St# [redacted] // Ford FRegular Cab // Vin# [redacted] The vehicle in question was a vehicle that was offered for sales by Future Ford of Rosevillein the Roseville Auto MallThe vehicle belongs to them, and was posted on a third party website ( [redacted] )We from time to time share inventory with Future Ford of Roseville butwe keep the inventory separateFuture Ford of Sacramento tried to assist the customer inthe purchase of the above listed vehicle, but once the customer brought it to our attentionthat the vehicle was priced on line ( [redacted] ) for $we shared with them that ithad been priced / listed / offered at that price in errorSince it was NOT our vehicle, and wedo not have control over Future Ford of Roseville’s on line marketing / advertisingWe wereunable to say how the ERROR occurred The customer asked us to honor the price of $7000.00, we explained to them again that theprice posted on line from [redacted] was a sizeable mistake and we would not sell them thevehicle for that type of lossWhen the customer wanted to know what we were going to do,we instructed them to contact Future Ford of RosevilleWe were unable to help them, we hadmade them our offer at the correct price and the customer had declined to accept our offerI can tell you that it is not uncommon from time to time a third party web site to make a postingmistake of a vehicle, options and or a priceWhen a mistake happens we try to deal with themright awayWe never misled the customer, we never told them we would honor the price or gavethem any bad informationThis was NEVER a case of bait and switch, and we are sorry that thecustomer feels they were misled by usWe only tried to correct an unfortunate situationThank you,
I am rejecting this response because: Once again they are lyingHere is a screen capture from THEIR website on 04/03/That being said, once again, this shows intentional bait and switch tactics, along with lies to try to cover their ***Ones like this is what give car dealers a bad name
I am rejecting this response because Again the web page clearly shows future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave, Sacramento , again there were two different screen shots on two different days each was at different locations , both of the same truck , if you research the thride party web page on the second day it plainly states that the dealer ship must submit the car or truck in question either way the first screen shot show future ford of sacramento that was taken on the day we went there , as proof it was on their web site not Roseville , and it again was advertised for that price a bait and switch , the head sales person also tried to delete the picture off my girl friends phone with no luck plus we had the original screen shot on the main computer until they admit they were wrong I wont drop it , as a bait and switch is not right again inclosing all web shots each don't lie as you can see in both screen shots one says future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave,, Sacramento that was the first one and the second one was the one in Roseville same truck same everything same vin number so again pictures don't lie thank you [redacted] ***
The only thing they showed was the top part of the screen, when you scroll downunder details it clearly tells you the locationThis vehicle was in Future Ford ofRoseville’s used vehicle inventoryThe customer was taken to Future Ford ofRoseville with our sales rep and looked at the vehicle thereThe customer wasnever given a test driveWhen the customer told the salesperson about the web adhe informed the customer that there was an error and it was not for sale for the$7,price. As I said in my earlier e-mail, we at times share inventory, we also share inventoryon line, we always show the location of the vehicleWe advertise that thesevehicles are available, that these vehicles are a combined inventory of The FutureAutomotive GroupAs you can see by this screen shot, if I only take the picture ofThe top or bottom of the page I can change or challenge an argument. This was NEVER a case where we told the customer they could buy it for $7,000.00,In fact we went out of our way to tell them they could not buy it for thatWe madethem an offer on what we could sell the vehicle for, they declined that offerWeshared with them they could go back to Future Ford of Roseville and try to see whatwould happen. It makes no sense to buy a vehicle from our sister store and sell it for thousands ofdollars less because of an error in the priceIt was never our intention to upset thecustomerWe never lied to the customer, we never tried to cover up a story and Iam not lying to you nowI respectfully disagree with the customer, and his versionof what happenedI am confident that *** remembers being told that he couldnot buy the vehicle for $7,000.00, that the vehicle was at a different dealership andthat he did not test drive the vehicle when he was at that other dealership becauseonce he brought up price we addressed the issue right there and confirmed with aphone call. Once the mistake / error was brought to the attention of Future Ford of Roseville,the steps were taken right away to correct itThank you for your time. Sincerely, *** ***Future Ford of Sacramento
Mr. [redacted],I had a phone conversation on Friday August 5th, 2016 with Mr. [redacted].He stated that he recently was involved in an accident in the Mustang that he purchased from our dealership in June 2015.After taking off the front bumper during repairs done on his...
