Roseville Toyota

Review: On June 1, 2012, I arrived at the Roseville Toyota at approximately 2:30 p.m. in attempts to purchase a 2012 Toyota Camry SE with all the added accessories (sun roof, blue tooth, push button start, navigation, back up camera… just to name a few). The ticket price of the vehicle was $31,912, plus I requested that Lojack and tinting be added to the vehicle. I added these items, because I planned on purchasing the vehicle.

At the time my credit scores were in the low 700-721 range. The dealership informed me that my credit was not good enough to purchase the vehicle, but that I could lease it. I told them I didn’t want to lease it that I wanted to purchase the vehicle. I have never leased a vehicle in my life and I didn’t want to start now. The dealership refused to give me my keys and continued to negotiate a deal with me. By 3:45 a.m. I was tired, frustrated and just wanted to go home. I ended up putting $6,000.00 down, traded in a 1994 Buick Century ($3,000) and my payments were $410.00 a month.

I was told by [redacted], Sales and leasing representative that as long as I wasn’t late on my payments I could purchase the vehicle when the lease was up. I never missed a payment during the lease of the vehicle. In fact, every payment was made early. I loved my car, and planned on purchasing the vehicle at the end of the lease.

According to my lease contract signed on June, 1, 2012, the term of the lease was May 31, 2015. The value of the vehicle at the end of the lease would have been $17, 625. I began getting numerous phone calls from the dealership beginning the first part of February indicating that they needed to get an appraisal of the vehicle. I finally went in for the appraisal at approximately 3:00 p.m. on February 16, 2015.

Once I gave them the keys to my vehicle to obtain the appraisal on the vehicle, they again began negotiating other vehicles with me, I informed them that I did not want another vehicle – I wanted to purchase the 2012 Toyota Camry SE that I had leased with them. They informed me again that my credit was not good enough to purchase the vehicle.

I told them that I was told when I leased the car that as long as I wasn’t late on any of my payments that I could purchase it for the amount owed at the end of the lease. They stated I could either pay the $17,625 up front or that they could provide me a two-year repayment option. My payments with a two-year repayment option would have been approximately $750.

When I refused to do a two-year contract with the dealership, they began offering me other vehicles.

They promised they would be as good as comparable to the one that I had leased with them. They continued to show me other vehicles and even had me drive a new Toyota Camry SE just to tell me that I couldn’t purchase that one either due to my poor credit. At this time, it was approximately 6:00 p.m.

I stood up and stated that I wanted my keys to my car. They told me that it was a lease and that they were not obligated to give it back since it is technically their vehicle. I told them that my lease was not up until June, 1, 2015.

Again, they told me that they didn’t have to give me my car back.

The dealership assured me that they “would take care of me.” This is by far the worst dealership that I have ever been to. Twice I was held hostage, kept for several hours until late in the evening, and taken advantage of.

At approximately 8:30 p.m. I was in the office with a finance manager, Joseph N. Beitzel working on a contract for a 2013 Toyota Camry which was a rental car. The vehicle does not have any added options that my previous vehicle did. It has more mileage on it than my 2012 model. Yet, they continued to tell me I was getting a comparable vehicle. The salesman also told me that I would have an extended warranty at no additional charge.

However, Mr. Beitzel informed me that it was not free and would cost me an additional $2495.

I was informed that I could not purchase my $17,625 2012 Toyota Camry SE unless I had a two-year contract with payments in excess of $750.

Ironically, they financed me a car with no added features that cost over $26,240 plus I put $4,000 cash down. My payments are now $488.17 ($78.17 more than I was paying for my leased vehicle with all of the additional features.) I explained to the dealership that I was unemployed and currently disabled due to a tumor that was recently removed from my inner ear.

I told them I could not afford a payment higher than I already had. Now here I am with a crappy car and higher payment!

In addition, the Carfax was run on the vehicle I purchased on February 16, 2015 that indicated that it had not been in any accidents nor was any other damage reported.

The document indicates that the last reported odometer reading was 18.465 but the vehicle has over 42,000 miles on it. After viewing the car in full daylight, I can see that the front bumper has been repainted.

The next day, I went back to the dealership and found a 2015 Toyota Corolla fully loaded with comparable features that I had on my 2012 Toyota Camry and the ticket price was approximately $23,500. This vehicle was not even offered to me; however, it was a better vehicle and cost less that the vehicle and cost less than the vehicle they sold me.

