Wheelchair Van Oasis

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I made three crucial points in my last response: ***'s exaggerated terminology regarding the condition of the vehicles he sells, repairs and supposed repairs, and issues about his certification process I believe all three aspects to [redacted] and Wheelchair Van Oasis to be misleading, inaccurate and inappropriate, and reiterate my reasoning below Exaggerated terminology: [redacted] claims to sell vehicles that are in a relatively phenomenal, extensively rejuvenated, superior condition (***'s words) The age of the vehicle I purchased, which [redacted] claims at various times is 13-, 14-, and even 15- years-old, is only mentioned in my complaintNowhere is it mentioned before purchase, so it is not relevant now The fact is that I did not receive a relatively phenomenal, extensively rejuvenated van in superior conditionI found and find this terminology extremely misleading The numerous malfunctions both [redacted] and I have described point to the fact that the vehicle I was sold is certainly not in the condition he claims with his own words Revdex.com can make their own determination about whether this terminology is misleading Repairs and supposed repairs: [redacted] now states "If somehow I am incorrect in my assertion that I mentioned at purchase time " regarding the TPMS and gas gaugeThese issues were not mentioned in any way, shape or form before purchase [redacted] knew this was a lie but what he didn't know was that I had proof in an e-mail, as well as my roommate's word on the issueThis goes to the heart of my complaint: if [redacted] cannot manage to tell the truth about these issues then how can anything he states be considered truthful and how can anything that has malfunctioned with the van he sold me be considered to have been working properly upon delivery The van was delivered with a malfunctioning TPMS, faulty gas gauge, no way to mount a front license plate, and a broken CD player that obviously was never testedAll the other malfunctions I've mentioned, in my opinion, were malfunctioning from the beginning and I should be awarded my original claim or [redacted] can have his vehicle back while returning what I originally paid Certification process: I've shown where ***'s chosen vendor for certification does not list any checked, certified part as being in good or satisfactory condition, as stated on his website This would not be difficult to do, but this basic lack to qualify terms points to ***'s lack of concern that his certification process show clarity The certified parts are only listed as "OK." "OK" does mean "good." "OK" does not mean "satisfactory." An online dictionary defines "OK" as "not very good or very bad." This definition most certainly falls short of ***'s stated promise about the certified parts on his vehicles I also showed that the same vendor who [redacted] relies on for his claim of certification does not actually drive the vehicle during testing, since the mileage on the vehicle coming into and leaving their shop is identicalMany aspects of a vehicle, new or used, must be driven to determine their conditionThis is especially crucial for used vehicles [redacted] now tries to blame it on front-office individuals having improperly documented the mileage, as if [redacted] were there to see it improperly written The fact is that this vehicle was never properly tested and therefore is not truly a certified preowned vehicle I've proven what I intended to prove [redacted] will make excuse after excuse about everything and anything in order to have this complaint go awayHis exaggerations are misleading Needed repairs have not taken place and he openly lied to me and the Revdex.com about having reported malfunctioning items to me before leaving my homeThis is also backed up by e-mail and my roommate's testimonyThe supposed certification process is faulty by nature, without the certifying vendor ever driving the vehicle during the certification process and simply qualifying parts as only being "OK." I could continue about ***'s most recent response, but if I haven't proven my point by now then perhaps I never will He lied to the Revdex.com, he lied to me, he misleads potential buyers, like myself, with terminology that does not accurately describe the vehicles he sells, he makes promises about repairing parts and then does not follow through with these promises, and he alters the e-mails he provides as proof I purchased this vehicle due to ***'s promises, statements, and descriptions If [redacted] is allowed to continue making such claims without penalty that forces him to stand behind such statements, then I'm not sure what anyone can do except continue paying a steep price for dealing with such individuals As the Revdex.com, I would hope you would demand Better Business from such individuals Sincerely, [redacted] ***

To whom it may concern with Revdex.com,
It is upsetting to read this mans complaintIt is unfair and unjust I am sorry that today is the first day I have been aware of this complaint, as my office manager had somehow overlooked itDuring the days and weeks following this mans purchase of the van
from me, there were very extensive repairs and labor which I chose to invest, into the process of wanting to satisfy him His extensive compliant to you contains errors, incomplete information and distortion of what actually occurredAnd it does not include comments regarding extensive financial and labor efforts I did put forth in attempts to satisfy him Due to the extensive experience I had with him before and after he bought the van from me, there is a large amount of information and facts I wish to provide to you, as my complete response to his complaintThoroughly doing so will take me approximately one weekGiven the fact that I have only become aware of this complaint today, will you please allow me until the end of 3/to respond? Please consider that in the or years of record you have with me, there have been zero companies until this timeI believe you will find my complete response to prove that I did nothing which would warrant my Revdex.com rating being lowered or any other action he suggests being taken
Please confirm your receipt of this and comment as to my request for an extension of time to respond.
Thank you,
*** ***

