The Roosevelt Hotel

I am responding to a complaint filed with the Revdex.com, by [redacted] , with an assigned file number of [redacted] Attached is a copy of the proposal that was presented to the customer It shows nine payment options based on down payment all of which are on a month term As Mr [redacted] stated, we had discussed 0.9% financing through [redacted] earlier in negotiations, however, it was only available for a month term Because the customer wanted to stay at a monthly payment around $400.00, we explained that we would not be able to use the 0.9% financing and instead had to choose a month term Also attached are copies of the TILA or Truth In Lending Form and Finance Menu that clearly shows the same number of payments and annual interest rate The contract using the same agreed upon pricing is also attached It was explained line by line by our Finance Manager before being signed off on by the customer While it is unfortunate that the customer did not understand the terms of the contracts they signed, we feel we made every effort to explain not only the amount of payments but also the interest rate Additionally, both buyer and co-buyer were required to sign a total of four times acknowledging the payments and/or rate We appreciate the Revdex.com assistance in trying to help us resolve this issue If you have any other questions, or if I can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me at [redacted] [redacted] Neil Huffman Honda

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
1) The title took well over days for me to receive itThat is nothing I can control and appears to be Indiana lawProblem is I decided I wanted to get rid of the car and had to wait for the titleThat delayed me and added to miles used on the carThat **so may affect the amount for my trade inWhich brings my to car trade ins
2) Because of they changed the contract after we agreed on a different amount, I recorded the next conversation I had with ***In that recording *** did not admit to changing the agreed amount for the trade but what he did was explain what they are doing since July of ***He said he was "giving me a car trade tax"When I questioned if he (dealership) was giving the tax he admitted it was not them but the stateHe said this new law went into effect in July ***My question is how can he say he's giving a tax credit appears to be adding it to what he offers for a car trade itIt **so appears obvious they are using the tax law to there advantage which is fine if both parties agree to itI **so pointed out that even with this trick the amount didn't not add up to what was agreed onHe then tried to offer halfI declined and left the meeting we had
Yes there is no question I signed the contract but when I noticed that it was incorrect I contacted the dealership the next morningThis took about 2-hoursI left the dealership that evening (7pm- I think they close at 9pm), whet to work, noticed the issue and called the next morning (9am)
I have the recording and can provide it when/if needed
Regards,
*** ***

I am responding to a complaint filed with the Revdex.com, by[redacted], with an assigned file number of [redacted]. 
Attached is a copy of the proposal that was presented to the customer.  It shows nine payment options based on down payment all of which are on a 72 month...

term.  As Mr. [redacted] stated, we had discussed 0.9% financing through [redacted] earlier in negotiations, however, it was only available for a 60 month term.  Because the customer wanted to stay at a monthly payment around $400.00, we explained that we would not be able to use the 0.9% financing and instead had to choose a 72 month term.
Also attached are copies of the TILA or Truth In Lending Form and Finance Menu that clearly shows the same number of payments and annual interest rate.  The contract using the same agreed upon pricing is also attached.  It was explained line by line by our Finance Manager before being signed off on by the customer.
While it is unfortunate that the customer did not understand the terms of the contracts they signed, we feel we made every effort to explain not only the amount of payments but also the interest rate.  Additionally, both buyer and co-buyer were required to sign a total of four times acknowledging the payments and/or rate.
We appreciate the Revdex.com assistance in trying to help us resolve this issue.  If you have any other questions, or if I can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me at [redacted].
 
[redacted]
Neil Huffman Honda

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the 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.
Regards,
[redacted]
 
 
 We appreciate Mr. Huffman’s account of the transaction, but he was not personally involved, and we do not feel that it is accurate. 
 
“Because the customer wanted to stay at a monthly payment around $400.00, we explained that we would not be able to use the 0.9% financing and instead had to choose a 72 month term.”
We contend that the italicized portion of this conversation never happened. 
We only spoke to two people about the deal that day, and only one of them verbally discussed the interest rate.  That was Mr. Hampton, the salesman, and the only interest rate that was ever mentioned was the 0.9%.  We firmly assert that the interest rate of 4.85% was never mentioned to us, nor was it explained that we would not be getting the 0.9%.
Business Manager [redacted] did not review the contract verbally with us, (a step that their Finance Manager later acknowledged that he always personally performs when finalizing a deal,)  and instead spent the whole time that we were in his office trying to sell us an extended warranty.
“Additionally, both buyer and co-buyer were required to sign a total of four times acknowledging the payments and/or rate.”
If we review these documents,
Page 1 has absolutely no reference to interest rate on it.
Pages 2 and 3 were presented to me during the conversation of the extended warranty, and as proof that I was declining the extended service warranty, not as part of the loan itself. 
While Page 4 does describe the details of the loan, it is not executed by any member of the Huffman staff. 
We acknowledge we should have read the paper work more closely. However, with stellar credit, we can assure you that had the term “4.85%” been presented, we would have never agreed with this contract.   When we contacted [redacted] Financial to register a complaint, their suggested resolution was a rebooking, which could be performed by the dealer.  We would request that this be performed.  We love our new car, and, at the time enjoyed the experience with the dealership.  We would love to tell our friends, neighbors and coworkers that the trek to Southern Indiana is worth it, because of the upstanding people at Hoffman Honda. We feel that the only way we can do that is with a rebooking of the loan, as suggested by [redacted] Financial.

