ComplaintsforEwald Kia of Oconomowoc

• Initial Complaint

  02/19/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  My daughters 2016 ******** was dropped off at Ewald Kia of Oconomowoc sometime in July of 2023. They had told us it needed a new engine because it was consuming oil and that it would be covered by the powertrain warranty provided when it was purchased "certified pre-owned" from a different dealership. Ewald *** ran ** in circles with this, ultimately trying to sell my daughter a $10,000 new engine.By November we had enough and just wanted the vehicle back to take elsewhere. I spoke with the service manager; ***************** who had told me the engine was in pieces, and had to be put back together and it would cost us almost $1,1100 to do that. After arguing with ****, after him trying to justify the cost with "all of the hours" put into the vehicle, he did agree to a 60/40 split. We pick the vehicle up on November 3rd 2023, paid $655.20 to them before they'd release the vehicle. Then, they said they couldn't find it. That was untrue. It took that long because the vehicle was dead. They got it started and brought it out to us; it was making a strange noise. It was in worse condition now than when we dropped it off almost 4 months ago. Because of the noise it was making, I asked if they put oil back into it. The response I received was "of course, a vehicle doesn't leave the lot without oil in it". We left, went down the road to eat dinner. We were done a half hour later, and the vehicle is completely dead. Upon opening the hood to jump start the vehicle it was noticed: 1, they certainty DID NOT have this engine in pieces; it was never taken apart, There was an absence of any fingerprints, only untouched old dirt and dust. 2, there was NO OIL in the vehicle either. I've tried repeatedly to speak with **** (the service manager) about this. He will not return my calls and refuses to speak with me. I want ALL of my money back for the lies and deceit from this dealership.

  Business response

  02/21/2024

  Attempting to investigate the allegations presented in this case we find that we do not have a record of the named individual.  As mentioned, this vehicle is owned by a relative, we assume records would belong to this person.  Can additional information be provided in that regard?

  Customer response

  02/21/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  My name as well as my daughters name (***********************) is associated with that vehicle.  Ewald *** in Oconomowoc is well aware of this.
  
  Regards,
  
  ***************************

  Business response

  02/28/2024

  We appreciate the clarification in regards to vehicle ownership.  The dealership records are retained per the current owner, in this case ***********************.  That said, once the correct vehicle was identified our service records do show a previous owner of *************************** in March 2021, and Sept. 2022.  Specifically pertaining the internal engine issue described, as ******************* states the vehicle was present for diagnosis in August 2023 with a concern documented of the "vehicle seems to be using oil very quickly."  The dealer was also presented with a ************************** service contract purchased at another dealership.  In reaching out to the customer's service contract provider ********************** *** was informed to receive the customer's authorization for engine disassembly to the causal part.  The customer provided that authorization.  As the customer's invoice reads the engine disassembly was made to the point of detecting scored cylinder walls.  Scoring of this nature allows oil to bypass the piston rings and be consumed by the engine.  Reporting this information their service contract provider, they (***) requested from the customer maintenance records indicating the manufacturers recommended services had been performed.  Ewald *** had not been the servicing dealer and therefore had no records to provide on behalf of the customer.  The customer could not provide the requested records to **************************, and therefore coverage was denied.  (See statement 1. under Your Responsibilities, and again number 1. listed as Teardown authorization.  Below that see the *** verbiage pertaining to compliance)   In doing so the engine diagnostic authorized by the customer is also not covered.  In an attempt to assist the customer ********************** *** requested powertrain warranty coverage consideration of *** ****** of *******.  Ultimately this was also denied due to the lack of maintenance records, and partially due to second ownership.  As you can imagine these processes took weeks to sort through.  At this point the decision to continue with repairs fell directly to the vehicle owner and the vehicle sat stagnant waiting for a decision to be made.  Attached, I've included the repair order the customer references in addition to details surrounding their service contract and it's terms of coverage for your consideration.  I've also attached the two repair orders in history under *********************** name, only one of which contained an oil change service.  Coincidentally, in September of 2022 on repair order ****** the technician calls out that the vehicle oil level was low and should be monitored on a regular basis.  Ewald *** did not see the vehicle return until after the ownership changed and ***** miles later. 

   

   

  Customer response

  02/28/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  1.  The vehicle never changed ownership.  We were both always on it.

  2. *****************; the "Service Manger" lied to me, and did not feel he had to respond to my calls.  That engine was Never disassembled, period... What they ACTUALLY did would have taken 5-10 minutes.  They literally held the vehicle hostage, then returned it to us in much worse shape and with NO oil in it.  Also, the arrogance of the service advisor to call my daughter and try to sell her a $10,000 engine after he was directed to call Me.  And proceeded to talk about us behind our backs when we picked the vehicle up.  Yes, that was heard.  Ewald *** is not a professional dealership one can count on.  

  This will Not be resolved until I am refunded in Full.  

  
  Regards,
  
  ***************************

  Business response

  02/29/2024

  I cannot speak to what was said, or not said, by any individual.  Only the facts as represented by documentation.  Reviewing the records previously supplied, clearly, they are under different ownership names that represent the primary owner at the time they were generated.  Which would coincide with the vehicle owner listed under the service contract by **************************, ***********************.  The documentation previously supplied clearly indicates that the vehicle's engine appeared to have an issue related to oil loss / engine noise going back to September 2022.  It was documented at that time, and advised to the owner, to monitor the condition.  To this dealership's knowledge the now known condition went further unaddressed until August of 2023, ***** miles later. As is often the case, engine oiling issues tend to worsen the longer they go unaddressed.  As also previously shared, coverage for the required repairs may have likely been taken care of by the customer's service agreement had they been able to show they performed the vehicle's recommended maintenance per the manufacturer's guidelines.   As is often the case a Service Contract will not begin to discuss possible coverage until the issue is properly diagnosed and the expense to do so many times falls to the owner. Also attached to the previous response.   Ewald *** followed the guidelines of the customer's Service Contract with the customer's consent in the hopes of coverage.  Where the authorization process broke down with FWS, was when the owner failed to produce the required records to support the claim.  In this case, the only oil change record we had was a year old and showed that the owner had knowledge of the mechanical concern and chose not to address it sooner.  Had the contract requirement been followed by the owner of the vehicle authorization for the needed repairs would very likely have been received, and we would equally likely not be having this unfortunate discussion.  Repair coverage is determined by the manufacturer or in this case the service contract provider, not by the dealer.  

*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. ↩