I am very frustrated with the service I have been given at the Toyota Roseville Dealership, from the first time I set foot on their business, I have been taken advantage of and held against my will until I am delirious and making stupid decisions that I would never have otherwise made. I have visited other Toyota dealerships who have assured me that I would never have been treated with this type of disrespect had I gone to their establishment. I was informed from the beginning that I had gone to another Toyota dealership that I would have been able to purchase my vehicle with the credit score I had in 2012.

Furthermore, there is no reason I should have been denied the opportunity to have a 75 month contract to purchase my 2012 Toyota Camry SE with a balance of $17,625. I am now forced to pay a 75 month contract to purchase a 2013 Toyota Camry with no added features that was a rental car and has been treated who knows how.

My 2012 Toyota Camry was only driven by me and was in excellent condition. I feel that the dealership had no intentions of ever letting me purchase the car and their tactics in getting me to purchase the vehicle are uncouth and they should be held accountable for the service I received while in their establishment.

I called Toyota Financial and they said that people buy at the end of their lease all the time for 60 to 70 month contracts, and they said they never do two year contracts. They said, “They probably lied to you to get the vehicle to flip it for more than I owed due to its low mileage and excellent condition.”

Desired Settlement: I want the contract I have for the 2013 Toyota Camry to be null in void, and I want my 2012 Toyota Camry SE back in the lease that I originally had. I also want to purchase my leased vehicle with a 60 month contract.

I am sixty years old and I thought this 2012 Toyota Camry SE would be the last vehicle I purchased. I held up my end of the contract by making my payments on time each and every month during the lease. I feel the dealership should be required to hold up their end of the agreement and allow me to purchase the leased vehicle for the remaining balance of $17,625. The $4,000 I put down on the 2013 Toyota Camry could have been put down on the remaining balance of my 2012 Toyota Camry. The Toyota Roseville dealership is corrupt and should be held accountable for their callous actions.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or concerns information that I have provided, please do not hesitate to contact me at ###-###-####.

Business

Response:

I have read the complaint and I had one of my sales managers contact him. I will update you as we find out more about it. thanks.

Business

Response:

Good afternoon [redacted], we have resolved this with the customer already. We made arrangements with a bank to refinance the balance of his lease. The customer should be ok now.

Review: On Monday, August 31, 2015 my partner, [redacted] and I ([redacted]) went to John L. Sullivan Roseville Toyota to look at a Toyota Corolla as a comparison to a Honda Civic that we going to view next. Our intention was to trade in our 2014 Kia Soul for a new vehicle. We test drove a 2015 and a 2016 Toyota Corolla LE. We revealed to the dealer that we were potentially upside down in our Kia Soul and we had no money to put down. We were upfront about our current payment and the loan balance of our Kia Soul. The sales person and we sat and met with a preliminary finance man who presented us with what they had to offer concerning financing options. The first finance option presented indicated charges for car options that we were not in agreement or discussed earlier. The options were for Dent Removal Protection and LoJack. I said we did NOT want these options. The other finance option was the down payment of $8000 required. This was not possible! After several hours, we walked out to our car, (Kia Soul) prepared to drive away when a closing finance person ran out. He presented $ -0- down with 84 months finance terms and a payment of over what we would afford. I stated that we could not and did not want to finance 84 months. We also needed our payments closer to $375 per month. He came with another finance offer stating that the term would be $399 for 75 months and that the EXpress Dent Removal Protection and LoJack were added at NO COST to us. I said we have NO need for either option and do not want it. He stated to make the deal it was included and there is NO charge. He also stated that the LoJack was an installed option that could not be removed. This was not the case as all their vehicles have LoJack installed and it a protection package that John L Sullivan offers for their customers. [redacted]Desired Settlement: We request re-negotiated contract with removal of all three optional goods, as they were added charges to our contract and finance terms. We did not agree to pay for either under any circumstance.

Business

Response:

We responded to the customers complaint by fulfilling their cancellation request and forwarding a check to Toyota Financial Services for the disputed amount. As per our dealer agreement with Toyota, all insurance product cancellations must be refunded to the lienholder and are used to reduce the customers loan balance. The customer purchased the vehicle August 31st, the loan docs were sent to Toyota, and funded. We overnighted a check to Toyota Financial Services on September the 8th, 2015 for the cancellations.Thank You,[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

