Union County Kia Reviews (%countItem)
Union County Kia Rating
Address: 4712 W Highway 74, Monroe, North Carolina, United States, 28110-8453
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Fax: |
+1 (704) 926-3470 |
Web: |
|
Add contact information for Union County Kia
Add new contacts
Bought a new 2018 Kia Optima from Union Kia in Sept. 2018. Service engine light has been on repeatedly since purchase. Dealership refuses to repair.
Bought 2018 Kia Optima on 9/1/2018 from Union Kia. On 9/2/2018 check engine light was on. Took car to dealership for repairs and service dept. looked at it and said it was repaired but it was not. On another visit, the service technician said he replaced a fuel sensor but that was not true. The light is still on and we have taken it there 9 times since purchase trying to get it fixed. The light is still on. The car also vibrates when stopped at a stoplight and the engine has cut off twice in the middle of the road. This is very dangerous and the dealership has refused to repair it.
If the dealership can not repair the car, we are requesting a new car.. This car is a lemon and we don't believe the dealership has the ability to fix it.
We are in receipt of Mrs *** complaint dated 02-14-2020.
As stated in her complaint, Mrs. purchased a new 2018 Kia Optima and has had multiple occasions of a check engine light coming on and has made numerous appointments in our service department. On most of the service visits the check engine was not present at the time of inspection but the technician did find an evap history code present, per Kia Technician line support this can appear from a loose gas cap, or filling the car with gas while engine is running.
on another service visit, the check engine light war present at time of inspection and per the tech line we cleaned the evap hoses and replaced a pressure valve which was shown to correct the issue at that time under the manufactures warranty.
In regards to receiving a new car from a lemon, we dot have the latitude to repurchase or replace the vehicle but we will continue to make every effort and exhaust every resource available with the manufacturer to repair Mrs *** vehicle, and we will provide the contact with Kia if that course of action is ever needed .
We understand the frustration this must cause. We will be reaching out to Mrs *** today to schedule another appointment to diagnose the current issue and will also be contacting Kia Tech Line and review the full history.
***
General Manager
Union County Kia
Union County Kia did not offer the $2000 rebate advertised on the Kia Motors America web site. Instead they offered a $1750 rebate with Kia financing.
At the end of July Kia Motors America listed several options when purchasing a 2020 Kia Soul, options listed on the web site. One option was for a $2000 rebate, another for 0% financing for 48 months. These offers could not be combined. When I visited Union County Kia they told me I was wrong about the offers and the only offer available for a rebate was $1750 but only if I financed with Kia. I did not wish to finance with Kia but then I was told I could not get a cash rebate. After making the deal I checked with Kia Motors America and they told me that the local dealers must adhere to the corporate offers. I again asked Union County Kia and they told me I was wrong. I believe this is nothing more than the old bait & switch tactic by Union County Kia. I believe that Union County Kia got reimbursed the full $2000 for Kia Motors and I would like the additional $250 that I did not get credited to my Kia loan. To date I am not happy with the response from Union County Kia.
I want the $250 remaining on the rebate offered on the Kia web site that I did not get. This can be cash or applied to my Kia loan. They shold also offer me consideration for the finance charges I am accurring on the loan that I did not want or need. But I'll settle for the $250 rebate money owed to me.
We are in receipt of Mr *** complaint dated 9/10/2019. We appreciate you sharing this with us as we thought we had provided Mr *** a satisfactory explanation and he no longer believe that we were trying to deceive him.
In an effort to complete the task of providing proof that the correction incentives were applied to Mr ***s deal, we have attached the program rules and explanations from *** As you will note upon review there is some complexity to the programs, but if you review it thoroughly, you will see that there were three options for the 2020 Soul. The three options were as follows:
option 1) standard rebate , 500 standard rebate plus 500 bonus cash, total 1000rebate and standard APR
option 2) kia motors finance 0.00 rebate plus 500 bonus cash, total 500 rebate and 0 % APR
option 3) customer signed off on and hasone. kia motors finance 1750 rebate plus 500 bonus cash total 2,250 total rebate and 2.9% APR
option 3 is by far the best, total of 558.00 in total interest charges but received addt 1250 in rebates on this program
option 3 is at least 1250 better than option 1
option 3 is 1198 better than option 2 based on paying 558 in interest but receiving 1750 more in rebates.