Mustang, the Body Shop that was working on the vehiclecame across what appeared to have been some slight damage from a previous issue, that was concealed by the front bumper.The quote he received to repair this previous issue was $450. Mr [redacted] then stated to me that the work had not yet been doneand he requested us to pay the $450 to the body shop for the repairs. Mr. [redacted] felt that we had not been completely honest by not disclosing this prior accident at the time of sale. I informed Mr. [redacted] that his Mustang initially passed our original service & visualCPO inspection and because of the info stated on the Carfax we disclosed all that we had found. We did in fact provided the Carfax at the time of sale,which is a practice of our dealership on ALL sales, that Mr. [redacted] signed showing that no accident had been reported to Carfax. [attachment provided]. We than discussed helping him trade in his vehicle and he came in that evening and picked out a 2013 Ford Edge. We were unable to comeup with a price that would work for him as he wanted all the monies he paid for his vehicle refunded to him including the tax and license.I informed Mr. [redacted] that I would talk to my G.M. and would inform him on Monday what we would do for him in this situation.We have decided to pay the $450 to the body shop upon completion of the work.Please contact me once a decision is made.Thanks
I am rejecting this response because:
Future Ford's assertion that they saved me money by "discounting"
the labor costs is ludicrous
They saved me money, yet I paid over three times the
actual cost of the lock that I bought?
The truck has 34,miles on it; attached is a photograph
of the odometer reading from today
What's more likely than two different repair persons
misreading the mileage is that it simply was not read the second time and just
recorded from the original incorrect reading. It
is ridiculous to state that a truck with just over 30,miles on it has the
same wear and tear as a vehicle with over 300K miles on it. Their assertion that I had put over 28K miles on it since the first visit is an obviously fabricated figure, same as the total mileage. Ford's tiptoeing around their outright lie is a clearly tenuous, scrambling argument. (....."it doesn't matter anyway" is their rationale after being caught in a lie?)
I still feel that I'm due a refund for an hour's worth of
labor costs
St# [redacted] // 2005 Ford F150 Regular Cab // Vin# [redacted] The vehicle in question was a vehicle that was offered for sales by Future Ford of Rosevillein the Roseville Auto Mall. The vehicle belongs to them, and was posted on a third party website ([redacted]). We from...
time to time share inventory with Future Ford of Roseville butwe keep the inventory separate. Future Ford of Sacramento tried to assist the customer inthe purchase of the above listed vehicle, but once the customer brought it to our attentionthat the vehicle was priced on line ([redacted]) for $7000.00 we shared with them that ithad been priced / listed / offered at that price in error. Since it was NOT our vehicle, and wedo not have control over Future Ford of Roseville’s on line marketing / advertising. We wereunable to say how the ERROR occurred. The customer asked us to honor the price of $7000.00, we explained to them again that theprice posted on line from [redacted] was a sizeable mistake and we would not sell them thevehicle for that type of loss. When the customer wanted to know what we were going to do,we instructed them to contact Future Ford of Roseville. We were unable to help them, we hadmade them our offer at the correct price and the customer had declined to accept our offer. I can tell you that it is not uncommon from time to time a third party web site to make a postingmistake of a vehicle, options and or a price. When a mistake happens we try to deal with themright away. We never misled the customer, we never told them we would honor the price or gavethem any bad information. This was NEVER a case of bait and switch, and we are sorry that thecustomer feels they were misled by us. We only tried to correct an unfortunate situation. Thank you,
[redacted] I would be more than happy to have a Finance Manager sit down with you and explain everything in detail. I would also attempt to trade you out of that vehicle and into something less expensive if the bank would allow it.
[redacted]
[redacted]Future Ford...
