Gordons Truck Sales

Please allow this letter to serve as formal response to your letter of Monday, August 17, 2020 regarding the above referenced individuals complaint.

Mr. presented himself on our lot day of purchase wherein he was greeted with a no pressure sales approach, he inquired within regarding our vehicles and proceeded to explain his situation of being on a limited. budget.

After assessing the inventory, he was directed to a choice of vehicles that we could make work within his financial constraints. He was very partial to the 2005 Chevy Malibu due to miles, appearance and affordability of future repairs. Mr. was sold this vehicle below the actual sticker price, which was also $905.00 below blue book value. Mr. also stated concern for a warranty wherein we sold him a warranty of his choosing based on budget from an outside company at our dealer cost. Mr. was told that any claims would need to be diagnosed with a repair shop of his choice and then submitted to the warranty company directly as we do not offer consumer repair at our facility.

It was also explained to Mr. at the time of the sale, that the vehicle was being sold "AS IS", he was also presented with a Buyers Guide also marked "AS IS". He was instructed to thoroughly read this document before signing, the document clearly advises all consumers to their due diligence of inspecting the vehicle and asking the dealer for time to take it for an inspection by an independent mechanic or mechanic of their choosing. Mr. opted out of any independent inspection, stated that he understood what the document explained and signed the Buyers Guide.

The next date we heard from Mr. was on. July 21, 2020 through a message app on social media, wherein he contacted us regarding his issues with the vehicle. He accused us of effecting repairs to the engine, which we did not and was very insistent to speak with us. Mr. was messaged back explaining that we were busy with customers and as soon as someone was free to devote undivided attention to him that he deserved. Mr. agreed to this and waited for a return call. Upon calling Mr. back he did not answer his phone, he was left a voice mail message asking him to return our call and was also sent a message through the original messaging app that he initially began his inquiry.

In Mr. original complaint to us he claims that he is having issues with a leak coining from the timing chain cover. A leak such as this would result in an oil leak and does not cause a motor to overheat. When Mr. contacted us the next day, July 22, 2020 he reiterated his initial complaint and was asked if he had taken it to a repair facility, he stated that no he had not, Mr. was advised at that time to set up an appointment with a repair facility to have the vehicle diagnosed so a claim could be started.

We did not hear from Mr. again until August 5, 2020 wherein he showed up in the office demanding paperwork that he claims he lost. He was asked what documentation he needed so that we could supply copies. Mr, *** never disclosed what documentation he needed and proceeded to get very irritated, and in a raised voice made another complaint about his vehicle. Again, Mr. was asked if he had taken the vehicle to a repair facility wherein, he denied ever having it diagnosed by a repair facility. It was again explained that the warranty company required the vehicle to be diagnosed by a technician in a repair facility and was welcome to report their findings back to us. Mr. got visually frustrated, stood up from the desk and stormed out stating that we would be hearing from him.

Until we came into receipt of your letter Ms., dated Monday, August 17, 2020 no other correspondence has transpired in this situation.

Per the State of Ohio, all requirements on behalf of the dealer have been satisfied in due course, Mr. reluctance to heed the advice of having the vehicle diagnosed by a professional and continue to operate same said vehicle with alleged engine problems only known to him is failure to maintain the vehicle. Mr. warranty specifically states that continued use of the vehicle after initial failure is considered abuse and not covered and that proper maintenance falls into the hands of the vehicle owner.

Our dealership proudly sells approximately 300 vehicles per year, it is a travesty when you only hear about the misrepresented grievances of buyer's remorse and never about the hundreds of satisfied customers.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter, we consider this complaint to be closed and fully satisfied.