I recognize that car dealers are often thought to be unscrupulous characters and I completely understand customers having a level of skepticism regrading their interactions with us. Whole I can't speak to the character or integrity of all dealers I can assure you that the incentive received by Mr. was the best value for his deal. I hope that will be evident after studying the data sheets I've provided, but I will be happy to walk Mr *** through the sheet and his deal again if it will help process that we have not mislead him in any way.
Because the 2019 models had a$2000 rebates this *** have been the source of the initial confusion but that is merely a discussion on my part. Please contact her if I can be of further assistance
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I understand the rebate options as presented by Union County Kia. But my understanding from the Kia Motors web site and with discussion with their customer service people is that the rebate for a 2020 Kia Soul was $2000 cash. It appears that Un Co Kia is saying the $2000 rebate was for a 2019 Kia Soul. If that is the case then I did receive the correct rebate, BUT that is not what *** is telling me. If I can get documentation from *** that the rebates for 2019 and 2020 Soul are as described by Un Co Kia then I would consider the case resolved. To date *** is telling me the rebate was for $2000. I agree that I received a fair deal from Un Co Kia but if there is additional money available to me then I would appreciate that also. I have dealt with car dealers for over 50 years and I agree that some are better than others. I am not insinuating that Un Co Kia is in the worse category. I want to be clear on the rebate available and my problem is that they tell me one thing and Kia Motors is telling me another. You can understand my confusion. Thank you.
I spoke to Steven at Union County Kia and we have resolved this issue. I now understand what rebates were offered by both Un Co Kia and ***. I believe I got the best rebates possible. I consider this issue closed and resolved in a very friendly manner. I appreciated the call I received and would recommend Union County Kia to anyone considering buying a car. I am pleased with the result.
New vehicle was received with 943 miles and was not disclosed to me. Very questionable delivery of the vehicle also.
Purchased a new 2020 Kia Sportage that was advertised as new. The mileage on the car consisted of 943 miles when car was finally delivered. Union County Kia has not been helpful and clearly not wanting to work for a resolution. Stating there isn't another car of that type we can have. I initially called their corporate customer service department to file a complaint and ask for a resolution. I have only gotten called back from Union County KIA once in this time frame.
Timeline
I purchased the vehicle on 6-11-2019 was given a loaner as the vehicle was offsite at a "***" being showcased. I was told I will get the car on 6-12-19 in the afternoon.
6-12-19
Was told wait till 6-14-19 as the vehicle was not able to be removed from *** due to "contract" issues. I drove to both of the ***'s in the area to see if my vehicle was there. The *** location had a KIA that was removed (manager at *** confirmed that there was a KIA outside the day before). Why was I to wait till 6-14-19 when it was removed on 6-11-2019 when I purchased? Cannot confirm if the KIA that was at this *** was my vehicle.
6-14-19
Picked up the vehicle. Everything looked good. Started to drive home with our new car and immediately noticed the mileage. 943 miles. This was NOT disclosed to me beforehand and nor is it listed on the UnionCountyKia Purchase agreement. I immediately called my salesman and informed him that I was not happy that "new" car had 943 miles on it. I don't know what was done for those 943 miles. I called KIA corporate customer service and opened a case with my complaint (#***) Kia asked me what I would like to settle this complaint. I informed them that I purchased a LX model with no "packages", I wanted to have the "LX Popular package" installed on the vehicle. Did not receive a call back from the dealer.
6-15-19 - Did not receive any call back from the dealer to discuss my complaint
6-16-19 - While looking through the inside of my vehicle I found a "***" receipt that was dated 6-13-19 at 21:09. This is very interesting since I purchased the vehicle on 6-11-19 and was not allowed to pick up my vehicle until 6-14-19 stating the car was at a *** not at a *** picking up groceries at 9pm at night. This *** location is in *** miles from the *** it was supposedly stationed at and picked up from on either 6-11-19 or 6-12-19.
6-17-19 - Called KIA corporate again to inform them no one has called me to discuss a resolution and would like a district manager to call me back. After that call, the dealer called me. General Manager from Union County Kia Michael R called me and stated that he would take the car back. I did not want to do that. That was not the resolution that I wanted. He stated that he didn't have another of that car. (color, make, model) I find that hard to believe that he couldn't get another of the car it is a 2020 year vehicle. He offered me service which I declined.