I want to apologize for the treatment you received in our Service Department, I will get the prorated maintenance refunded to your lender. Because your vehicle is financed we are required to refund whomever is financing your vehicle and the maintenance plan. Your balance financed will be...
reduced by the amount sent to them, typically shortening the loan. I will also calculate the interest charged and include that in the refund. Again, my apologies, your lender should be receiving a check next week or the one after. Respectfully, [redacted]
After talking to all the parties on this end, there seems to be a misunderstanding. Please contact me directly, I'm hoping I can find a way to resolve this. Respectfully, [redacted]GM Future Ford of Sacramento[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
We have bought 7 vehicles from [redacted] and all our service has been done at Future Ford We have never had an issue till now. I will accept the response I also would like to say If you do not offer Royal Purple, 1 your service adviser [redacted] shouldn't have told me he could have ordered it but he did not as it would have taken to long and my wife would be waiting some time till they go get it, Note as I previously stated, 2, I have the the service receipt that states you did use Royal purple on our last service so maybe you should research things before you make statements as I am not pulling this from the air or Future Ford lied either or I have all copies of every service we have done on our vehicles. I also feel my wife was misled you never mentioned of the comment of the additives added to her engine is like having full synthetic. None the less you are offering a full refund so will be waiting for that refund.[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because Again the web page clearly shows future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave, Sacramento , again there were two different screen shots on two different days each was at different locations , both of the same truck , if you research the thride party web page on the second day it plainly states that the dealer ship must submit the car or truck in question either way the first screen shot show future ford of sacramento that was taken on the day we went there , as proof it was on their web site not Roseville , and it again was advertised for that price a bait and switch , the head sales person also tried to delete the picture off my girl friends phone with no luck plus we had the original screen shot on the main computer . until they admit they were wrong I wont drop it , as a bait and switch is not right again inclosing all web shots each don't lie as you can see in both screen shots one says future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave,, Sacramento that was the first one and the second one was the one in Roseville same truck same everything same vin number so again pictures don't lie thank you[redacted]
[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:While I appreciate the apology from Mr. [redacted], and the fact that he has agreed with me that the sales people I dealt with lied to me about the absence of used car manager on site, I believe it is not enough. I think they should make a change in their process for making offers. Their online offers should not be that far off from what they are actually willing to pay. For example, their online offer to me was $21025 and the offer that recently Mr. [redacted] made to me based on their inspection of the car was $16000. When I asked about the reason for this huge discrepancy, he responded by saying: "The [redacted] appraisal is only an estimate…the discloser reads “Offer valid only after physical inspection of vehicle by the Quick Offer partner. If you accept the offer after inspection, the value you received may be higher or lower than your online offer depending on your vehicles’ condition.” While I agree with him that the [redacted] offer is an estimate and is valid after physical inspection, but if there is no discrepancy between what I have said in the [redacted] application and what the car really is, then the [redacted] offer and the offer after the physical inspection should not be this much different. The difference here is about 25%, that is, their offer after the inspection is almost 25% less than their offer before the inspection, without a reasonable justification. What was so wrong with the car that it resulted in the offer becoming lower by $5000? The minor accident was already reported on the [redacted] application and even pictures of the minor damages were included in the application. I don't see any justification.Mr. [redacted] should make sure that they don't make these inflated online offers to just get people come to their dealership, and later on reduce the price considerably. They should respect people's time and intelligence.
[redacted]. Funny, we're both related to [redacted]. I'd be interested in knowing exactly what he's accusing me of lying about, because one thing I'm not is a liar. CYA, perhaps? I should have listened to everyone who told me to stay far away from Future Ford. And this is what I get for trying to help out family. Anywho, you've put my family through enough. Our insurance has paid for the repairs to the vehicle, less our $1,000 deductible. This matter, along with your hilarious temper tantrums and famously deplorable customer service, will be put behind us.
I am rejecting this response because: Once again they are lying. Here is a screen capture from THEIR website on 04/03/2015. That being said, once again, this shows intentional bait and switch tactics, along with lies to try to cover their [redacted]. Ones like this is what give car dealers a bad name.
The reason your relationship has bearing on this matter is because in your initial complaint you alluded to us not following protocol regarding drivers license and insurance. [redacted] knew the customer and the fact that he had both. [redacted], your brother-n-law has made it crystal clear that you are not being totally forthright regarding this matter...When a fully licensed driver is driving a vehicle and at fault for a collision, it is the drivers insurance who is responsible. If that were not the case his insurance wouldn't be covering the incident.
