Sullivan Auto Trading INC

In regards to Ms. [redacted] complaintI have spoke to the employee who was responsible for handling Ms. [redacted] vehicle (The Service Manager, [redacted]).  She told me that what Ms. [redacted] has stated is true but all of the issues that she complained about have been addressed and paid for by...

the dealership.  Ms. [redacted] having to visit the service center several times was a mere result of trying to diagnose the issues at hand.  With pre-owned machinery, sometimes it can become extremely tedious to narrow the exact cause of something and repair it.  We hope to resolve any issue the first time but realistically that does not happen in some cases.  In regards to the desired settlement:Customer satisfaction is very important to us and we are willing to comply with 100% of the customers request.  Please have the client call the dealership and speak with William S[redacted] the GSM to arrange.

Sullivan Auto Trading sold the vehicle in question, a [redacted], in good working condition. During Mr. [redacted]'s second week of ownership, the radiator hose failed on this vehicle. Although this was not a covered item under the customer's 30 day limited warranty,...

Sullivan Auto Trading repaired the failed radiator hose free of charge in an attempt to provide exceptional customer service to Mr. [redacted]. Weeks later, Mr. [redacted] experienced what he described as 'drainage issues' which were causing water to flow back into the vehicle during a heavy rain . Mr. [redacted] removed the entire rear bumper of the vehicle while attempting to locate this leak on his own. After removing the bumper, he discovered repairs had been previously made to the rear bumper area. Mr. [redacted] came to our dealership to question us about the damage and to ask why he was not informed at the time of purchase the vehicle had been in an accident. In an attempt to provide exceptional customer service, our body shop technician inspected the prior repair to ensure the vehicle was structurally sound. We performed this inspection free of charge. Mr. [redacted] has also stated he had a second body shop inspect the prior repair and this second body shop also concurred the vehicle was safe. We believe Mr. [redacted]'s main concern is not being told the vehicle had been involved in what we would categorize as a 'fender bender' which was obviously never reported to the prior owner's insurance company. Our technicians are instructed to check for any damage or rust to a vehicle's frame and body that could possibly pose a safety concern. When our sales staff is asked by a customer if a vehicle has ever been in an accident, our sales staff will immediately produce a [redacted] vehicle history report. A [redacted] report is the standard in the industry to document a vehicle's past history and is a reliable reference if a vehicle has sustained a documented accident. It is rare for an accident not to be reported on the [redacted] as most major accidents are reported to insurance companies who then automatically report to [redacted]. If a vehicle is in a minor accident which can be repaired for less than an insurance company's deductible, the owner of the vehicle may obtain the repair for less than his or her deductible and thus not report the incident to their insurance company who then would not report the incident to [redacted]. All Sullivan Auto Trading Staff members would fully disclose any and all knowledge of prior damage to a vehicle if that damage is known. A prior repair to a minor incident similar to the prior repair to the vehicle in question would not have changed the value, worth or sales price of the vehicle. The vehicle's sales price would not have changed even with the knowledge the vehicle had been in a minor accident. The vehicle was properly repaired and structurally sound. Mr. [redacted] is requesting the vehicle be repaired. We are unaware of any repair that is outstanding as confirmed by our body shop technician and also has been independently corroborated by a third party body shop of Mr. [redacted]'s choosing. Sullivan Auto Trading apologizes for being unaware of the prior repair to the vehicle but again we stand behind the standard in the industry, [redacted] report, as the reference source for the vehicle's prior history. We are very sorry Mr. [redacted] is unsatisfied as we feel we have attempted to provide exceptional customer service and it is our utmost goal to be as honest and transparent as we possibly can. Regards, [redacted] Sales Manager

Although we are not obligated to, We would be happy to pay the clients deductible. It is unfortunate that this happened so early in her ownership so it would be our pleasure to assist.  However, the tires had passed va state inspection and we will not be replacing them.  An opinion of...

