goodwill gesture to assist out of goodwill.
taking back in a car that was sold and refunding deposit ect and paying off the vehicle.

I appreciate the feedback on this concern and have done some research on this one with parties involved.
We have attempted to ask prior customer to bring in the 2nd key as he said he would look for it at this time the 2nd key has not been located by prior client, this is not uncommon that we get...

only one key on a trade in and we do try and take that into consideration when we price our cars to the market as keys these day can run few hundred dollars. I do see we gave a $564 discount on this vehicle at purchase as well I have pulled the File and do see a  the DUE bill was signed and clearly states vehicle was sold as equipped nothing else promised or implied.
we can call the local dealer to see if they can pass along any savings for dealer to dealer to client that may assist in this matter. We have also sent a letter to prior client asking once again if he could search for the spare key in a last attempt to try and obtain it and will advise if we get a response.