Luther Ford Sales

I have talked to Tom and we are taking the vehicle in on the 29th of November

As figured, Luther Ford responded with assessing blame entirely on me In regards to the issue of "check verification"; at no time was the concern about the timely cashing of my insurance check and subsequent refund of $ This process should be subject to further review and censure.In regards to the instrument cluster being inoperable Yes, I did know it was not working However, I had identified this problem to the sales person during the test drive The sales person assured me "it would be taken care of" Only after the arrangement for repair was agreed upon did Mr*** inform me that there was knowledge about the inoperable instrument cluster prior to the sale of the vehicle In my opinion, this is a deceptive sales practice.In regards to the warranty issue he wrote " This was a matter between the warranty company and Mr*** Our obligation was to refund the money to the Lender because he had no warranty." This couldn't be further from the truth The warranty company advised they had never received the application for the warranty; it was never sent in a timely manner from Luther Ford After I had contacted them advising that Cars Protection Plus had no application for coverage, I received notice from the warranty company about week later that my application for coverage would not be accepted This is because the application was sent in after the fact This is deceptive and poor business practice Mr*** never acknowledged in his response that he confirmed or denied that Luther Ford was aware the problems this vehicle has had One cause of concern is his last paragraph of reply He indicates that I was well aware that the vehicle had over $129,miles This is true, but it was advertised as a functioning vehicle A concern should be raised given the fact that he encouraged me to purchase a "nicer vehicle" In my opinion, this means that they do not stand by the product they are selling.In fact, my truck is currently at another Ford Dealership The new warranty did cover some components; however I am still going to be left with approximately $of parts and labor out of my pocket The warranty coverage was approximately $ Which means the repairs to this truck will total almost $ For confirmation, I urge you to contact *** *** about the problems The sales practices are questionable and deceptive I caution anyone purchasing a vehicle, especially a used vehicle, from Luther Ford I also caution customers to have the vehicle thoroughly inspected by a mechanic prior to signing the purchase agreement I still would like recompensed for money I have had to pay out of pocket As an example, the brakes and rotors are among the components that are being replaced One of the issues was that the brake caliper was inoperable Most used car sales places will at least have new brakes and / or rotors applied prior to selling a used a vehicle

In Response to Mr*** ***’s Statements regarding his vehicle purchase:In the subject of not accepting Mr***’s personal check:Luther Ford Lincoln has a check authorization company that verifies certain informationTheywill then approve or decline the applicant based on their report- This
is to prevent any fraud on checkwriting to our company and is a store policyIn this case the third party check authorization did notapprove because Mr*** did not qualifyWe explained this to Mr*** and he seemed to understandwith no complaints and chose to continue to do business with us.In the Matter of Mr***’s vehicle cluster being inoperable:When we noticed the speedometer was inoperable we notified the customerMr***purchased the vehicle as it was represented knowing the cluster was in fact inoperableWe gave himthe opportunity to have a local mechanic fix the vehicle and we would contribute dollars towardsthe cost as a onetime good willThe Cluster was a lot more expensive than what he originally thought itwould cost himSo again Mr*** complained and asked for more help on getting his truck fixedAs agood will to this customer we supplied the part at no cost to himMr*** was happy with us at thatpoint.In the subject of his warranty company declining his application for warranty:Mr*** contacted his warranty company to discuss an issue with his vehicle shortly after he hadpurchased the vehicleThe warranty company had not instated the warranty yet and chose to declinehis application for the warrantyThis was a matter between the warranty company and Mr*** Ourobligation was to refund the money to the Lender because he had no warrantyAgain we workedtirelessly trying to come up with an alternative solution for the customerOnce we came up with asolution it was well over three weeks before the customer had finally decided on accepting thealternativeEven though so much time had elapsed for the customer to respond, we still were able togo through channels and honor his request.Mr*** was well aware that He was purchasing a year old vehicle with over miles.He purchased this vehicle knowing that the vehicle was sold as isWe are sorry that he is experiencingproblems with his vehicle and have tried to offer him the opportunity to trade it in on a nicer and morereliable truckBeing in business for years, we understand the importance of customer satisfactionand go above and beyond to try and do soHowever paying for repairs on a customer’s vehicle that waspurchased nearly months ago is an unrealistic expectation and is not part of the business transaction.It is however the customer’s obligation to maintain and repair their vehicle its part of ownershipWenever wish for customers to have mechanical issues with their vehicle after they purchase them, butunfortunately it is the nature of mechanicsWe wish Mr*** the Best and if there is anything, withinreason we can do to help him, we will.Sincerely,*** ** ***Luther Ford Lincoln