another shop, probably to sell tires, simply is not enough evidence for us to reimburse the client for her purchase.  A Va State Inspector passed those tires which would have failed if they were dry rotted the way she explains.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.Mr. Sullivan disregards the fact that Sullivan's knew of the "fender bender" and instead of making me aware of this, he provided me a clean [redacted] as if nothing had ever happened. He clearly states they had to inspect the vehicles frame, which means again, they saw the damage from underneath. He then chose to keep it hush hush hoping nobody would ever be made aware of this underlying issue. I agree the car fax is clean, but as far as properly repaired, I highly disagree. I have been in the automotive industry for 7 seven years and I know Mr. Sullivan's game. What he needs to understand is just because someone chose to repair their vehicle the cheap way, does not mean this damage does not affect the value of this vehicle or that is was repaired properly. Clearly if [redacted], the industry's leading standard, was not made aware of this "proper repair," it was not properly repaired to begin with. I can provide written estimates/ statements, by multiple accredited businesses, that will do the repair properly and agree with the FACT that this vehicle is damaged and is NOT properly repaired. I do agree that this is a rare case, but I do not agree with Mr. Sullivan's "transparency" comment. If one were to be transparent, one would have provided a clean car fax, but also told me about the "fender bender," considering it affects nothing (as Mr. Sullivan would state.) Please see attached document for reference of damage.Best Regards, Cody [redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr [redacted]. It surprises us tremendously to hear this regarding the vehicle you purchased from us considering the details of the transaction. When you initially sat down with me to purchase the SUV, you insisted that you be able to keep the Lexus for an extended period of time and have it...

checked by your personal technician. We were happy to oblige and honored your request. Upon your return, you told us that you were satisfied with your technicians check out and wanted to move forward in purchasing the Lexus. I explained at that time that all of our cars came with a complimentary 30 day [redacted] mile **/** limited warranty. This warranty you signed, as explained to you thoroughly at the desk, covered **% of parts and labor if a claim was made during the time/mileage duration. I then explained that you were purchasing an 11 year old vehicle and highly recommended that you purchase an extended warranty. Despite my advise, you decided to sign a waver denying the purchase of an extended warranty and stating that you assume all risk after the sale. After taking delivery of your vehicle, you later reached out and spoke with our service manager who handled your claim. As a dealer, we are not responsible for providing you with a service loaner while your vehicle is in the shop for repair but we did so anyway. Mr. [redacted], please consider the facts: 1. Prior to purchase you kept the vehicle for an extended period of time. (12 or MORE HOURS)2. Had a full inspection by your personal technician 3. Stated that your technician found the vehicle to be satisfactory and worthy of purchase 4. Had an extended warranty offered to you and declined it.5. Signed a Buyer's Guide dealer implied **%/**% warranty for 30 days or [redacted] miles, NO CHARGE from the dealer. 6. Signed a disclosure stating that an extended warranty was offered to you and that you declined it, assuming all risk after purchase. 7. You made a claim on your **% parts and labor warranty and paid half of the repair. The dealership paid the other half.8. The dealership supplied you with a loaner vehicle while the work was being done. In closing, I am terribly sorry that your transmission failed early in your ownership. I can assure you that it was not a preexisting issue considering our initial pre-delivery inspection, the amount of time you kept it on your test drive with no complaint, and the good report from your 3rd party technician. With any used machine, they all run risks of failure at any given time. This is why we offer extended protection when purchasing pre-owned. We did honor your dealer implied warranty and would like it to be known that Sullivan Auto Trading paid for half of the repair on your claim. Thank you for taking the time to share your experience and take care.Sullivan Auto Trading wishing to offer absolutely no compromise to this complaint.  We have signed documentation if the Revdex.com would like copies of it.  Regards,William S[redacted] GSM