The vehicle did come in in February and we did install "Poplocks" so the tailgate could be locked per the customer request. We only charged a 1/2 hr labor to do so. The invoice total was $137.64 . 8 months and 28,470 miles later the vehicle returned with a broken...
tailgate handle. The fact that the handle was broken and the tailgate locked, it did require additional time to disassemble the entire latch system in order to access and remove the broken handle. I disagree that the handle was broken due to the locks. It could be broken if pulled too hard while locked or just the fact that the vehicle does have 344,830 miles on it. Our labor rate is $150.00 per hour. We charged two hours to do the repair and discounted the labor to $112.50 per hour and obtained the customers authorization prior to doing the repair. I don't feel that we did anything wrong or mislead anyone at any time. The customer could have just declined the repair if he felt we were too expensive.
I am rejecting this response because: Whoever wrote the business's response to the Revdex.com flat out lied about the facts. They claim I returned with the truck "8 months and 28,470 miles later" with the broken handle. I've had the truck since Feb. of 2014 and have put approximately 5000 miles a year on it. They claim I might have broken the handle by "pulling too hard" (?) (ludicrous) and further state that the handle was probably worn out because of the "fact that the vehicle has 344,830 miles on it." THE Revdex.com SHOULD PLEASE NOTE, THAT IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE. THE TRUCK HAS APPROXIMATELY 34,000 MILES ON IT. This company should not even have a service section if they can't replace a plastic part on a vehicle in less than 1.5 hours. I still feel I'm due a refund for at least an hour's worth of labor costs. Including my rental vehicle I paid around $500 for work and a part that should have been around $150.
I’m am aware of the concern and was the manager on duty and spoke with Mr. [redacted] when he picked up his vehicle this last visit. Unfortunately previously his A/C system had no signs of leakage 6,700 miles ago on his previous visit. We did in fact find the cooling fan motor was completely...
inoperative causing his concern and verified after the repair. His extended warranty company covered approximately half of the repair. The amount he was responsible for was documented and relayed to him prior to the work being performed. This visit the system was very low on Freon and was found that the ac compressor was leaking. His extended warranty covered this repair also and he was only responsible for his $100.00 deductible. I unfortunately cannot predict the future on to what will happen on a vehicle. I did and do not feel there was any wrong doing on our part and have all pressures and temperatures documented on both of these repairs. His concern did not warrant a refund in my eyes which is why I did not provide one. [redacted] Future Ford of Sacramento
St# [redacted] // Ford FRegular Cab // Vin# [redacted] The vehicle in question was a vehicle that was offered for sales by Future Ford of Rosevillein the Roseville Auto MallThe vehicle belongs to them, and was posted on a third party website ( [redacted] )We from time to time share inventory with Future Ford of Roseville butwe keep the inventory separateFuture Ford of Sacramento tried to assist the customer inthe purchase of the above listed vehicle, but once the customer brought it to our attentionthat the vehicle was priced on line ( [redacted] ) for $we shared with them that ithad been priced / listed / offered at that price in errorSince it was NOT our vehicle, and wedo not have control over Future Ford of Roseville’s on line marketing / advertisingWe wereunable to say how the ERROR occurred The customer asked us to honor the price of $7000.00, we explained to them again that theprice posted on line from [redacted] was a sizeable mistake and we would not sell them thevehicle for that type of lossWhen the customer wanted to know what we were going to do,we instructed them to contact Future Ford of RosevilleWe were unable to help them, we hadmade them our offer at the correct price and the customer had declined to accept our offerI can tell you that it is not uncommon from time to time a third party web site to make a postingmistake of a vehicle, options and or a priceWhen a mistake happens we try to deal with themright awayWe never misled the customer, we never told them we would honor the price or gavethem any bad informationThis was NEVER a case of bait and switch, and we are sorry that thecustomer feels they were misled by usWe only tried to correct an unfortunate situationThank you,
I am rejecting this response because: Once again they are lyingHere is a screen capture from THEIR website on 04/03/That being said, once again, this shows intentional bait and switch tactics, along with lies to try to cover their ***Ones like this is what give car dealers a bad name