Complaint: ***I am rejecting this response because:
Part of these "extensive" repairs was to fix the tire problem that this company knew was wrong with the van but chose not to reveal to me before signing off on the purchase. Another part was to fix the fuel gauge, which sticks on FULL until the gas is actually down quite a bit. He never fixed the problem. Instead he claims the original conversion company is the problem. There's no way a national conversion company would sell all their vehicles with gas gauges sticking. They would have been sued. This is something he should have fixed. He did attempt to fix the engine light which came on shortly after purchasing but it turns out there is a leak of some kind, according to a mechanic, causing the problem. He also brought the vehicle without the CD changer working, despite that being part of the "qualities" of the vehicle. Though he did provide funding for me to have this fixed, this is simply part of the overall "preowned certification" that I don't believe was ever performed. Him claiming that this is the first response received regarding his work and the Revdex.com means little to me because I think the people even know they have this option as some kind of means to hopefully remedy negative situations, meanwhile many companies, including this one, post their Revdex.com ratings on their sites as a badge of honor. His lack of responding to the original Revdex.com complaint is yet another sign of the way this individual does business, despite what he says and thinks. And there are other issues…
Sincerely,*** ***

Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
I made three crucial points in my last response: [redacted]'s
exaggerated terminology regarding the condition of the
vehicles he sells, repairs and supposed repairs, and issues
about his certification process.  I believe all three aspects
to [redacted] and Wheelchair Van Oasis to be misleading, inaccurate
and inappropriate, and reiterate my reasoning below.
Exaggerated terminology: [redacted] claims to sell vehicles that are
in a relatively phenomenal, extensively rejuvenated, superior
condition ([redacted]'s words).  The age of the vehicle I purchased,
which [redacted] claims at various times is 13-, 14-, and even 15-
years-old, is only mentioned in my complaint. Nowhere is it
mentioned before purchase, so it is not relevant now.  The
fact is that I did not receive a relatively phenomenal,
extensively rejuvenated van in superior condition. I found and
find this terminology extremely misleading.  The numerous
malfunctions both [redacted] and I have described point to the fact
that the vehicle I was sold is certainly not in the condition
he claims with his own words.  Revdex.com can make their own
determination about whether this terminology is misleading.
Repairs and supposed repairs: [redacted] now states "If somehow I am
incorrect in my assertion that I mentioned at purchase time…"
regarding the TPMS and gas gauge. These issues were not
mentioned in any way, shape or form before purchase.  [redacted]
knew this was a lie but what he didn't know was that I had
proof in an e-mail, as well as my roommate's word on the
issue. This goes to the heart of my complaint: if [redacted] cannot
manage to tell the truth about these issues then how can
anything he states be considered truthful and how can anything
that has malfunctioned with the van he sold me be considered
to have been working properly upon delivery.  The van was
delivered with a malfunctioning TPMS, faulty gas gauge, no way
to mount a front license plate, and a broken CD player that
obviously was never tested. All the other malfunctions I've
mentioned, in my opinion, were malfunctioning from the
beginning and I should be awarded my original claim or [redacted]
can have his vehicle back while returning what I originally
paid.
Certification process: I've shown where [redacted]'s chosen vendor
for certification does not list any checked, certified part as
being in good or satisfactory condition, as stated on his
website.  This would not be difficult to do, but this basic
lack to qualify terms points to [redacted]'s lack of concern that
his certification process show clarity.  The certified parts
are only listed as "OK."  "OK" does mean "good." "OK" does not
mean "satisfactory."  An online dictionary defines "OK" as
"not very good or very bad."  This definition most certainly
falls short of [redacted]'s stated promise about the certified parts
on his vehicles.  I also showed that the same vendor who [redacted]
relies on for his claim of certification does not actually
drive the vehicle during testing, since the mileage on the
vehicle coming into and leaving their shop is identical. Many
aspects of a vehicle, new or used, must be driven to determine
their condition. This is especially crucial for used vehicles.
[redacted] now tries to blame it on front-office individuals having
improperly documented the mileage, as if [redacted] were there to
see it improperly written.  The fact is that this vehicle was
never properly tested and therefore is not truly a certified
preowned vehicle.
 
I've proven what I intended to prove. [redacted] will make excuse
after excuse about everything and anything in order to have
this complaint go away. His exaggerations are misleading.
Needed repairs have not taken place and he openly lied to me
and the Revdex.com about having reported malfunctioning items to me
before leaving my home. This is also backed up by e-mail and
my roommate's testimony. The supposed certification process is
faulty by nature, without the certifying vendor ever driving 
the vehicle during the certification process and simply
qualifying parts as only being "OK."
 
I could continue about [redacted]'s most recent response, but if I
haven't proven my point by now then perhaps I never will.  He
lied to the Revdex.com, he lied to me, he misleads
potential buyers, like myself, with terminology that does not
accurately describe the vehicles he sells, he makes promises
about repairing parts and then does not follow through with
these promises, and he alters the e-mails he provides as
proof.  I purchased this vehicle due to [redacted]'s promises,
statements, and descriptions.  If [redacted] is allowed to
continue making such claims without penalty that forces him to
stand behind such statements, then I'm not sure what anyone
can do except continue paying a steep price for dealing with
such individuals.  As the Revdex.com, I would hope
you would demand Better Business from such individuals.
Sincerely,[redacted]