The GroundsMen

This was an “AS IS” vehicle that was sold May 11th. [redacted] and [redacted] contacted the GM around June 21st regards to the vehicle recently being in service and the window not working properly. The car was brought into our service department on June 12th to get the sensor fixed, which it was. The...

window issue was mentioned after the fact and we were not covering it which our GM explained to him. Within the next week the car had some issues and needed to be brought to Cadillac, which it stopped working while in their shop. We were in contact with the service manager at Cadillac and we were in contact with the buyer [redacted] (Tyler’s wife) through the process. The car was fixed at Cadillac, it took about a week. The cost was covered by an extended warranty that the customer purchased. An employee there asked us if we were willing to cover the oil change and pay for the window repair, our GM told them we were not willing to because that was not agreed upon prior. Our GM was the one that called the customer to let them know the repair was completed at Cadillac and they can go down to pick up their vehicle. They called him with the manager while they were picking up the car and everything was fine. He has not heard from the customer since. He was under the impression from the customer that the rental vehicle was covered by the extended warranty, this is the first he's hearing about it not being covered. In regards to this request our GM will reach out to the customer to try to figure out a solution that would work to avoid any further issues, but we have not received any communication from them since they picked up the vehicle at Cadillac. We are not going to be bullied into something over the threat of lemon law/legal action of which there is none as this vehicle was sold "as-is".

The agreed-upon price did not include tax. We ordered the car and they took a shot at us to include the tax when they arrived to take delivery. It’s a vehicle that’s in high demand and we were already discounting the car enough. They chose not to purchase the vehicle so we refunded their money on...

their credit card.

Our Sales Manager is contacting the customer right away to resolve this. Thanks

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. 
There was more than 7 inquiries on my credit and husbands', 2 hard ones and they brought our credit down by 45 points. To resolve this issue, I want the dealer to contact those banks and remove the inquiries just as they placed them there without our permission. As for the offer, it's basically not true as the sales person told me to put half the price of the car down as payment and many other things top prove proper income. We left the place on good understating only to go home and see our credit drop substantially!  Regards,   [redacted]

The problem with the car is that it consumes an exorbitant amount of motor oil.  I didn't file any kind of report with the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection (DCP).  I contacted them with a question and advice. My question was related to a concern that my...

warranty would be voided if I had another mechanic look at the car. I suspected that Audi was not being truthful about the amount of oil consumption and I wanted another mechanic to drain the oil, measure the amount left in the car and return the oil before I had Audi do the same. The DCP gave me guidance as to how to proceed with that but they could not give me assurances as to how it would impact my warranty as that was a contract issue and I would need a lawyer to review that. After having a lawyer review the warranty I did have another mechanic measure the oil left in the car; Audi's measurements were significantly different. In an effort to keep this out of court and to settle it by receiving the repairs needed discussed the results with the Administrative Director of the Service Department. He assured my that my calculations must have been wrong but that he would now do the repair necessary. This is when they preformed the repair that was not intended for my model. I now understand that they preformed this repair because they were able to bill it to Audi international and evade the cost to the local Audi. The Administrative Director of the Service Department is now no longer with their company.

This situation was brought to our GM's attention last week and he immediately contacted the customer. Paul S[redacted], our GM, with Ms. [redacted]’s husband last week when he was notified of the issue.  Paul has already contacted the bank and provided all of the needed paperwork to resolve the issue...

for this customer.   When speaking to the customers last week he let them know that they will receive notification from [redacted] the vehicle is returned and no longer in the customers possession.  He asked the customers to bring the bills and/or late charges to the dealership and he will cut a check for the inconvenience.   He also apologized profusely for the mistake and has been attempting to contact Mr. [redacted] throughout the day.

We made corrections to this deal. We have the lease buyout title and are processing tomorrow. The GM, Jared W, will call [redacted] and explain the correction and time frame for her title.