I am rejecting this response because Again the web page clearly shows future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave, Sacramento , again there were two different screen shots on two different days each was at different locations , both of the same truck , if you research the thride party web page on the second day it plainly states that the dealer ship must submit the car or truck in question either way the first screen shot show future ford of sacramento that was taken on the day we went there , as proof it was on their web site not Roseville , and it again was advertised for that price a bait and switch , the head sales person also tried to delete the picture off my girl friends phone with no luck plus we had the original screen shot on the main computer until they admit they were wrong I wont drop it , as a bait and switch is not right again inclosing all web shots each don't lie as you can see in both screen shots one says future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave,, Sacramento that was the first one and the second one was the one in Roseville same truck same everything same vin number so again pictures don't lie thank you [redacted] ***
The only thing they showed was the top part of the screen, when you scroll downunder details it clearly tells you the locationThis vehicle was in Future Ford ofRoseville’s used vehicle inventoryThe customer was taken to Future Ford ofRoseville with our sales rep and looked at the vehicle thereThe customer wasnever given a test driveWhen the customer told the salesperson about the web adhe informed the customer that there was an error and it was not for sale for the$7,price. As I said in my earlier e-mail, we at times share inventory, we also share inventoryon line, we always show the location of the vehicleWe advertise that thesevehicles are available, that these vehicles are a combined inventory of The FutureAutomotive GroupAs you can see by this screen shot, if I only take the picture ofThe top or bottom of the page I can change or challenge an argument. This was NEVER a case where we told the customer they could buy it for $7,000.00,In fact we went out of our way to tell them they could not buy it for thatWe madethem an offer on what we could sell the vehicle for, they declined that offerWeshared with them they could go back to Future Ford of Roseville and try to see whatwould happen. It makes no sense to buy a vehicle from our sister store and sell it for thousands ofdollars less because of an error in the priceIt was never our intention to upset thecustomerWe never lied to the customer, we never tried to cover up a story and Iam not lying to you nowI respectfully disagree with the customer, and his versionof what happenedI am confident that *** remembers being told that he couldnot buy the vehicle for $7,000.00, that the vehicle was at a different dealership andthat he did not test drive the vehicle when he was at that other dealership becauseonce he brought up price we addressed the issue right there and confirmed with aphone call. Once the mistake / error was brought to the attention of Future Ford of Roseville,the steps were taken right away to correct itThank you for your time. Sincerely, *** ***Future Ford of Sacramento
Mr. [redacted],I had a phone conversation on Friday August 5th, 2016 with Mr. [redacted].He stated that he recently was involved in an accident in the Mustang that he purchased from our dealership in June 2015.After taking off the front bumper during repairs done on his...
Mustang, the Body Shop that was working on the vehiclecame across what appeared to have been some slight damage from a previous issue, that was concealed by the front bumper.The quote he received to repair this previous issue was $450. Mr [redacted] then stated to me that the work had not yet been doneand he requested us to pay the $450 to the body shop for the repairs. Mr. [redacted] felt that we had not been completely honest by not disclosing this prior accident at the time of sale. I informed Mr. [redacted] that his Mustang initially passed our original service & visualCPO inspection and because of the info stated on the Carfax we disclosed all that we had found. We did in fact provided the Carfax at the time of sale,which is a practice of our dealership on ALL sales, that Mr. [redacted] signed showing that no accident had been reported to Carfax. [attachment provided]. We than discussed helping him trade in his vehicle and he came in that evening and picked out a 2013 Ford Edge. We were unable to comeup with a price that would work for him as he wanted all the monies he paid for his vehicle refunded to him including the tax and license.I informed Mr. [redacted] that I would talk to my G.M. and would inform him on Monday what we would do for him in this situation.We have decided to pay the $450 to the body shop upon completion of the work.Please contact me once a decision is made.Thanks
I am rejecting this response because:
Future Ford's assertion that they saved me money by "discounting"
the labor costs is ludicrous
They saved me money, yet I paid over three times the
actual cost of the lock that I bought?
The truck has 34,miles on it; attached is a photograph
of the odometer reading from today
What's more likely than two different repair persons
misreading the mileage is that it simply was not read the second time and just
recorded from the original incorrect reading. It
is ridiculous to state that a truck with just over 30,miles on it has the
same wear and tear as a vehicle with over 300K miles on it. Their assertion that I had put over 28K miles on it since the first visit is an obviously fabricated figure, same as the total mileage. Ford's tiptoeing around their outright lie is a clearly tenuous, scrambling argument. (....."it doesn't matter anyway" is their rationale after being caught in a lie?)
