ComplaintsforDestination Vancouver Mazda

• Initial Complaint

  24/05/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Deal# ******* Stock# N28466A I financed a used car from Mazda Vancouver from August 2022 to August 2025 for $22,408. However, during the purchase, the financial manager deceived me into buying unnecessary protection coverage. After realizing this, I requested a withdrawal and had to revisit the dealership for a new contract, expending significant effort to resolve the issue.1. When attempting to sell the car I bought here, I discovered that the Carfax posted on their website was fake. Despite my screenshotting it for future reference, the salesman never presented the Carfax or included it in my purchase documents. Upon discussing this with the sales manager, he admitted they usually don't provide separate Carfax reports, but pledged to do so in the future due to this incident.The fake Carfax showed rear damage, which the salesman had agreed to fix, leading me to finalize the purchase. However, the recent genuine Carfax disclosed a previous front-end accident, contradicting the salesman's assurances. Despite knowing my preference for a car without front damage, the salesman deceived me and sold the car as if there were no such issues, while the sales manager dismissed my concerns to protect his team.2. I went to the bank to pay off my car loan, but the balance was higher than I thought. The bank couldn't explain it properly and asked me to seek an explanation from the dealer about why there was more money than expected. The borrowing cost was $1000 more than the stated 7.99%. They failed to accurately calculate it. Also, the car had front damage, not rear, so they should fully repair it. Additionally, the Carfax listed the car as made in 2017, but I purchased a 2015 model, leading me to believe I bought it cheaply. However, I ended up paying a high price with unreasonable interest charges. I demand compensation.

  Customer response

  24/05/2024

  On May 9th, I had a meeting with General manager ( *****************)

  On May 23rd, emailed ***** regarding the interest of the finance- No response

   

  Business response

  07/06/2024

  We had both the customer and her friend in here several times.  Each time, it was proven to her through documents she signed that there was no misrepresentation.  The customer is trying to sell her car for what she paid for it, and is taking every angle to assign blame to us.  We are putting no further energy into this situation.  She has copies of all documents, and the CarFax she has could have been obtained anywhere by anyone.  The one in her file corresponds to the car she is driving, the accident numbers were declared on her bill of sale, and we've taken several hours in person to try explain, WITH PROOF, the situation.

  Customer response

  13/06/2024

   
  Complaint: 21754775
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Mazda's statement contains falsehoods. I only visited with a friend once, on May 9th. I'm puzzled by their false assertion of multiple visits. 
  Despite their insistence that there was no misrepresentation, I signed the documents under the belief that they pertained to rear damage, as there was no indication of whether it was for rear or front damage on the paperwork. They argued it wasn't legally necessary to specify. Consequently, they deceived me by exploiting the lack of legal requirement for such specification. 
  
  I never doubted that they could display a false Carfax until I was preparing to sell my car. 
  
  The manager, *****************, said that a Carfax copy is not typically provided to customers upon selling. However, they have committed to providing it to customers in light of this incident. 
  Yet, when I inquired with another salesman, he assured me that they always provide a Carfax copy when selling a car. This indicates that my salesman intentionally withheld the Carfax copy from me in order to deceive me.
  
  I bought the car assuming it was a 2017 model without any previous front accidents like the Carfax indicated, and I paid a higher price accordingly. I demand appropriate compensation for this.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **************

  Business response

  13/06/2024

  We verified, with her, and the person she brought along, over a three hour meeting, that there was no malice in this case.  Even her "friend who was in the car business and understands" looked at her in the end and told her there's nothing to complain about here.

  In terms of the CarFax report she has from some other car.  We verified that the *** on the CarFax she claims we gave her has never been in our inventory, in which case we would have never even possessed a CarFax for.

  All documents are legal and fully disclose the accident.  She's already tried social media, ****** and dealer rater, and even VSA threw out her claim, SINCE WE DID NOTHING WRONG.

  This only came up because she can't get what she wants in selling it, and clearly has way too much time on her hands.  To put perspective into this, we're talking about a $2000 claim (or around that amount).  It costs about that just to paint a bumper without any body damage.

  Again, this is the last bit of energy me or my team will put into the matter.  I suggest you do the same.

  Customer response

  19/06/2024

   
  Complaint: 21754775
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Here has been so much exaggeration, so let me set the record straight:
  
  *My friend and I met with them for 1-2 hours. There was no need to discuss for more than 3 hours or for an extended period.
  
  *My friend knew someone among the car dealers who was his customer, but he has never worked in the car industry.
  
  *My friend asked the manager if he could show the record of the Carfax that was displayed with the car at that time, but the dealership manager said that record is not kept. My friend expected the record to be kept, but since the manager said it wasn't, there was no room for further conversation, so we didn't continue.
  
  *Initially, I raised my complaint with VSA, but upon my friend's recommendation, I opted to submit it to BBB instead. This decision was not made based on VSA's determination that the dealer did not do anything wrong; rather, I trust BBB to provide a swifter resolution. As a result, I withdrew my application from VSA personally.

  * This is my first time personally owning a Carfax record, as I have never purchased a used car before. They are manipulating the Carfax information, falsely accusing me of fabricating it from another source.
  It seems suspicious that they claim there is no record of ****** displayed for my car. Furthermore, the document I received does not specify whether the damage is to the front or rear, and the manager insists that this is legally justified. 

  The Carfax provided at the time of sale for that car shows a different year and different accident details.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **************

  Business response

  19/06/2024

  Once again, all paperwork was explained and signed off on.  ******* doesn't allow me to provide that to you, but you can ask her for her paperwork.

  VSA is another option she can take, but I suspect it will be futile as we operate with transparency and integrity.

  The fact that she wants to essentially drive that car for free, by accusing us of wrong doing so we refund her after years of use is a little excessive.

  We offered a fair price to buy her car when she initially inquired, but she declined, as is her right.

  We are still willing to buy it back, but not for what she paid for it.

  To put some perspective on this, she is complaining about a claim amount of about $2500 if I recall correctly, which was fully disclosed and generally at that amount doesn't affect the value of a vehicle of that age.  That's what it costs to paint a bumper.  We're not talking about a claim that affected the car's structure.

  Her CarFax that she claims was provided at time of sale, is not saved in our CarFax records.  Nor does the *** number on it correspond to any vehicle that was ever in our inventory, therefore we would have never been in a possession of a CarFax for a car we never had, in which case we couldn't have provided a CarFax we never had to another person.

   

  Customer response

  20/06/2024

   
  Complaint: 21754775
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I already raised concerns about discrepancies between the documents I signed and their explanations. During the car sale, the financial manager attempted to deceive me regarding protection coverage. I had to withdraw my financing application and request that the documents be reissued. I considered this to be the extent of their deception.
  
  Based on the evidence I provided, I purchased the vehicle for nearly $20,000, with interest totaling $22,400. 
  
  I drove the car for 1 year and 9 months, adding only ***** km, and the car had no issues. However, they offered to buy it back for $11,000. Is this the fair price they claim? They deceived me to sell the car at a profit and aimed to repurchase it cheaply for their own gain.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **************

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