The [redacted] was purchased on May 9, 2015. The alternator failed soon after although this part failure could not have been anticipated at the time of purchase. Although the necessary alternator repair was not a covered item under the customer's 30 day/1 ,000 mile power train...

warranty, Sullivan Auto Trading repaired the failed alternator, free of charge, in an attempt to provide exceptional customer service. The customer took the vehicle to another location to have it inspected and returned to Sullivan Auto Trading with the list mentioned in their complaint. The customer stated she felt we were upset she took the vehicle to another shop. Our staff made multiple attempts to convey this was not the case and she thanked us for clearing up any miscommunication. Our technicians reviewed all the items on her list and all items appeared ok with the exception of the rear end , which was now making noise. The customer was also concerned the repairs were performed with used parts. It is standard practice to use reclaimed parts for certain repairs. Although these parts were not new, they were not broken or failing. During our subsequent inspection of the vehicle, our technician drove the vehicle and noted rear end noise. This noise was not present during the original inspection. In an attempt to provide exceptional customer service, we replaced the rear end at no cost to the customer. Regarding the listed 'leaks,' this was simply an unanticipated occurrence. We attempted to repair the issue at zero cost to the customer. The customer has stated the leak is still present. It is our intention for every customer to be pleased and we would welcome the opportunity to further investigate and eradicate the leak. Regarding the exhaust leak, the state police investigated this matter and a small leak at the exhaust flange was found that was unseen by the state inspector. He was held accountable, as all state inspectors are personally responsible and accountable for their inspections, not the repair facility. We are regretful repairs were necessary so early into the customer's ownership of the vehicle. We also apologize the exhaust leak was unseen not once but twice by the state inspector. We have taken appropriate measures to deal with this matter internally. We would like the opportunity to repair the exhaust and any issues you may still be having regarding the leak. It is our intention for all customers to have a pleasant and positive buying experience at our company. We acknowledge the frustration you have endured and we do apologize. It is our foremost goal to conduct business with full disclosure and honesty. Kind Regards , Sullivan Auto Trading

Sullivan Auto Trading does provide CarFax reports to all of our customers. We check Carfax reports when purchasing our vehicles to insure that a vehicle has never been in major accidents. We would not be willing to purchase this vehicle back from Mr. [redacted] based off the opinion of another dealer who...

is attempting to place a figure on the vehicle for trade. We would be willing to inspect the vehicle ourselves and review our results with Mr. Sund. We cannot provide any suggestions towards a resolution until we inspect the vehicle. Please contact us at your earliest convenience to set up an appointment for inspection.Kind Regards,Sullivan Auto Trading540-654-5200

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
The business provided their standard, scripted reply that is reflected in many existing complaints.  The fact of the complaint is as follows: Sullivan Auto sold a vehicle with a defective transmission.   1.  Will S[redacted] took our money and sold us a defective vehicle.  The specific failure mode of the transmission did not manifest itself until the vehicle was driven at highway speeds.  This fact was confirmed by Sullivan after EIGHT calendar days with their service department.  Unfortunately, my test drive did not include a highway test drive and no mechanical inspection would have revealed this latent defect.  The Sullivan reply (conveniently) does not address these conditions.  It was certainly a mistake to trust the Sullivan "**-point" inspection or believe there would be any fairness or integrity in the product description.2.  As evident in the reply, Sullivan Auto believes that selling defective products on a "catch me if you can" basis is acceptable if the customer does not buy an extended warranty or is forced into sharing the cost of the repair via the 30-day as-is warranty.  This self serving "business model" is clear and evident on the many complaints where these warranties only benefit the dealership selling the defective product and what our family experienced.  Again, appreciate the transparency of this scripted response. 3.  Amused that there is some "surprise" of this complaint, I made my feeling completely known at the time I picked up the vehicle and wrong "very dissatisfied" on the memo of the check (which was cashed very expeditiously no questions asked).  Also, after exchanging many texts, emails and calls during the sale; communications suddenly went silent after numerous (and fully documented) requests to arbitrate this matter.  Be advised, I was willing to negotiate a settlement, the lack of common consideration as evidenced by the facts outlined above have set me on a long-term course to leverage all resources at my disposal to ensure this does not happen to anyone else.  At this point, it is not about the money.  I am not angry, just focused.  Appreciate any support you can provide in ensuring another defective vehicle does not roll off this lot and into the hands of an unsuspecting individual. 
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] purchased a used Dodge [redacted] 1500 from us on 3/18/2017 from Sullivan Auto Trading.  Post-Sale, Mr. [redacted] did return back to our service department to get some issues addressed that he was having with his truck.  Mr. [redacted] did not purchase a warranty that covered any...