I still feel that I'm due a refund for an hour's worth of
labor costs
St# [redacted] // 2005 Ford F150 Regular Cab // Vin# [redacted] The vehicle in question was a vehicle that was offered for sales by Future Ford of Rosevillein the Roseville Auto Mall. The vehicle belongs to them, and was posted on a third party website ([redacted]). We from...
time to time share inventory with Future Ford of Roseville butwe keep the inventory separate. Future Ford of Sacramento tried to assist the customer inthe purchase of the above listed vehicle, but once the customer brought it to our attentionthat the vehicle was priced on line ([redacted]) for $7000.00 we shared with them that ithad been priced / listed / offered at that price in error. Since it was NOT our vehicle, and wedo not have control over Future Ford of Roseville’s on line marketing / advertising. We wereunable to say how the ERROR occurred. The customer asked us to honor the price of $7000.00, we explained to them again that theprice posted on line from [redacted] was a sizeable mistake and we would not sell them thevehicle for that type of loss. When the customer wanted to know what we were going to do,we instructed them to contact Future Ford of Roseville. We were unable to help them, we hadmade them our offer at the correct price and the customer had declined to accept our offer. I can tell you that it is not uncommon from time to time a third party web site to make a postingmistake of a vehicle, options and or a price. When a mistake happens we try to deal with themright away. We never misled the customer, we never told them we would honor the price or gavethem any bad information. This was NEVER a case of bait and switch, and we are sorry that thecustomer feels they were misled by us. We only tried to correct an unfortunate situation. Thank you,
[redacted] I would be more than happy to have a Finance Manager sit down with you and explain everything in detail. I would also attempt to trade you out of that vehicle and into something less expensive if the bank would allow it.
[redacted]
[redacted]Future Ford...
of Sacramento4[redacted]
I want to apologize for the treatment you received in our Service Department, I will get the prorated maintenance refunded to your lender. Because your vehicle is financed we are required to refund whomever is financing your vehicle and the maintenance plan. Your balance financed will be...
reduced by the amount sent to them, typically shortening the loan. I will also calculate the interest charged and include that in the refund. Again, my apologies, your lender should be receiving a check next week or the one after. Respectfully, [redacted]
After talking to all the parties on this end, there seems to be a misunderstanding. Please contact me directly, I'm hoping I can find a way to resolve this. Respectfully, [redacted]GM Future Ford of Sacramento[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to my concern, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
We have bought 7 vehicles from [redacted] and all our service has been done at Future Ford We have never had an issue till now. I will accept the response I also would like to say If you do not offer Royal Purple, 1 your service adviser [redacted] shouldn't have told me he could have ordered it but he did not as it would have taken to long and my wife would be waiting some time till they go get it, Note as I previously stated, 2, I have the the service receipt that states you did use Royal purple on our last service so maybe you should research things before you make statements as I am not pulling this from the air or Future Ford lied either or I have all copies of every service we have done on our vehicles. I also feel my wife was misled you never mentioned of the comment of the additives added to her engine is like having full synthetic. None the less you are offering a full refund so will be waiting for that refund.[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because Again the web page clearly shows future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave, Sacramento , again there were two different screen shots on two different days each was at different locations , both of the same truck , if you research the thride party web page on the second day it plainly states that the dealer ship must submit the car or truck in question either way the first screen shot show future ford of sacramento that was taken on the day we went there , as proof it was on their web site not Roseville , and it again was advertised for that price a bait and switch , the head sales person also tried to delete the picture off my girl friends phone with no luck plus we had the original screen shot on the main computer . until they admit they were wrong I wont drop it , as a bait and switch is not right again inclosing all web shots each don't lie as you can see in both screen shots one says future ford of Sacramento on Madison ave,, Sacramento that was the first one and the second one was the one in Roseville same truck same everything same vin number so again pictures don't lie thank you[redacted]
[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:While I appreciate the apology from Mr. [redacted], and the fact that he has agreed with me that the sales people I dealt with lied to me about the absence of used car manager on site, I believe it is not enough. I think they should make a change in their process for making offers. Their online offers should not be that far off from what they are actually willing to pay. For example, their online offer to me was $21025 and the offer that recently Mr. [redacted] made to me based on their inspection of the car was $16000. When I asked about the reason for this huge discrepancy, he responded by saying: "The [redacted] appraisal is only an estimate…the discloser reads “Offer valid only after physical inspection of vehicle by the Quick Offer partner. If you accept the offer after inspection, the value you received may be higher or lower than your online offer depending on your vehicles’ condition.” While I agree with him that the [redacted] offer is an estimate and is valid after physical inspection, but if there is no discrepancy between what I have said in the [redacted] application and what the car really is, then the [redacted] offer and the offer after the physical inspection should not be this much different. The difference here is about 25%, that is, their offer after the inspection is almost 25% less than their offer before the inspection, without a reasonable justification. What was so wrong with the car that it resulted in the offer becoming lower by $5000? The minor accident was already reported on the [redacted] application and even pictures of the minor damages were included in the application. I don't see any justification.Mr. [redacted] should make sure that they don't make these inflated online offers to just get people come to their dealership, and later on reduce the price considerably. They should respect people's time and intelligence.