6-18-19 - Did not get a call back
6-19-19 - Did not get a call back
6-20-19 - Called and asked for the manager to call me back to discuss this again. About 3 hours later Michael R called me back. He stated again that he didn't have the car I was looking for. I informed him that he could get it from a dealer that was 14 miles away. He stated that he would call them and call me right back. Did not call me back with an update.
6-21-19 - I called the dealer again asking for an update. Spoke with Michael R and he stated the other dealer is not calling him back and that there was nothing else he could do. I told him to order me the car I wanted. He said that would take 3 months and he couldn't have me driving the car and putting mileage on it. I told him he could take the car back and I would wait for the car I wanted then. He stated he will call the other dealer again and get back to me.
6-22-19 - Did not get a call back
6-23-19 - Did not get a call back (open this Sunday)
Same EXACT car with our picked Color and this package below. There is one at a dealer 14 miles away. LX Popular Package +$1,595 The LX Popular Package includes: 10-Way Power-Adjustable Driver's Seat w/ 2-Way Power Lumbar Support Adjustment Tricot Cloth Seats w/ YES Essentials(r) Fabric Treatment Dual-Zone Automatic Temperature Control Air Conditioning w/ Auto De-Fog System and Cluster Ionizer Power-Folding Outside Mirrors w/ LED Turn-Signal Indicators Heated Outside Mirrors Blind-Spot Collision Warning (BCW) Rear Cross-Traffic Collision Warning (RCCW) Solar Control Glass Dual Illuminated Sun Visor Vanity Mirrors Windshield Wiper De-Icer
we have spoken to Mr *** and rectified the issue to his satisfaction. we have replaced the Sportage with another with out the miles, thank you
Union County Kia called me relentlessly for 3 weeks about selling them my vehicle. Then they wanted to keep my Kia for 2-3 days before giving me check
First off I want to state that I am a disabled veteran.For the past 3 weeks Union County Kia has called me several times a day about selling them back the 2015 Kia Sorrento I bought from them in Dec. 2014. Last Saturday night, Jan. 26 2019, I went by their dealership to see what they would offer me. They made their offer and said that they would cut me a check for that amount right away if I accepted it, and I asked for a little more, on Sunday Jan. 27 2019, a manager called and said he would up the offer by $200. I said I would let them know my decision on the following Monday. Monday morning I got a text from Jonah asking if I had made a decision, and I said I would sell it to them for the last offer and would be at their dealership at around 3pm that afternoon. When I arrived I tried to squeeze $65 more out of them and they said no. I decided to go ahead with the deal and was then told that it would take 2-3 days for them to be able to cut me a check for the amount above the pay off. I had already been told , back on Saturday night, that I would receive a check immediately. Plus they wanted me to leave the vehicle with them while I waited for 2-3 days for my check. I feel that this is a complete scam as I have sold cars to dealerships before and have never had to wait to receive a check. I was told the wait was because they needed time to get the deal funded. So why were they making me an offer if they didn't even know if they could get the deal funded? And why did I have to leave my vehicle with them while they attempted to get the funding? I feel that this was very under handed and not a normal practice for dealerships. I want everybody to know what kind of shifty practices this dealership are up too. And that Keffer Automotive Group is the parent company of this dealership so therefore they must be ok with their dealerships doing this kind of under handed practices.
I want them to honor thier second offer to buy my vehicle and to cut me my check when I turn over the vehicle to them.
We are in receipt of Mr *** complaint and appreciate you bringing his concern to our attention. We have apologized to Mr *** for the manner in which the purchase policy was explained. We have a sincere desire to purchase his vehicle, but our policy in issuing checks is a little more conservative based on some bad experiences in the past where checks were issued and then additional liens were placed on the vehicles that had been purchased by the customer after receiving our check. The net result was that we were unable to sell these vehicles without paying off the second lien which was not part of the original agreement.
Our General Manager and Operating Partner, Steven M, has reached out to r *** to provide a more clear explanation of our policy and we hope to be able to finalize the transaction to his satisfaction.
I was contacted today by Union County Kia and they are working to correct this issue and make it right with me. I appreciate their efforts and their determination to make this issue right.
I was sold a motor vehicle with a mental disorder without credit check or employment.