I am responding to a complaint filed with the Revdex.com by [redacted], with an assigned ID of [redacted]. 
Mr. [redacted] purchased a vehicle from us on August 18, [redacted].  We did not receive proof of insurance until August 27, [redacted] at which time the paperwork was...

submitted.  On September 3, [redacted] the vehicle was transferred into his name and the tags were issued.  The title is mailed to the customer directly from the state, therefore, out of our control. 
Attached are copies of the two proposals that were offered to Mr. [redacted].  The second proposal, which Mr. [redacted] signed off on, shows a trade allowance of $12,170.90.  At no time was there an offer made of $14,000 for his trade-in, $14,209.27 is listed as his trade payoff or the amount Mr. [redacted] still owed on his trade in.  The final proposal with the agreed upon trade allowance of $12,170.90 was signed by Mr. [redacted] prior to his departure to his bank.  The contract using the same agreed upon pricing was then completed, explained line by line by our Finance Manager, and signed off on by Mr. [redacted] when he returned.  This contract is also attached. 
Several employees have spoken and/or sat down with Mr. [redacted] explaining the title work process as well as the agreed upon pricing.  Additionally, a $1000 was offered to Mr. [redacted] as a good will gesture but was refused by Mr. [redacted].  The title work was completed in a timely fashion and, as displayed in the attached paperwork, no contract was breached. 
As always, we appreciate the Revdex.com’s assistance in trying to help us resolve this issue.  If you have any other questions, or if I can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me at [redacted].
 
[redacted]
Neil Huffman Honda

Review: I prepaid $133.55 through [redacted] to stay the night of 07/**/2015. When I checked in they preauthorized $50 on my card for incidentals but also preauthorized $117.11. I found this later that evening and asked about it and they said they had no record of it and that they had only authorized the $50 charge. Since it was just an authorization they said there was nothing they could do and to see if the charge finalized the next day. The next day the charge went away, so I checked out thinking everything was ok. On the morning of 07/**/2015 I noticed the $117.11 charge was back again and now finalized. That afternoon I went back to the hotel and the employee I spoke with assured me that the billing error was caught and I should be seeing a reversal soon. I checked my account again on 07/**/2015 and still had no credit. I then called the hotel and was told the credit shows good on their end and to call my bank because sometimes they will hold a credit. On Monday 07/**/2015 I called the bank and they said they have no credit that shows on their end. I called the hotel again. This time I got a person who was very rude and didnt want to deal with my problem and just transferred me to the front desk mid sentance. The person I talked to then looked into it and said that the credit was there but never actually processed. He said he had fixed it and that the bank should be able to see the credit. I immediately called the bank and they still have no record of it. I waited until the next day and the bank still has no record. I am at the point where they are either too incompetent to fix their mistake or they just dont want to give me my money back.Desired Settlement: I just wanted the money back that I was over billed, and now since it has been this much of an issue getting my money back I feel they should credit my stay as well.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved.

Sincerely,

Review: I have a 567.07 charge on my debit card for my hotel stay which I already paid for with a different card. The card we paid for was already charged and paid but there is still a -567.07 on my debit card. They are charging me twice and when I called to see why there is still a charge, the lady was extremely rude to me and started yelling at me. I have been charged several overdraft fees for having a negative balance in my account.Desired Settlement: Refund my account and overdraft fees

Business

Response:

Our credit manager has called this guest and left a detailed message to call us back to resolve this issue including refunding of overdraft fees caused by us. Guest will need to provide statement from their bank showing overdraft fees.

Review: My daughters and I stayed at the Roosevelt for 3 nights and paid $55 night for their valet parking. At no time was I aware or advised that the Roosevelt uses parking garages and does not have onsite parking. As I am from Canada and rely on businesses to be truthful, I had to way of knowing they were brokering out services. Had I known I would have chosen to park the car myself at a cheaper garage block from the hotel. When the car was returned to me the valet driver parked it on a angle that you could not really see the other side. As we had 8 hour drive ahead we were in hurry and did not think to check the car and why would we there is a trust bond that should be here but there wasn't. When I stopped for gas 4 hours away, I then noticed the damage to my brand new 2016 car. When I got home I contacted the hotel and Central garage who were responsible for this. Far as concerned Roosevelt hotel is responsible for the damage as they without my knowledge brokered out valet services. Either way both parties are refusing to pay.Desired Settlement: I want the Roosevelt to pay for the damage and car rental for the irresponsible and negligent behavior of a 3rd party contract they had with Central garage

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved.

Sincerely,