[redacted]. Funny, we're both related to [redacted]. I'd be interested in knowing exactly what he's accusing me of lying about, because one thing I'm not is a liar. CYA, perhaps? I should have listened to everyone who told me to stay far away from Future Ford. And this is what I get for trying to help out family. Anywho, you've put my family through enough. Our insurance has paid for the repairs to the vehicle, less our $1,000 deductible. This matter, along with your hilarious temper tantrums and famously deplorable customer service, will be put behind us.
The customer has been traded out of the vehicle in question and I believe at this point is more than happy. [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Once again they are lying. Here is a screen capture from THEIR website on 04/03/2015. That being said, once again, this shows intentional bait and switch tactics, along with lies to try to cover their [redacted]. Ones like this is what give car dealers a bad name.
The reason your relationship has bearing on this matter is because in your initial complaint you alluded to us not following protocol regarding drivers license and insurance. [redacted] knew the customer and the fact that he had both. [redacted], your brother-n-law has made it crystal clear that you are not being totally forthright regarding this matter...When a fully licensed driver is driving a vehicle and at fault for a collision, it is the drivers insurance who is responsible. If that were not the case his insurance wouldn't be covering the incident.
The vehicle did come in in February and we did install "Poplocks" so the tailgate could be locked per the customer request. We only charged a 1/2 hr labor to do so. The invoice total was $137.64 . 8 months and 28,470 miles later the vehicle returned with a broken...
tailgate handle. The fact that the handle was broken and the tailgate locked, it did require additional time to disassemble the entire latch system in order to access and remove the broken handle. I disagree that the handle was broken due to the locks. It could be broken if pulled too hard while locked or just the fact that the vehicle does have 344,830 miles on it. Our labor rate is $150.00 per hour. We charged two hours to do the repair and discounted the labor to $112.50 per hour and obtained the customers authorization prior to doing the repair. I don't feel that we did anything wrong or mislead anyone at any time. The customer could have just declined the repair if he felt we were too expensive.
I am rejecting this response because: Whoever wrote the business's response to the Revdex.com flat out lied about the facts. They claim I returned with the truck "8 months and 28,470 miles later" with the broken handle. I've had the truck since Feb. of 2014 and have put approximately 5000 miles a year on it. They claim I might have broken the handle by "pulling too hard" (?) (ludicrous) and further state that the handle was probably worn out because of the "fact that the vehicle has 344,830 miles on it." THE Revdex.com SHOULD PLEASE NOTE, THAT IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE. THE TRUCK HAS APPROXIMATELY 34,000 MILES ON IT. This company should not even have a service section if they can't replace a plastic part on a vehicle in less than 1.5 hours. I still feel I'm due a refund for at least an hour's worth of labor costs. Including my rental vehicle I paid around $500 for work and a part that should have been around $150.
I’m am aware of the concern and was the manager on duty and spoke with Mr. [redacted] when he picked up his vehicle this last visit. Unfortunately previously his A/C system had no signs of leakage 6,700 miles ago on his previous visit. We did in fact find the cooling fan motor was completely...
inoperative causing his concern and verified after the repair. His extended warranty company covered approximately half of the repair. The amount he was responsible for was documented and relayed to him prior to the work being performed. This visit the system was very low on Freon and was found that the ac compressor was leaking. His extended warranty covered this repair also and he was only responsible for his $100.00 deductible. I unfortunately cannot predict the future on to what will happen on a vehicle. I did and do not feel there was any wrong doing on our part and have all pressures and temperatures documented on both of these repairs. His concern did not warrant a refund in my eyes which is why I did not provide one. [redacted] Future Ford of Sacramento