I was on going to get my truck title back from the *** and they wouldn't give my title back. I do not remember buying a car at the Union County Kia in Indian Trail on January 27, 2018 due to my mental instability. There was no insurance on the car when I took the possession on this vehicle. They didn't ask me for a income verification My wife had to tell me when I got the vehicle and she was not with me when they sold it to me. She told me that I traded in my 2008 Ford Ranger for $2,000 toward this car. My truck was worth $7,264.47 and bought that truck on July 11, 2017 at *** and the Union County Kia sold my truck. The next day January 28, 2018 I was seen at *** for two days for observation. I was under suicide watch and they concluded that I needed further treatment. I was transferred to *** which I stayed for eight days.
I have returned the car to the dealership and they have sold my truck. I am seeking a refund for the total amount for my truck which is $7,264.47.
We are in receipt of Mr *** complaint dated 03/01/2018. We are certainly sensitive to any disability that Mr *** may have, and while we cannot discount that he may have received treatment there was nothing in his pattern of behavior that would have lead a reasonable person to identify or perceive any sort of cognitive impairment. we are happy to provide documentation if necessary that will indicate very routine shopping behavior. Mr *** came to the dealership on jan 19th , test drove and looked at numbers for purchasing a Kia Forte. After Mr *** initial visit and negotiation, there were subsequent phone contacts, texts back and forth, an appointment set (which he kept) and finally a sale after numbers had been agreed upon.
If this had been a one contact transaction, Mr *** assertion that he was not aware of what he was doing would be seem more credible. As it stands, it appears that our staff acted appropriately in their interactions with Mr ***. There were no visible or audible signs that would have indicated any sort of abnormal behavior and the transaction was conducted in good faith. Had we been told of an alleged impairment prior to his transaction
Our own sale transaction data indicates that the vehicle Mr *** purchased was deeply discounted. This would further indicate that a transaction was entered into between a willing buyer and willing seller. The fact that Mr *** received a wholesale value for his trade in was a simple result of applying the same sort of discount to his vehicle's retail value that was applied to our own vehicle that we were selling. There is nothing irregular about the transaction aside from Mr *** claim at this late date that his mental condition was impaired at the time of the transaction. While we are again sensitive to his allegation we do not agree that Union County Kia should be forced to absorb a $5700 loss based on the facts surrounding the transaction and the timeline associated with the deal in question.
In an interest to foster good will, we would be willing to provide a Maintenance agreement to Mr *** to help offset future maintenance costs on his new vehicle. If there is additional information that the *** believes we should consider regarding our decision or questions that we can answer, please don not hesitate to contact Steven M
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
This is his wife and that is not normal for him to buy a vehicle. He does not have no job and there was no insurance on the car. I did not know he was going to the dealership. There was no proof of employment or no credit check. He would never buy a vehicle without no job or no source of income what so ever. I was not aware of his where about. No dealership can sale a person without any source of income. The car has been turned in the dealership and we should be refunded the trade in value or the whole value of his truck. The dealership should have called me in the first place. I do not like the way the dealership is acting. I have attached the psychicistist letter which he is seeing in ***. If they would like additional information please contact *** at ***. I would like for this dispute to be settled fairly.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not accept the response because he did not have a job when he got the car. He quit his job at *** on January 15 and is not working
I don't know how he would put a job down and don't have one. He does not remember anything about purchasing a car. That is not normal for him to buy a car without telling me. I have been married to him for almost 2 years and I know what is normal for him and what's not. He is on medications now and all we want is some kind of refund back please. We only have one car which is mine.
In preparation for a response to Mrs *** rebuttal, we reviewed all of our documentation again. As indicated in our initial response, it is of the utmost importance to us that our team is sensitive to any sort of impairment on disability that a client may have and how that should be treated.
After another thorough review, we simply do not believe that there was any evidence of such an impairment in Mr *** behavior. Our records indicate that Mrs *** called the dealership several days after the purchase took place. It seems odd to us that she would not react within 24 hours of the purchase if she felt that the purchase should be unwound.
When she called and asked for information initially, our sales manager responded that he could not disclose any information because her name was not on any of the documentation. This would be in keeping wit our privacy policy. It was another 2 weeks before Mr and Mrs *** came in to the dealership and requested that the deal be modified and that he should receive several thousand additional dollars of consideration. Again, the delay in the timing of their reaction and request, made it impossible to unwind the deal, and we do not feel that based on our findings that any additional monetary consideration. we will still honor our offer to provide a maintenance agreement to the ***s as a good will gesture in an effort to reduce their cost of ownership and demonstrate that we do care.