[redacted]9-15-2015

Review: My father and I went to Roseville Toyota to find a Prius to buy but we encountered a lot of sketchy and unethical practices which turned us off to the dealership as a whole. The two sales people we initially were dealing with were friendly. We had gotten through a lot of paperwork and when we got to the warranties we realized the price was too high for the car in question. At that time, which was way too late into the night to be making a decision like that, after midnight, and after talking to a more knowledgeable family member, we decided to hold off on the transaction. At this point, our financing representative started getting too aggressive and her fake character was shining through, stronger than her first impression. It then seemed obvious why they keep customers that late into the night and so we left with intentions of coming back the next day. After talking about it and doing research, we decided not to purchase from that dealership, but we wanted to get back all of our information that had been floating around the hands of too many representatives for our trust and for an honest professional business. We returned to the dealership and were then pushed around to different managers and salespeople, they claimed they legally could not give us back all of our documents and claimed to have lost a file that had eight personal references on it (with addresses and phone numbers). Almost every manager and finance person we spoke with seemed sketchy and manipulative. All we wanted was our paperwork back but they kept trying to squeeze in another deal or push us around to another representative. We felt pushed, manipulated, and generally disrespected. They finally found our reference sheet after we had already left and we had to come back to the dealership to retrieve it.Desired Settlement: We would like a guarantee that our information and the information of our eight references is not going to be sold to third parties, used for any marketing procedures, and that all of our credit information and personal information is not at the risk of being sold, used for identity theft, or some sort of credit fraud.

Business

Response:

we do not sell any of our information to 3rd parties and we shred all missed deal documents except for the credit application and privacy notice which we are required to keep stored in a secure location.

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because:

This is unacceptable. This is not a guarantee. The business does not have my trust that our information is in professional hands. I would like a GUARANTEE that none of the things I requested will happen. The business has not even mentioned not adding us to their marketing procedures. I have ALREADY received an email saying they hope I had a good experience (which does not make any sense, I did not even purchase from their dealership). I hadn't received a response from Revdex.com, when I originally received the Roseville Toyota email, so I went ahead and removed myself from the subscriptions, but I have replicated how the subscription page appeared when I originally opened it (see screen shots attached). I have not even spoken with my father about how he has been contacted. He is 75 years-old man and does not need to be subjected to these dishonest marketing practices, he barely even knows how to use his email. When I proceeded to the unsubscribe page, at the original time of receiving the email, it showed that I had already been added to all the spam that comes from that dealership. My father and I would like NOTHING to do with Roseville Toyota, especially not to be solicited for more of their business. This has gotten ridiculous and at this point it feels like we are being harassed.

Business

Response:

Again, we apologize about your experience. I know your upset with [redacted] who was the person who was doing your paperwork that night. I know that you were frustrated that it was late. I know that you feel that she was rude and pushy. we take your feedback seriously and we have counceled her for her actions. you have been removed you from our marketing and we will not sell your information.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Please make sure to remove my father's information as well.

Review: ON JULY 12 2015 I "PURCHASED" A 2015 DODGE JOURNEY SXT FROM ROSEVILLE TOYOTA. I HAD A SPECIAL SITUATION WHERE I HAD TO TRADE IN MY CURRENT VEHICLE TO FREE MY SPOUSE FROM THE LOAN SO WE COULD BUY A HOUSE. HAVING A FEW FAILED ATTEMPTS AT OTHER DEALERS, WE HAPPENED TO GO TO ROSEVILLE TOYOTA. THERE WE MET WITH SOME OF THE MOST CROOKED INDIVIDUALS ANYONE CAN DO BUSINESS WITH. [redacted], [redacted], AND [redacted] IN FINANCING. I GOT A "SPOT DELIVERY" WITHOUT THINKING MUCH OF IT TRUSTING THEIR WORD I DROVE THE CAR HOME. WELL THIS EXPERIENCE HAS MADE ME THINK TWICE ABOUT TRUSTING THE WORD OF ANY "MAN" LIKE [redacted], [redacted], AND [redacted] IN FINANCING AGAIN. THESE SO CALLED "MEN" AKA SG VULTURES DID ABOUT 15 INQUIRIES TO MY CREDIT SCORE. AFTER THE FIRST 5 YOU WOULD THINK THEY WOULD GIVE UP. IT WAS NOT UNTIL JULY 23 2015 THAT THEY CONTACTED ME SAYING THEY COULD NOT GET FINANCING. THIS GOES OVER THE 10 DAY RULE IN CALIFORNIA. BEFORE JULY 22 2015 WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CALLS REGARDING THE MATTERS AT HAND. I WAS VERY DISPLEASED WITH ALL THE LIES AND UNPROFESSIONAL DEMEANOR THESE PEOPLE HAVE. I HAVE AN ANXIETY CONDITION AND THIS WHOLE EXPERIENCE HAS KEPT ME ON EDGE AND NOT BEEN ABLE TO SLEEP OR RELAX. I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS PLACE TO ANY ONE EVEN IF I HAD AN ENEMY I WOULD NOT HAVE THEM GO THROUGH WHAT I WENT THROUGH. [redacted], [redacted], AND [redacted] IN FINANCING ONE THING TO YOU "MEN" GOOGLE UP THE WORD MAN AND LEARN FROM IT BECAUSE YOU BOYS ARE FAR FROM ITDesired Settlement: BE HONEST TO PEOPLE AND CORRECT AND PAY FOR THE PAYMENT THAT WAS DELINQUENT ON MY 2009 ACCORD EXL TRADE IN THAT THEY DID NOT DO ANYTHING WITH DID NOT MAKE A PAYMENT AND I HAVE NEVER BEEN LATE OR DELINQUENT ON ANY PAYMENT UNTIL I CAME TO ROSEVILLE TOYOTA!!!!!!!