I gave the customer a call on 11/14/2014 at 4pm and on 4/18/2014 at 4:14pm. I did not talk with her,
but left a message on her phone in regard to her concern and to please give me call so we can take look
at her vehicle. I have not received a call back at this time.
We performed a recall to...

install a reinforcement crossbrace on the subframe so that steering control
can be maintained in the event of separation of the forward attachment of the LCA.
Until the customer brings the vehicle into the shop so we can inspect our work I can’t comment on her
statement.

Review: I had my Escape in for a recall and the recall was replaced but Two days later when I went to get it inspected It would not pass because the recall part was bolted on to the sub frame and it is rusted threw. Luther Ford did not tell me and This could have caused an accident. I notified Ford Motor company and they said they had paid Luther Ford for the recall and there was nothing more they could do. Luther Ford has never contacted me and I am now hunting for a sub frame to replace the other one and the Escape is not able to be driven. Very unhappy with Ford Motor Company and Luther Ford!!Desired Settlement: Would like the sub frame replaced!!

Business

Response:

I gave the customer a call on 11/14/2014 at 4pm and on 4/18/2014 at 4:14pm. I did not talk with her,

but left a message on her phone in regard to her concern and to please give me call so we can take look

at her vehicle. I have not received a call back at this time.

We performed a recall to install a reinforcement crossbrace on the subframe so that steering control

can be maintained in the event of separation of the forward attachment of the LCA.

Until the customer brings the vehicle into the shop so we can inspect our work I can’t comment on her

statement.

Consumer

Response:

I have talked to Tom and we are taking the vehicle in on the 29th of November

Review: I was taken for $13,000. I was sold a 2010 [redacted] Limited with 70,000 miles for $31,000. I was told by the sales agent ([redacted]) it is a $42,000 car new. This was misleading and incorrect. After getting home I found out a 2014 [redacted] Limited new MSRP is $35,000 with 0 miles and the blue book value of the 2010 [redacted] is $18,000. The [redacted] is a $42,000 car. The 2010 car ended up having a wheel bearing noise within a day. I returned to Luther Ford and tried getting the car fixed. It was returned with the original problem and I refused to take the car back. I complained to the sales manager that the car was sold way over value. I could have bought a new car for only $4,000 more with a lower payment due to reduced interest rates on a new car. In order to resolve I wanted a new [redacted] in return which they had many. I was expecting to get reimbursed for the original 2010 [redacted] purchase minus reasonable processing fees. After returning home my son inspected the contract and showed that I was only reimbursed $18,000 for the $31,000 purchase. I now have a 2014 [redacted] MSRP $24,500 and a $30,000 car loan not including the original trade in for $3000 and $5000 cash paid to the dealer. I have a $24,500 (MSRP) car for which I paid $38,000. I was taken for $13,000. My son after the fact noted in both cases the car loans through the dealership were about 125% of the actual car value which seems suspicious. By the way, my husband was present during this transaction but has been diagnosed by doctors with symptoms of dementia or stroke.Desired Settlement: Requesting riembursement of the original 2010 [redacted] sale ($31,000) minus reasonable processing fees towards the purchase of the 2014 [redacted]. Estimated reduction of about $11,000 to the current [redacted] car Loan would settle the matter. This loan was originally processed by Luther Ford during the 2014 [redacted] transaction.

Business

Response:

The [redacted]’s did purchase a 2010 [redacted] Limited on 10/14/13. There was a

Review: 1. I did not receive a reimbursement check (money left over from insurance) for almost 30 days. They would not accept my personal check (to which I had more than enough to cover down payment). They would only accept the insurance check (signed over to them). There was a difference over $900.00 owed to me. Despite repeat communication, it was not received for almost a month later.2. The speedometer did not work and was identified prior to purchasing vehicle during the test drive. They acknowledged they had been aware of the problem and I ended up having to pay labor for the repair.3. The first extended warranty through Cars Protection Plus I was sold during the sale was never mailed to the company and after it was mailed, Cars Protection Plus declined to place my vehicle on a contract. The Credit Manager has made some hints that they knew this used truck had problems with it and had the audacity to tell me to just get a different vehicle. I can provide documentation from the sale, Cars Protection Plus, and check stub as a testimonial to this issue.Desired Settlement: I have to take my vehicle to have it repaired. The 4 x 4 system and ABS system are in need of repairs. Also the motor needs replaced due to a broken valve rod. The secondary "warranty" coverage I was sold will not cover certain expenses and rental. I'd like to have any out of pocket expenses and cost of rental paid for by Luther Ford. I do not think this unreasonable.

