Otto Cadillac Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12489302, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.It's unfortunate Otto Cadillac's response to my complaint offered no resolution, but rather offered only more confusion by way of their calculations to their deceitful sales transactions.It is a fact I purchase a used "Certified" Cadillac VIN # *** plus an extended warranty (7/19/16)Upon arriving home that day my husband noticed some significant body damageWe immediately called an Auto Body repair expert, and he too confirmed the car had significant body damageThis caused me to call Otto Cadillac that very same day,(7/19/16) whereas Ian M*** (Salesman) assured me MrOtto would be contacting meI received no call from MrOtto, therefore I called Otto Cadillac several more times until I was able to speak with MrChris OttoI indicated the car was purchased as "Certified Cadillac" however is has significant body damage that was NOT disclosed to me at the time of the saleI sent I insisted that I wanted my trade vehicle back the SRX Cadillac as I was returning the vehicle right awayMrChris Otto informed me my car was already gone, and assured me he would make it right by me, and did NOT want to lose my businessHe insisted I keep the car that was sold me (7/19/16) as it was mechanically sound, and to give him a few days to located a car (Cadillac coupe) that had no damageI did as MrOtto requested, as I felt he was trustworthyAlso my daughter was seriously ill with an unknown sickness, and I was tending to her, (going back and forth to medical facilities trying to get a diagnosis). Several days went by, and I kept in touch with MrOtto on his pursuit to find me a replacement vehicle, in which he had no luckI assured him at this time, I simply wanted a vehicle that was comparable in price, and options as the vehicle I purchased 7/19/that had damageI did NOT insist on all those DEMANDS he claims (heated seats, cooled seats)I simply wanted a vehicle that did NOT have damageI insisted upon returning the vehicle to his lot, and he told me he was unable to place me in a loaner for a few days as the loanerMrOtto assured me once the loaner was available he would have Bill (Service Manager contact me). I called numerous times the next few days, and finally spoke w/ Bill and made arrangements to return the damaged vehicle, and pick up the loaner. I was driving the loaner vehicle for several weeks, and I kept in close contact with Otto in hopes they would find me a car soon, as my daughter's medical condition worsenedIn fact I myself, had located several Cadillac Coupe's at local dealerships, right around the same price (some lower in cost) I purchased the damage car from his dealership in JulyIt is a fact I informed MrChris Otto of these potential replacements, along with where they were located, in hopes he could possibly deal with these local dealerships and I would finally have a replacement vehicleIt wasn't until August 22, 2016 I received a call from Chris himself that they he found me a replacement vehicleI was most grateful MrOtto had allowed me the use of the loaner vehicle, and my trust in him only increasedMrChris Otto was giving me the details on this replacement vehicle describing it as a much better vehicle than that of the car I returned to him and is a fact he openly admitted once again the car I returned had body damageHe also mentioned the replacement car had a few more options, and that is when I questioned pricingThis is when Chris told me this car was only $1,maybe $1,more than that of the damaged vehicle due to more optionsI responded, what about the cars I informed him that were at local dealerships, that had all these same options, (in fact one of them had less miles) and was selling for $1,+~ less than the damaged car (base model) I returnedChris became short with me, and I felt I was being unreasonableI also felt I owed my loyalty to him as he did in fact allow me to use his loaner while he located a replacement vehicleI agreed to the slight price increase that being $1,to $1,500 for as he promisedthe extended warranty I purchased would be transferred to the replacement vehiclePlease Note * Purchase Agreement clearly states (8/22/17) bottom right corner under Taxes AND OTHER FEES the twelfth set of numbers down PURCHASE PRICE NET= $32,It is a fact that is far MORE! In fact if one was to look up an approximate value of a Cadillac at that time frame, $32,is far, far more than what it was worthSo, his response to my complaint proves he falls short of revealing truths (he did me a favor). Please place close attention to his response about the depreciation value $4,500 did he depreciate or did he increase the price of the replacement car? Now take a look at the purchase agreement as I already mentionedThis is almost laughable. I returned the loaner and picked up the replacement vehicle August 22, Upon doing so, Chris told me to NOT to pay attention to the purchase agreements, as things were complicated due to the circumstances (me needing to return the damaged car)Sandy, and MrOtto assured me the extended warranty was transferred to