Lehmann's Store Inc.

I want northtown land rover to explain the difference in the mileage and the reason why they could not  repair my vehicle.  I called and asked the parts attendant if he had a battery and I called and asked if there was anything special that I had to do to install the battery. the attendant...

said just drop it in.  look at the diagnostic page 1, compare to the milage July 26th 2017 and July 23,2017and July 21, 2017.

Northtown’s Response in Black.  My true response in Blue: MESSAGE FROM BUSINESS: Mr. [redacted] did purchase his vehicle from us in June of 2013 for $55,000.  The original asking price was $58,980.  Total purchase price was $60,408.55, but this has no bearing on anything. Northtown is not aware of any engine modifications to this vehicle at the time of sale.   I can possibly agree with that statement, but they did not disclose any modifications in the listing or during the sale, so their statement can be true or false, but they do acknowledge modifications to the exhaust system and intake system that affect engine performance. We did not affirm that the vehicle was “all original” as we had no means of knowing that then or now. False. Vehicle was sold as stock 2011 [redacted]. There was no mention of any modifications by the salesman or in the vehicle published listing. I was told also that the vehicle had gone through a full 110 multi-point inspection and detailing prior to the listing.  Northtown is aware the prior owner had replaced a portion of the factory exhaust with an aftermarket item, effecting only the warranty on that item and/or any warrantable concern resulting from it. Northtown only acknowledged that they had changed out the exhaust system for the prior owner within the past 12 months. Not true regarding the warranty coverage. [redacted] management told me on the phone that the factory warranty was voided when the car was purchased with aftermarket parts on it.  [redacted] stated that I made a mistake by not filing a complaint with them earlier against Northtown, due to the non-disclosed modifications.  The entire first year of ownership Northtown Service attributed the fault codes to the aftermarket exhaust system, and were pressuring me to pay for a replacement factory system. I refused stating that the car was under their warranty and they were responsible for the labor and material to replace the system. Mr. [redacted]'s vehicle has subsequently been modified to enhance performance under racetrack conditions and continually experienced random issues when driven on the track.  He was unclear to us as to when he exactly made these modifications and who did the work. False, the vehicle experienced repeated engine faults for the same error codes, on top of those that were random codes. False,  I have emails to the Northtown Service Dept that state that I installed a IPD Plenum system over the Winter of 2014, after they told me that the car was repaired. I always acknowledged the modification and told them that I had installed it.  Northtown has never experienced or duplicated these condition under "normal" driving conditions. Among other modifications to the vehicle, the on-board computer has pried open for reasons unknown.  No modifications were made to the on-board computer under my ownership. Northtown could not prove that it had been altered or that any modifications were made. Northtown tried to charge me for a new on-board computer without proving that there was an issue with the existing one at a cost of $2100.00. I declined on that action, until all other items were ruled out. Northtown offered to replace this to return the vehicle to a factory standard and Mr. [redacted] declined. Correct, Northtown offered to have the unit replaced under my cost of over $2,100.00. They could not verify that there was an issue with the unit. I had a conversation with Mr. H[redacted], Director of Northtown Fix Operations, that I would pay for the unit to be replaced but if issues surfaced following the replacement that I would not pay the cost for the unit. They chose to not continue with the work, based on my comment. Mr. [redacted] always had a rental car from us, at times, for months that we paid for while we had his vehicle in our possession.  Correct, however; I did not purchase a high end [redacted] car to drive various [redacted] rental cars.  We actually had to reach out to Mr. [redacted]  back in January 2015 asking for our rental car back since his car was here for some time. We explained that there was nothing we could really do with it since we essentially could not drive it on the roads due to the weather conditions and that we can re-visit the issue in the spring. False, I was in weekly communication with the [redacted] Service department regarding the status of my car. They instructed me that they needed to return the [redacted] to me otherwise it would be stored outside in the [redacted] parking lot for the rest of the 2015 Winter and could see damage from the snow/ice and plowing of the lot. Yes, a plan was put together to revisit the issue in the Spring. I requested a written and management signed plan of action, per the suggestion of [redacted], Northtown would not oblige and the said actions were not followed come Spring 2015.  Prior to the last repair we did make a good faith offer to trade him out of his 2011 [redacted] and into a new 2016 which he declined. False, the offer was not in good faith. The offer was a trade-in value of $19k under the current market value of the vehicle. No concessions were made for the issues I had endured for 2 years.  The last repair we did on the vehicle was in July 2015.  True, per my agreement. The issue again was that the car would not pass NYS Inspection due to the check engine light.  True. The car would not pass NYS Inspection when they had the car in June 2015, they kept the car until July 24, 2015. Northtown was able to finally get the codes to clear the morning of 7/24/15, thus allowing them to install a valid NYS inspection sticker. After much time and effort we convinced him that we needed to re-install the Plenum that he had installed elsewhere.  False, the Spring 2015 verbal plan was to re-install the factory plenum, which I had agreed to pay for over the Winter of 2014. Northtown continued to delay from completing this work. I needed to send emails to Mr. H[redacted] complaining of the lack of progress based on the agreed timeframe I was provided.  From the beginning Mr. [redacted] was sure that the issue was not with the Plenum unit that he had installed which made working on the car difficult.  Furthermore, he was not interested in paying for any work since the car was under warranty. False, I agreed to pay Northtown to re-install the factory plenum during the Winter of 2015. The dealership continued to “lie” and state the car was under warranty but they would not pay for any faulty part/equipment to be replaced.  An owner should not have to pay for issues that have plagued a vehicle during it’s “said” warranty period.  As our Master [redacted] Technician started to work on the vehicle he noticed that the installation of the aftermarket Plenum was done very poorly.   We re-installed the original [redacted] factory unit (we have been suggesting this from the beginning) that the customer had and installed new gaskets.  We test drove the vehicle and were able to clear the codes.  The technician noted that the car actually drove much better than before.  Mr. [redacted] stated in his final comments in the letter that he currently has an expired inspection sticker which is not true.  Please see my note above. A valid sticker was installed on July 24, 2015, well after this complaint was filed, so the statement was not un-true. I have an email from Mr. H[redacted] that states that whether the codes clear the morning of 7/24 or not that I needed to pick up the car, that they would no longer service my [redacted] and that an invoice would be ready for mid-morning. The invoice waiting for me was for over $1500.00.  We were able to complete the NYS Inspection on his last visit after the re-installation of the original [redacted] unit. Upon delivery and upon the trip home the car had another “check engine” light come on.  I was required to take it to a local repair shop for the repair because Northtown had stated in the email from Mr. H[redacted] that they would no longer service my [redacted] because I had “altered” the relationship. I believe that the alteration of the relationship was due to an email I had sent to Mr. H[redacted]’s attention  regarding the poor service I was experiencing  and the poor review I gave the service department on a [redacted] Service Survey due to the above listed items. Northtown refutes Mr. [redacted]’s allegations that the vehicle or it’s state of modification was knowingly misrepresented and declines his demands. Please ask Mr. H[redacted] to provide proof of his statements. I have a copy of the original [redacted] listing and all correspondence.  I also have an apology email from the Sales Manager Brian R[redacted] regarding the issues found by me with the [redacted] following the sale.