of the items he was having concerns with.  Despite the fact that he did not purchase a warranty, Sullivan Auto Trading out of "Good Will" attempted to repair the items he was concerned about.  His claim to us topping his power steering fluid off and servicing his air conditioning are true, for this would be the first step in diagnosing any mechanical issue.  Both of these remedies did fix the issues at hand while the vehicle was here.  His claim to us telling him we would not help him further because of the review he wrote about us is erroneous.  However, we did find it upsetting that he said such things after we paid for items to be repaired that we were not obligated at all to pay for.  Furthermore, the items repaired also fell outside of the dealer implied complimentary warranty that was provided to him "Free of Charge".  Lastly, there is no possible way that the exhaust would have passed a third party VA State Inspection if it had the issues that Mr. [redacted] claims it had.  We find it curious that Mr. [redacted] purchased this truck almost a year ago and is just now stating his claims with the Revdex.com. Sullivan Auto Trading performed several services to this truck despite that fact that Mr. [redacted] was outside of his coverages, at no charge.  Unfortunately, purchasing the vehicle back from Mr. [redacted] is not an option for us at this time.

[redacted] purchased a Truck from us on January 31 2016.  The truck we sold Mr. [redacted] is a ** year old truck that was described to be just that.  The pictures clearly showed the damage and we told Mr. [redacted] that we were not going to fix the bumper on the truck prior to the sale....

 Knowing that, he still chose to purchase the truck.  In regards to the radio, we had Mr [redacted] come back to our dealership and we replaced the old radio with a new one.  Note, this is something the dealership was not obligated to fix.  The only reason Mr. [redacted] had to come back to the dealership is because we went out of our way to accommodate the client by delivering the truck "sight unseen" to his doorstep.  The other issues discussed in the clients complaint would have been taken care of on site prior to delivery, had he not demanded that we deliver the car to house and that be contingent to the sale. We offered Mr. [redacted] to repair the items that he said we not operating correctly and declined our offer.  In fact, he said he took care of the things himself. All of our cars are VA State inspected prior to being sold, the fact that the headlight was not operating correctly must have happened while the vehicle was on the lot according to the third party inspector's finds.  Our customers satisfaction is extremely important to us.  However, I find these claims to not only be erroneous but maligns our integrity as a dealership.  S[redacted] Auto Trading did all, abundantly and above, what is required of a dealership to accommodate Mr. [redacted] and feel we could have not handled the situation and better than we did.   Despite the clients discontentment, we are displeased to hear this news.  Any questions regarding this situation please contact me, Will S[redacted] Sales Manager.  Thank you.Regards,William S[redacted] Sullivan Auto Trading