the replacement vehicleAgain, my trust in the dealership was at a high, as he agreed the first car had damage, and allowed me to use a loaner car throughout this processI felt I had no reason to question his intentionsI also had a very sick daughter at home I needed to get home to, as she was in kidney failure, and I was headed to Boston.It wasn't until I went to trade in the replacement vehicle November 2, that I learned the replacement car (August 22, 2016) extended warranty was NOT transferred as Chris Otto promised! Upon calling the extended warranty protection plan, that contract number did NOT even exist! The $1,I paid was requested by Otto and a refund went directly to his dealership his Otto (09/01/17, weeks AFTER I picked up replacement car. That is when I also learned MrOtto charged me a depreciation on the damaged car he sold me (7/19/16) in the amount of ($4,500) the same CAR I CALLED AND COMPLAINED I WANTED MY MONEY BACK the VERY SAME DAY I PURCHASED (7/19/16)! I also insisted I wanted my SRX CADILLAC back that I had traded in for the damaged carI have my telephone records to prove thisThere should be NO depreciation cost involved, as I made it clear to the dealership and MrOtto himself the same day I picked up this damaged vehicle, that it was NOT disclosed to me this car had body damage, explaining to OTTO therefore any trade in value (at a later date) would be significantly lowerI wanted my old car back, and the deal to be canceled immediately! It was MrOtto that planned out the next deceitful move! I trusted him and he took advantage of myself financially, and emotionally due to my very sick daughters medical stateAgain, whenI learned Chris Otto not only increased the cost of the second vehicle he sold me (replacement car) but he gave me a trade-in-value of the damaged car he sold me of $4,less than what I paid! When I brought this to his attention 11/02/he laughed and said it's called DEPRECIATION Sweetheart! He further told me the extended warranty was only through his dealership (he would warranty the car for as long as I owned it)I have all documents in hand to prove so.I am requesting my $4,in depreciation, along with the $1,refunded to me immediately!
Regards,
*** ***

RESPONSE TO Revdex.com ComplaintID [redacted]Nov 13 2017 05:47pmWe are writing in response to the Revdex.com complaint we received on November 10, 2017. It's unfortunate that the customer feels as if she has been advantage of, however the facts of our transactions with her will not only show that we were...

not taking advantage of her but actually went above and beyond standard business practices. The following is the time line of the transaction:• On 7/19/16, the customer purchased a Certified Pre-Owned Cadillac 2012 CTS (VIN [redacted]) for $23,000 plus a service contract for $1,895. Total with taxes,DMV fees and trade payoff was $27,399.15. The customer's down payment check number 587 for $261.00 was initially returned non-sufficient funds. (Purchase Order and Proof of Certification Attached).• Several days later, the customer called Chris Otto to ask about the Car Fax and expressed concern over an accident on the vehicle history report, which was not requested prior to purchase. In NYS, dealers are not required to disclose vehicle history reports. The car did meet all certified pre-owned requirements.• Chris Otto not only offered to find the customer a replacement vehicle, but also gave her a loaner vehicle to drive until one was found. Neither of which Otto Cadillac was under any legal obligation to do.• The replacement vehicle had more options than the original vehicle, as requested by the customer (i.e. heated and cooled seats, and navigation) and the original vehicle was a Base package, while the replacement vehicle was a Premium package therefore having a value of several thousand dollars higher.• We sold her the vehicle for $28,000, and offered a trade allowance of$23,500 ($500 more than what Ms. [redacted] paid for the vehicle the prior month). (Purchase Order attached).• Service Contracts do not transfer from vehicle to vehicle. The service contract was cancelled and refunded less a $50 cancellation fee to the customer and applied to the cost of the replacement vehicle as a down payment as promised.• As explained above, the replacement vehicle had more options as requested by the customer and therefore resulted in a $4500 price increase. The above timeline was put together to clearly state the facts of the transaction and clear up the misunderstanding with regards to the vehicle traded in and the replacement vehicle purchased. Otto Cadillac clearly communicated to the customer that the service contract was being refunded and applied to the purchase of the new vehicle. Therefore the $1,895 is not owed to the customer. As far as the $4,500 difference, as explained above, the customer requested additional options on the replacement vehicle and approved the purchase price of $28,000 before purchasing the replacement vehicle. As a result of the above stated facts, Otto Cadillac's position on the dispute is that there is no additional money Owed to the customer.