I...

have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. I tried to call him twice and never got a call back. he has my phone number. I did not even make it back to my office before the speaker failed again. I contacted another mechanic and a audio repair shop and they both saud I have a short and or loise connection. I do not understand why they can mot check the connections or at least be courteous enough to pick up the phone and not ask me to call again. I have been driving almost a year with hit and miss radio...certainly not acceptable

The original request was for us to provide four snow tires at our cost, we agreed, yet, now it's something different. Unfortunately, this is as far as we're willing to go. Yes, we made a mistake by not handling the payoff immediately. We addressed this mistake. The customer also made his first call to our dealership the same day that we addressed the mistake, it's not as if this has been lingering. All we can do is fix the mistake, which we did, and provide the tires at cost, as was originally requested.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.  This is the lamest excuse for apparent incompetence I have ever heard. I fully accept the fact that the cost of living may be higher in Bethesda than in Orlando. What I do not accept is the following, the part in question, throttle body, wholesales for around $1300 in your area (I checked with a local Mercedes dealer) you wanted to charge $3015, that's about a 130% markup. Furthermore, according to my own mechanic, who has 15+ years of experience rebuilding Merced's engines the labor involved in changing the part is less than 1 hr. yet you wanted to charge me for 51/2 hr. labor.  The age of the car and how many mechanics have worked on it over the years have absolutely nothing to do with my complaint. I am focused exclusively on the exorbitant cost of the part and labor.  Regards,  [redacted]

This customer took delivery of a 2007 Lexus with 108,000 that does not qualify for any lemon law warranty as per New York State Law, vehicles with more than 100,000 miles are not covered.  The customer came back to the dealership a few days after delivery complaining about a check engine light...

but the light was not on when he was at the dealership.  He contacted the sales manager a few days later with a list of $4,000 worth of his repairs that his local mechanic recommended to be done which our manager disagreed with the fact that these repairs needed to be done now as most would be due in a year or so.  The customer brought the vehicle to another mechanic to get a second opinion and the 2nd mechanic said the repair would only cost about $1,200 and, in an effort to keep the customer happy, but by no means anything we were required to do, our Sales Manager offered to split the repair costs. Our Manager has been in contact with the customer the whole time and was surprised to hear of this complaint.

The customer provided the incorrect credit card to credit on two occasions. They provided another number today for us to process a credit. We will do this today.

We are not willing to cover the extra charges, our inspection is a pre-inspection to give the dealer an opportunity to buy the vehicle...when we don't buy the vehicle, regardless of what our inspection believes the damages to be, MINI still has an official inspection done later by their own contractor who assesses the damage; ours is simply a guide.

A Check is being cut to the customer today.

Due to an oversight on our behalf, Ms. [redacted]’s Excessive Mileage and Unpaid Lease Payments to Mercedes-Benz Financial Services, in the amount of $1272.92 was wired and processed directly to Mercedes-Benz Financial Services this afternoon.Ms. [redacted] is a valuable customer...

to us, as well as all of our customers, we had and have no intentions of misleading Ms. [redacted] in any way; Staci D[redacted] had processed the proper paperwork in which from that point there was a clerical error causing the oversight. Steve D[redacted] had attempted contact with Ms. [redacted] twice in which voicemails were left and Ms. [redacted] had not returned his calls. Upon hearing of the error, we took quick action to resolve the issue. Please forgive our inattention. If you have any questions, please contact me at ###-###-####. SincerelyNew Country Motor Cars, Inc.

Our Service Director, Rob Y, has reached out to Ms. [redacted] via email 2-3 times to have her contact him at her convenience so that he can help her any way possible. We have been unable to duplicate her concern on the previous visits but we'll do anything we can to continue to assist her. Thank you.

The dealership's General Manager has sent the customer a $400 refund.

There is nothing further that we can do to assist this customer.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.   As you can see in the email sent by the business they are claiming that I was not eligible for the repair because my VIN number did not qualify. However, the repair that made was exactly that repair..... a repair that was specifically designed for another car.  The business made this repair so that they could charge it back to a recall. It is another example of the business evading their responsibility. This time trying to pass it off as something even they claim it was not so that they would not be responsible. The business response to the Revdex.com remains consistent in with their misleading information. Chris (from the business) is indicating that they did this repair when my car was two years out of warranty. He is misrepresenting the facts. My car is two years out of warranty NOW. The repair was made at the VERY end of my warranty or just after it expired. The problem was reported to the business during the warranty (in fact it was reported very early in the warranty and Chris has access to those undisputed facts).  I did follow the instructions that Chris suggested and I phoned the number that he gave to me. I continue to follow up with the parent company (the number he gave me).  Regards,  [redacted]

To Whom It May Concern:  Thank you for bringing our attention to a recent complaint made against our dealership by [redacted].    Mr. [redacted] returned his 2014 428Xi BMW lease to our dealership on June 3rd of this year; the same date that he picked up his newly leased 2016 435Xi....