The [redacted] was purchased on May 9, 2015. The alternator failed soon after although this part failure could not have been anticipated at the time of purchase. Although the necessary alternator  font-size: 11px;">repair was not a covered item under the customer's 30 day/1 ,000 mile power train warranty, Sullivan Auto Trading repaired the failed alternator, free of charge, in an attempt to provide exceptional customer service. The customer took the vehicle to another location to have it inspected and returned to Sullivan Auto Trading with the list mentioned in their complaint. The customer stated she felt we were upset she took the vehicle to another shop. Our staff made multiple attempts to convey this was not the case and she thanked us for clearing up any miscommunication. Our technicians reviewed all the items on her list and all items appeared ok with the exception of the rear end , which was now making noise. The customer was also concerned the repairs were performed with used parts. It is standard practice to use reclaimed parts for certain repairs. Although these parts were not new, they were not broken or failing. During our subsequent inspection of the vehicle, our technician drove the vehicle and noted rear end noise. This noise was not present during the original inspection. In an attempt to provide exceptional customer service, we replaced the rear end at no cost to the customer. Regarding the listed 'leaks,' this was simply an unanticipated occurrence. We attempted to repair the issue at zero cost to the customer. The customer has stated the leak is still present. It is our intention for every customer to be pleased and we would welcome the opportunity to further investigate and eradicate the leak. Regarding the exhaust leak, the state police investigated this matter and a small leak at the exhaust flange was found that was unseen by the state inspector. He was held accountable, as all state inspectors are personally responsible and accountable for their inspections, not the repair facility. We are regretful repairs were necessary so early into the customer's ownership of the vehicle. We also apologize the exhaust leak was unseen not once but twice by the state inspector. We have taken appropriate measures to deal with this matter internally. We would like the opportunity to repair the exhaust and any issues you may still be having regarding the leak. It is our intention for all customers to have a pleasant and positive buying experience at our company. We acknowledge the frustration you have endured and we do apologize. It is our foremost goal to conduct business with full disclosure and honesty. Kind Regards , Sullivan Auto Trading

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID[redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  I was told when  after I brought the car back that the reason the engine over heated was because the radiator hose was not installed properly when the engine was installed in July. It was not 6 months it was at the end of September  when the second engine which Sullivan installed overheated and died. Which by my count is only 3 months.  My wife was told that she didn't need to see the warranty because if anything went wrong with the motor she was told suillvan would fix it and it would be covered. I have two other people who can verify that this was said. I just want suillvan to honor their word.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
Mr. Sullivan disregards the fact that Sullivan's knew of the "fender bender" and instead of making me aware of this, he provided me a clean [redacted] as if nothing had ever happened. He clearly states they had to inspect the vehicles frame, which means again, they saw the damage from underneath. He then chose to keep it hush hush hoping nobody would ever be made aware of this underlying issue. I agree the car fax is clean, but as far as properly repaired, I highly disagree. I have been in the automotive industry for 7 seven years and I know Mr. Sullivan's game. What he needs to understand is just because someone chose to repair their vehicle the cheap way, does not mean this damage does not affect the value of this vehicle or that is was repaired properly. Clearly if [redacted], the industry's leading standard, was not made aware of this "proper repair," it was not properly repaired to begin with. I can provide written estimates/ statements, by multiple accredited businesses, that will do the repair properly and agree with the FACT that this vehicle is damaged and is NOT properly repaired. I do agree that this is a rare case, but I do not agree with Mr. Sullivan's "transparency" comment. If one were to be transparent, one would have provided a clean car fax, but also told me about the "fender bender," considering it affects nothing (as Mr. Sullivan would state.) 
Please see attached document for reference of damage.Best Regards, Cody [redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

Unfortunately, I booked a one way flight to purchase a truck (at full asking price) from this dealership based on not only its online presentation, but how the vehicle was represented to me over the phone.
Sullivan Auto Trading bragged about the positive features of the truck but failed to acknowledge a multitude of other negative realities (rust on the body and extreme rusted components under the vehicle for example).
I trusted this dealership to fully disclose the condition of the vehicle before I incurred travel expenses of over $1,200 total and agreed to pay full asking price.
When I arrived to Virginia and looked at the vehicle, I specifically asked Will (the sales person), why he did not disclose the two areas of rust bubbling under & through the paint on the body (and he conveniently said he did not notice them). When I asked him to walk around the vehicle and thoroughly describe all of the imperfections on the phone, how does one miss two areas of rust?
I got the impression that they did not care about accurately representing the vehicle as if they could get me to book a one way flight (as I did), I would give in and buy it no matter what they failed to disclose.
I hope Sullivan Auto Trading will be more respectful to potential consumers that make such financial, time, & travel commitments to come check out a vehicle.
I am grateful that I did not trust their description to the point that I had the vehicle shipped (because then I would really be screwed).