Business

Response:

Revdex.com Complaint Number: [redacted] Sunday, July 12th, 2015, the client and his wife visited Roseville Toyota Certified Used Car Center. During the visit, the client expressed interest in purchasing a seven- passenger SUV and wanted to trade-in a [redacted] Accord that he and his wife were co-owners. The client stated the primary reason for entering into the transaction was to trade in the [redacted] Accord to remove the client’s wife from the debt of the Accord loan. They wanted to purchase a house and said their home loan officer advised them they could buy a home under the wife’s name only, provided the [redacted] loan was paid off. One of our Sales Associates helped them select a [redacted] Pilot, proceeded by a test drive and write-up offer to purchase. We determined the [redacted] pilot was too expensive. The payment was too high in relation to the client’s income. We notified the client that obtaining financing would be difficult based on his income alone. We asked to include the wife as a co-buyer to lower the payments and improve the financial quality of the application; they declined. We let the client know we would need to find a less expensive vehicle. The client agreed and again reconfirmed the main goal was to trade-in the [redacted]. Upon reviewing our inventory, we found a vehicle similar to the criteria given by the client. We test drove the vehicle. We entered into a second write- up offer to purchase. We determined the payment structure may be acceptable to a lender. Numbers were presented to the client; he agreed then took delivery of the vehicle. Tuesday, July 21st, 2015, we called and notified the client that the loan was not approved; lenders wanted additional monthly income or a co-signer. The client denied both. We advised a 10-day letter would be sent. Thursday, July 23rd, 2015, we attempted to call the client; we were unable to reach him. We received a return call from his wife, she indicated he was at work and he wanted her to call on his behalf. She was concerned the monthly payment on the [redacted] trade-in was due and the vehicle had not been paid off. We advised her we couldn’t pay off the existing loan until the new loan was approved. She said that she did not have the money to make the payment because they used most of their cash to make a down payment on the vehicle purchase. So that she could make the car payment, we mutually agreed to unwinding the purchase transaction by noon the next day, and returning the down payment. The client did not return to the dealership the next day. Saturday, July 25th, we received a call from the client. The client stated he spoke to a lawyer. The client stated we were now his bank. We told him the 10-day letter had been sent. Sunday, July 26th, the client called and said he received his 10 day letter and asked us to have his down payment check ready the next morning, he was returning the vehicle; we agreed. Monday, July 27th, the client’s wife returned the vehicle and purchased a new [redacted] in her name.

Upon pick-up of my vehicle, I did my usual walk-around and I noticed both front wheel covers (plastic) were cracked/split. They were not this way when I dropped it off (not noted on their inspection). I discussed this with service advisor and he said I must have hit a curb. The way they were cracked was not likely from a curb (on both sides of the car?). I proposed it could have happened when they were removed for tire rotation. Not satisfied with his response of saying I was at fault, he brought out mechanic who showed me how they remove them and said no way that could have damaged it. I said they could have been damaged by something dropping on them while off the vehicle. Once again they accused me of bringing them in that way. I demanded I talk to Service Manager. He agreed with them that they didn't do it. He said he would split cost of replacements. I said they should replace them 100% or I will go to corporate customer relations. Corporate customer relations never called me back within 2 business days as promised. Instead, on the third day, a representative from the dealership's service manager called me and said corporate referred it back to them. Splitting cost was still the only option offered. I declined - if not replaced, I will never return there and possibly not buy Toyota again!

I don't like the implication that I was trying to get away with free wheel covers! No longer Toyota satisfied customer!

P.s. Battery inspection was marked in the green, yet comment on 2nd page stated battery not checked, trunk was full. It has had things in the back on all previous 9 services and never noted as not checked, trunk full. Makes you wonder how much is not really inspected but marked as such! I guess they don't check spare tire pressure either (also in trunk)!!