Business

Response:

In Response to Mr. [redacted]’s Statements regarding his vehicle purchase:In the subject of not accepting Mr. [redacted]’s personal check:Luther Ford Lincoln has a check authorization company that verifies certain information. Theywill then approve or decline the applicant based on their report- This is to prevent any fraud on checkwriting to our company and is a store policy. In this case the third party check authorization did notapprove because Mr. [redacted] did not qualify. We explained this to Mr. [redacted] and he seemed to understandwith no complaints and chose to continue to do business with us.In the Matter of Mr. [redacted]’s vehicle cluster being inoperable:When we noticed the speedometer was inoperable we notified the customer. Mr. [redacted]purchased the vehicle as it was represented knowing the cluster was in fact inoperable. We gave himthe opportunity to have a local mechanic fix the vehicle and we would contribute 150 dollars towardsthe cost as a onetime good will. The Cluster was a lot more expensive than what he originally thought itwould cost him. So again Mr. [redacted] complained and asked for more help on getting his truck fixed. As agood will to this customer we supplied the part at no cost to him. Mr. [redacted] was happy with us at thatpoint.In the subject of his warranty company declining his application for warranty:Mr. [redacted] contacted his warranty company to discuss an issue with his vehicle shortly after he hadpurchased the vehicle. The warranty company had not instated the warranty yet and chose to declinehis application for the warranty. This was a matter between the warranty company and Mr. [redacted] Ourobligation was to refund the money to the Lender because he had no warranty. Again we workedtirelessly trying to come up with an alternative solution for the customer. Once we came up with asolution it was well over three weeks before the customer had finally decided on accepting thealternative. Even though so much time had elapsed for the customer to respond, we still were able togo through channels and honor his request.Mr. [redacted] was well aware that He was purchasing a 10 year old vehicle with over 129000 miles.He purchased this vehicle knowing that the vehicle was sold as is. We are sorry that he is experiencingproblems with his vehicle and have tried to offer him the opportunity to trade it in on a nicer and morereliable truck. Being in business for 57 years, we understand the importance of customer satisfactionand go above and beyond to try and do so. However paying for repairs on a customer’s vehicle that waspurchased nearly 4 months ago is an unrealistic expectation and is not part of the business transaction.It is however the customer’s obligation to maintain and repair their vehicle its part of ownership. Wenever wish for customers to have mechanical issues with their vehicle after they purchase them, butunfortunately it is the nature of mechanics. We wish Mr. [redacted] the Best and if there is anything, withinreason we can do to help him, we will.Sincerely,[redacted]Luther Ford Lincoln

Consumer

Response:

As figured, Luther Ford responded with assessing blame entirely on me. In regards to the issue of "check verification"; at no time was the concern about the timely cashing of my insurance check and subsequent refund of $976.55. This process should be subject to further review and censure.In regards to the instrument cluster being inoperable. Yes, I did know it was not working. However, I had identified this problem to the sales person during the test drive. The sales person assured me "it would be taken care of" Only after the arrangement for repair was agreed upon did Mr. [redacted] inform me that there was knowledge about the inoperable instrument cluster prior to the sale of the vehicle. In my opinion, this is a deceptive sales practice.In regards to the warranty issue he wrote " This was a matter between the warranty company and Mr. [redacted] Our obligation was to refund the money to the Lender because he had no warranty." This couldn't be further from the truth. The warranty company advised they had never received the application for the warranty; it was never sent in a timely manner from Luther Ford. After I had contacted them advising that Cars Protection Plus had no application for coverage, I received notice from the warranty company about 1 week later that my application for coverage would not be accepted. This is because the application was sent in after the fact. This is deceptive and poor business practice. Mr. [redacted] never acknowledged in his response that he confirmed or denied that Luther Ford was aware the problems this vehicle has had. One cause of concern is his last paragraph of reply. He indicates that I was well aware that the vehicle had over $129,000 miles. This is true, but it was advertised as a functioning vehicle. A concern should be raised given the fact that he encouraged me to purchase a "nicer vehicle". In my opinion, this means that they do not stand by the product they are selling.In fact, my truck is currently at another Ford Dealership. The new warranty did cover some components; however I am still going to be left with approximately $1800.00 of parts and labor out of my pocket. The warranty coverage was approximately $1200.00. Which means the repairs to this truck will total almost $3000.00. For confirmation, I urge you to contact [redacted] about the problems. The sales practices are questionable and deceptive. I caution anyone purchasing a vehicle, especially a used vehicle, from Luther Ford. I also caution customers to have the vehicle thoroughly inspected by a mechanic prior to signing the purchase agreement.