Sullivan Auto Trading would like the opportunity to address any of the remaining issues the [redacted]'s have with their vehicle. We have attempted to contact them by phone. We are requesting that the [redacted]'s give us a call to schedule an appointment to bring their vehicle in for service.Kind Regards,Sullivan Auto Trading

Customer called Revdex.com to provide an update to the complaint. The check was received by the customer yesterday, October 1, 2015.

Review: In July the engine failed on my 2003 [redacted]. The oil pick up tube became clogged and the engine stopped working. A new engine was put it. When the new engine was put in, we where told we had a six month warranty on the engine. When my wife went to pick up the car she was not given a copy of the warranty. She asked the service man for a copy, and was told that she did not need a copy of the warranty. It was in their computer and if she had any problems to just bring the car back and the warranty would cover the engine. In October the new engine stopped working, and the car was brought back to the dealership. We told them we had just gotten the engine a few months ago and it was still under warranty. My wife mentioned that she did not receive a copy of the warranty in July even though she asked for one. The service man told her she should have gotten a copy of it but, it was in their computer. On October 31 my wife had to drop off some paper work at the dealership where they still had the car. She asked if it was covered under the warranty and the service man said yes. Around Thanksgiving we where told that when the new engine was put in, there was heat tabs installed. If the tabs became blown then the warranty was void because, the engine over heated. That was the first time we where told of the tabs. In order to look at the tabs part of the engine needed to but taken out. I told them no one ever told us about the tabs, they just told us everything would be covered by the warranty. The tabs where blown so now the warranty is void. The tabs did not blow because the engine over heated, the engine stopped working because the radiator hose became disconnected. I was told that was the original problem, however, now the dealership is saying they do not know why it stopped working. I again, asked for a copy of the warranty and was told that they did not have a copy of it.Desired Settlement: I would like to receive a copy of the warranty. Then I would like the engine repaired at no cost so I can get my car back.

Business

Response:

Revdex.com spoke with the business. [redacted] stated that this customer had a motor put in his vehicle and about 6 months later the motor blew. the business said that as long as he did not blow the heat signatures and they were the ones that removed the motor that it might be covered. However, the heat signatures were blown. the car had been driven with no coolant. the customer agreed to pay for the work once it was found that it was not covered and then pick up the vehicle. At this point the customer has agreed to sign over the title of the vehicle and settle the bill. The customer said about a week ago this might take 1-2 weeks.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID[redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. I was told when after I brought the car back that the reason the engine over heated was because the radiator hose was not installed properly when the engine was installed in July. It was not 6 months it was at the end of September when the second engine which Sullivan installed overheated and died. Which by my count is only 3 months. My wife was told that she didn't need to see the warranty because if anything went wrong with the motor she was told suillvan would fix it and it would be covered. I have two other people who can verify that this was said. I just want suillvan to honor their word.

Regards,

Review: -Car was purchased solely on the reason that an extended warranty was available. ($700) Dealership sold an invalid warranty not applicable to the vehicle. ($700) was refunded but monthly payments stayed the same. Car also had a malfunction 20mins after driving it off the lot. -A $4xx.00 processing fee (not required by law) was paid for " License, Title, Registration Fees, State or Local Taxes, Dealer Prep, Smog Fees," License plates and registration were not given by temporary plates expiration date. I was called 3 days after they had expired asking for more information. Also the vehicle hasn't passed VA smog emissions. They had told me that they have a gas station near but just forgot to do it. Asked me to do it and pay out of pocket for something that should've been done. -Vehicle came with one key fob. During negotiations we had a verbal agreement that car will come with two working keys. After numerous calls and one call back. They promised they had sent the key which I never got. Current key that came with the car stopped working shortly after the car was purchased.Desired Settlement: - refund of dealerships processing fees for services not provided as well as bait and switch to sign a contract for warranty terms not applicable to vehicle and originally paid for. - two working key fobs (old one will be returned)