Mr. [redacted] did purchase his vehicle from us in June of 2013 for $55,000.  The original asking price was $58,980.Northtown is not aware of any engine modifications to this vehicle at the time of sale.  We did not affirm that the vehicle was “all original” as we had no means of knowing that...

then or now. Northtown is aware the prior owner had replaced a portion of the factory exhaust with an aftermarket item, effecting only the warranty on that item and/or any warrantable concern resulting from it. Mr. [redacted]'s vehicle has subsequently been modified to enhance performance under racetrack conditions and continually experienced random issues when driven on the track.  He was unclear to us as to when he exactly made these modifications and who did the work. Northtown has never experienced or duplicated these condition under "normal" driving conditions.Among other modifications to the vehicle, the on-board computer has pried open for reasons unknown.  Northtown offered to replace this to return the vehicle to a factory standard and Mr. [redacted] declined. Mr. [redacted] always had a rental car from us, at times, for months that we paid for while we had his vehicle in our possession.   We actually had to reach out to Mr. [redacted]  back in January 2015 asking for our rental car back since his car was here for some time. We explained that there was nothing we could really do with it since we essentially could not drive it on the roads due to the weather conditions and that we can re-visit the issue in the spring. Prior to the last repair we did make a good faith offer to trade him out of his 2011 [redacted] and into a new 2016 which he declined. The last repair we did on the vehicle was in July 2015.  The issue again was that the car would not pass NYS Inspection due to the check engine light.After much time and effort we convinced him that we needed to re-install the Plenum that he had installed elsewhere.   From the beginning Mr. [redacted] was sure that the issue was not with the Plenum unit that he had installed which made working on the car difficult.  Furthermore, he was not interested in paying for any work since the car was under warranty.   As our Master [redacted] Technician started to work on the vehicle he noticed that the installation of the aftermarket Plenum was done very poorly.   We re-installed the original [redacted] factory unit (we have been suggesting this from the beginning) that the customer had and installed new gaskets.  We test drove the vehicle and were able to clear the codes.  The technician noted that the car actually drove much better than before.  Mr. [redacted] stated in his final comments in the letter that he currently has an expired inspection sticker which is not true.   We were able to complete the NYS Inspection on his last visit after the re-installation of the original [redacted] unit.Northtown refutes Mr. [redacted]’s allegations that the vehicle or it’s state of modification was knowingly misrepresented and declines his demands.