   While Mr. [redacted] was informed by his sales representative, Terrence Holmes, that he qualified for the “BMW Payment Waiver Program” (See copy of attached e-mail dated May 31st - 3 days prior to when Mr. [redacted] took delivery of his new car), he was never “assured”, as Mr. [redacted] claims, that he would “no longer be responsible for the old vehicle.”  The Payment Waiver Program is a plan that allows customers to get into a newer vehicle by eliminating the remaining lease payments on their current vehicle; however it does not eliminate a customer’s responsibility for any damages that may have occurred to their vehicle during the period of their lease.  In fact, had any deal been worked out between Mr. [redacted] and his sales representative that would void him of accountability for the condition in which his previous lease was returned, this stipulation would have been included on the purchase order of his latest lease. (Also enclosed.)   We have included a copy of the terms of the BMW Financial Services Motor Vehicle Lease Agreement initially signed by Mr. [redacted] 2 years ago when he leased his 2014 428Xi and again last month when he leased his 2016 435Xi.  As you will note, the contract clearly states that the leaser is “responsible for repairs of all collision, accident and other physical damage that is not a result of normal wear and use.  These repairs include, but are not limited to, those necessary to return the Vehicle to its pre-damage condition, including, but not limited to, repairing damage to exterior panels and components, structural components, etc. ….”   The contract further states that the leaser, “agree to pay the costs of all repairs to the Vehicle that are not the result of normal wear and use.”  This includes “dented, scratched, chipped, rusted, pitted, broken or mismatched body parts, paint, vehicle identification items, trim or grill work” and “missing equipment, parts, accessories or adornments.”   Attached is a copy of Lease-End Inspection Form that was issued to Mr. [redacted] by BMW Financial Services.  It shows damage to the left and right doors and left and right quarter panels of the leased vehicle he returned.  This inspection, conducted by an independent third -party hired by Mr. [redacted]’s lending institution, includes the cost for a missing master key that was not returned with the vehicle.    While Mr. [redacted] is requesting that Wide World BMW refund him the money for these damages, he needs to understand that his payment never went to our dealership, but to the banking institution (BMW Financial Services) that cashed his monthly lease payments.  In fact, by New York State law, our dealership does not have the authority to inspect any leased vehicles that are returned to our premises.  Third-party inspections, accompanied by photographs of any damage, are conducted to avoid such claims by individuals who insist that “these charges are completely made up” in an attempt to avoid payment.    Although we regret that Mr. [redacted] is unhappy with these charges, we wonder why he declined to have this inspection done prior to returning his vehicle.  This report would have given him the opportunity to either have these damages repaired; perhaps at a more desirable cost at our dealership, or given him the occasion to possibly work something out with his sales representative to reduce the expense.  While we appreciate Mr. [redacted]’s patronage, unfortunately we have no control over the contract he signed with BMW Financial Services, nor do we have the authority to overturn the decision of a third-party inspector hired by the same banking institution.  That said, we were able to connect with BMW FS to have them re-review the inspection report, see below, their response, in which they agreed to waive all the charges.    If you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me directly.  Sincerely,  Michael [redacted]General Manager Hi [redacted] - Sorry to see that this customer had to go as far as contacting the Revdex.com. I reviewed the pictures from the auction and it looks like this unit has been sold. I do not agree with the assessment. The CR has $1600.00 worth of charges and I do not see any reconditioning fees. Simply, this is not fair to the customer or Wide World. All charges will be waived and the customer will receive a new $0.00. I hope this can restore his faith a little bit in both Wide World and BMW FS.   BMW Group   Financial Services   Tim [redacted]