Business

Response:

n response to [redacted] Review: CASE #[redacted]

Review: I purchased a [redacted] from Sullivan Auto Trading in March of 2015 that had high miles but a clean Carfax. The car was represented as never wrecked and in solid mechanical condition based on their multipoint inspection. After deciding to trade-in the car for something a bit newer my problem was discovered... After Carmax completed their quick inspection of the vehicle they noted a number of disturbing issues... Hood has been repainted, Passenger Fender not original, apron repaired, FRAME DAMAGE, CORE SUPPORT DAMAGE. These major repairs were not disclosed and should not have been missed by Sullivan's inspection of the vehicle.Desired Settlement: I would like a full refund of the purchase price but since I have put 5,000 miles on the car I would be willing to sell it back to them for $2,000 less than the purchase price in a good faith effort to resolve this complaint.

Business

Response:

Sullivan Auto Trading does provide CarFax reports to all of our customers. We check Carfax reports when purchasing our vehicles to insure that a vehicle has never been in major accidents. We would not be willing to purchase this vehicle back from Mr. [redacted] based off the opinion of another dealer who is attempting to place a figure on the vehicle for trade. We would be willing to inspect the vehicle ourselves and review our results with Mr. Sund. We cannot provide any suggestions towards a resolution until we inspect the vehicle. Please contact us at your earliest convenience to set up an appointment for inspection.Kind Regards,Sullivan Auto Trading540-654-5200

Review: On March 30th, I financed a [redacted] with 42,258 miles on it. It was sold as a gently used vehicle with a clean car fax that had been repossessed from the previous owner. The second week, the van was being towed back to Sullivan's shop (out of my pocket). The radiator hose had busted as I was driving down the road. Needless to say I was very upset. They fixed the problem free of charge, which was great. Unfortunately, around April 22nd my wife calls me, the van is now leaking water in the trunk. I proceed to find the leak and long story short I find extensive rear end damage. I remove the rear bumper and take it to the assistant manager. He proceeds to inform me Sullivan's had known nothing of this, but he would be happy to give the van a good inspection to ensure it's safety. I agree. I do not find it right to hold someone accountable when they truly are not responsible and did not know about the damage. They told me everything was fine and if I really wanted it repaired, call my insurance company. So just to ensure its safety, I take the van to a local body shop to get a second opinion. They put the vehicle on a lift and show me the bright green writing underneath the vehicle (with the bumper back on). The owner of that business ensures me Sullivan's was fully aware of the damage considering they are the ones who passed the yearly safety inspection at the beginning of March. He does also ensure me the vehicle is safe to drive but it will be pretty expensive to repair. Next, I called my insurance company, per the suggestion of Sullivan's assistant manager. They will not cover the damage due to pre existing conditions. Now I am just disgusted with this businesses morals, values and ethics. I am paying on a van that has been in an accident and sold at a top dollar price. And as a last note, I purchased their warranty for this vehicle (which also covers none of this damage)Desired Settlement: A well deserved apology for the nightmare this vehicle has been. Also, 100% Repair paid for by Sullivan's or renegotiation of price.