I have reviewed the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] and have responded to each of his requests below.  Mileage.          Mr. [redacted] is basing this complaint on the mileage sequence recorded in the Event Log that he attached.  The Event Log is a data stream dump from the on-board computer in the vehicle and is dependent upon proper input to provide correct output.  Northtown Land Rover provided this to Mr. [redacted] at his request on 07/26/2017.  Whether due to the battery/charging system concerns, a communication buss loss or a software compatibility issue from a scan tool, the dates and mileage on the Event log appear to be incorrect (see below). Enclosed herein are two separate chronologies of service for the vehicle in question; 1) A warranty history from Land Rover and 2) A Car Fax repair history report.  Please note that the mileage on the Land Rover report corresponds with the mileage on the Car Fax report through 08/18/2015, when the mileage reported by Land Rover [redacted] was 47,164 miles.  On the Car Fax report Land Rover [redacted] again reported the mileage on 04/29/2016 as being 58,032.  The Event log shows the mileage on 05/25/2017 as 53,418 miles.  Please also note that there are 2 pages to the Event Log and only 1 was provided with Mr. [redacted]’s complaint.  A review of page 2 (enclosed) reflects mileage on 05/16/17 of 46,876 miles and 52,569 miles 7 days later on 05/23/2017.   Several of these anomalies exist on the Event Log.   Once again on the Car Fax report, the [redacted] Center in Buffalo reported on 11/23/2016 that the mileage on the vehicle was 71,787 miles, whereas the Event Log reports the mileage as being 71,819 miles on 07/02/2017.  Presumable Mr. [redacted] had service performed at [redacted] and has a copy of the receipt with the mileage on it.   The mileage sequences in the histories (Land Rover, Car Fax & Northtown) support each other and dispute the data in the Event Log. There are several possible explanations for the Event Log discrepancies and chief among them is the on-going loss of battery voltage.  Land Rover engineering informs us that this type of discrepancy can also be attributed to non-approved scan tool software being used to communicate with the vehicle in an independent repair facility, resulting in data corruption.  As Northtown has only seen the vehicle in question once, we cannot comment further than to say that the facts related herein satisfactorily resolve the five mileage related complaints.   Billing Adjustment                 Northtown provided the services requested for the agreed upon amount and performed those services correctly.  Northtown declines to adjust or refund any portion of this invoice. “…..the employee that drove my vehicle should be let go.”   We presume that this demand relates to the erroneous mileage concern addressed above. “….and the reason why they could not repair my vehicle.”  Northtown had possession of the vehicle from the afternoon of 07/21/2017 through 07/26/2017.  Once the computer system was cleared and reset, no faults occurred in the on-board computers and there was nothing to repair.  Additionally, the vehicle started when tested over this period and did not exhibit an actionable fault.  As there was nothing to repair, Northtown did not proceed beyond the events related on the invoice. Battery.           There is no Jim [redacted] in our employ, but Rich [redacted], a parts counterperson vaguely recalls a question regarding the need for “special tools” to install a battery.  There are none and at this point Rich’s expertise on the subject expires.  Had Mr. [redacted] requested, Northtown would have been pleased to install his battery for him and clear the monitors at that time.  Please notify me if any additional information will be helpful in resolving this concern.  Barring that we will consider this matter closed.  Thank-you   William L. [redacted] Director, Fixed Operations  Northtown Automotive Companies.