Review: My wife and I bought a 2006 ford f250 from Luther Ford a little over a week ago. The salesman allowed me to drive the truck for about 2 miles and in that time I wasn't able to find any issues other than an exhaust leak and small amount of rust. My wife and I were fine with buying the truck for the out the door price of $11,000 with those issues. The salesman, [redacted] assured us that the biggest and only mechanical problem with this truck was the exhaust leak. My wife drove the truck off of the lot to a gas station about 2 miles away and it was spitting and sputtering by then making ticking noises and running very rough. We managed to get it home and I tried out the 4 wheel drive to find it not working. We immediately called the salesman that sold us the truck after encountering these extra problems. He first told us that they would fix these extra issues and then said they wouldn't, we've made multiple attempts to get this settled. When taking the truck out for a test drive the following day I had a brake caliper go and leave me with almost no brakes to get home. I used to be a certified mechanic so first I looked into the brake issue and found nothing but a metal brake pad and a shattered caliper. I fixed these issues by installing a new caliper and changed brake drums and pads in the rear. Next I looked into the 4x4 issue and found that the wheel hubs were sticking. I did not have to spend any money on this. Finally I bought a diagnostic computer to read the trucks engine codes. It was throwing 13 different codes all relating to the timing of the truck. I found that it's common for the cam phasers to go out so I bought brand new cam phasers, timing kit along with sensors and solenoids. This cost me roughly $1,200. Now it's down to a few engine codes but still running very poorly. I have all of my receipts to show how much money I've spent on problems that were never disclosed to me. I also have the online ad saved which doesn't disclose any of these issues.Desired Settlement: Reimbursement for repairs made, I have all receipts to prove the work that needed done or we give the truck back and get our money back.

Business

Response:

Mr. and Mrs. [redacted] did purchase a 2006 Ford F-250 on 03/13/2014 knowing the

Review: We purchased a new vehicle at Luther Ford. We also set up financing through them and, at their recommendation, set up automatic payments. They chose to use a 3rd party to withdraw the money from our account and transfer it to the loan holder ([redacted]). ([redacted] later told me they could take the money directly from our account. Luther Ford never gave us this option.) The 3rd party they chose, [redacted], chose to sell our account to [redacted]. [redacted] then went bankrupt. They took money to pay [redacted] from our account, but the check they wrote was returned for insufficient funds. The money was never returned to our account. [redacted] contacted us, and we had to make the payment again. We essentially made the same payment twice. I was able to recover part of the lost money on my own. Both [redacted] and our financial institution urged me to contact the dealer to resolve the issue. I contacted Luther Ford several times to discuss it. I finally spoke with [redacted] the finance department. We spoke several times and I explained the situation to him. On 3/8/14, [redacted] said that he spoke to the Finance Manager and he (the Finance Manager) said "they (Luther Ford) would make it right." When I spoke with [redacted] again on 3/12/14, he said that Luther Ford (from ownership down) said they would not refund the money to us. In essence, they had chosen not to honor their verbal agreement to "make it right." I then contacted Ford Customer Service. They said there was nothing they could to because financing was set up through an outside source ([redacted]), not [redacted] (even though it was arranged by an authorized Ford Dealer. Luther Ford never gave us the choice to set up through [redacted]. The only option they provided us was [redacted], with a 3rd party making the electronic debits from our accoumt. As part of my call to Ford, I said I would be willing to speak with Luther Ford again to resolve things, but I have not heard from them.Desired Settlement: I feel that because we set up financing through Luther Ford (an authorized Ford Dealer) in good faith that they would choose reputable companies, it is the responsibility of Luther Ford and Ford to refund the remaining $180.95. When a company they chose to work with cheats a customer, Luther Ford and Ford should make every attempt to rectify the situation and protect their customer. We were given a verbal commitment from [redacted] at Luther Ford to refund the money, which they chose not to honor.

Business

Response:

04/17/20 14