Business

Response:

Sullivan Auto Trading sold the vehicle in question, a [redacted], in good working condition. During Mr. [redacted]'s second week of ownership, the radiator hose failed on this vehicle. Although this was not a covered item under the customer's 30 day limited warranty, Sullivan Auto Trading repaired the failed radiator hose free of charge in an attempt to provide exceptional customer service to Mr. [redacted]. Weeks later, Mr. [redacted] experienced what he described as 'drainage issues' which were causing water to flow back into the vehicle during a heavy rain . Mr. [redacted] removed the entire rear bumper of the vehicle while attempting to locate this leak on his own. After removing the bumper, he discovered repairs had been previously made to the rear bumper area. Mr. [redacted] came to our dealership to question us about the damage and to ask why he was not informed at the time of purchase the vehicle had been in an accident. In an attempt to provide exceptional customer service, our body shop technician inspected the prior repair to ensure the vehicle was structurally sound. We performed this inspection free of charge. Mr. [redacted] has also stated he had a second body shop inspect the prior repair and this second body shop also concurred the vehicle was safe. We believe Mr. [redacted]'s main concern is not being told the vehicle had been involved in what we would categorize as a 'fender bender' which was obviously never reported to the prior owner's insurance company. Our technicians are instructed to check for any damage or rust to a vehicle's frame and body that could possibly pose a safety concern. When our sales staff is asked by a customer if a vehicle has ever been in an accident, our sales staff will immediately produce a [redacted] vehicle history report. A [redacted] report is the standard in the industry to document a vehicle's past history and is a reliable reference if a vehicle has sustained a documented accident. It is rare for an accident not to be reported on the [redacted] as most major accidents are reported to insurance companies who then automatically report to [redacted]. If a vehicle is in a minor accident which can be repaired for less than an insurance company's deductible, the owner of the vehicle may obtain the repair for less than his or her deductible and thus not report the incident to their insurance company who then would not report the incident to [redacted]. All Sullivan Auto Trading Staff members would fully disclose any and all knowledge of prior damage to a vehicle if that damage is known. A prior repair to a minor incident similar to the prior repair to the vehicle in question would not have changed the value, worth or sales price of the vehicle. The vehicle's sales price would not have changed even with the knowledge the vehicle had been in a minor accident. The vehicle was properly repaired and structurally sound. Mr. [redacted] is requesting the vehicle be repaired. We are unaware of any repair that is outstanding as confirmed by our body shop technician and also has been independently corroborated by a third party body shop of Mr. [redacted]'s choosing. Sullivan Auto Trading apologizes for being unaware of the prior repair to the vehicle but again we stand behind the standard in the industry, [redacted] report, as the reference source for the vehicle's prior history. We are very sorry Mr. [redacted] is unsatisfied as we feel we have attempted to provide exceptional customer service and it is our utmost goal to be as honest and transparent as we possibly can. Regards, [redacted] Sales Manager

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the offer and/or 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 have reviewed the offer and/or 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.Mr. Sullivan disregards the fact that Sullivan's knew of the "fender bender" and instead of making me aware of this, he provided me a clean [redacted] as if nothing had ever happened. He clearly states they had to inspect the vehicles frame, which means again, they saw the damage from underneath. He then chose to keep it hush hush hoping nobody would ever be made aware of this underlying issue. I agree the car fax is clean, but as far as properly repaired, I highly disagree. I have been in the automotive industry for 7 seven years and I know Mr. Sullivan's game. What he needs to understand is just because someone chose to repair their vehicle the cheap way, does not mean this damage does not affect the value of this vehicle or that is was repaired properly. Clearly if [redacted], the industry's leading standard, was not made aware of this "proper repair," it was not properly repaired to begin with. I can provide written estimates/ statements, by multiple accredited businesses, that will do the repair properly and agree with the FACT that this vehicle is damaged and is NOT properly repaired. I do agree that this is a rare case, but I do not agree with Mr. Sullivan's "transparency" comment. If one were to be transparent, one would have provided a clean car fax, but also told me about the "fender bender," considering it affects nothing (as Mr. Sullivan would state.) Please see attached document for reference of damage.Best Regards, Cody [redacted]

Regards,