Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  10/31/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  A transaction was issued with a tag for credit (saving the $225.00 initial registration fee) Then the transaction was voided (I have all the documentation from the Clerk of Court in ************** **** B. *****) The transaction was issued again with no tag for credit (costing me an additional $225.00 + a ***** LP fee I have all this documentation from the clerk of court as well) a new tag was issued and not sent to the customer. We were stopped by law enforcement because the tag was wrong. as soon as I realized we drove to ************************* Annex and got a new tag costing me an additional $36.90. I would like to be refunded this money as I feel as though they pocketed money they should not have.

  Business response

  11/12/2024

  Having reviewed this complaint with other members of Management and reviewed our internal notes and communication records, I can say with confidence that we had to issue a new tag and made several contact attempts to try and let the customer know to come in and get the metal plate from us. However according to our notes the customer only called us after getting pulled over, after which what she told us was that she went and got her own tag and paid for that. We are not able to refund the cost of the tag as we also paid for a tag and were trying to give her the tag we procured on her behalf. Once she let us know that she had gotten a new tag we turned the metal plate we had issues into the *** so that it was accounted for. Unfortunately the *** does not refund us when such things happen so we have no such monies to pay back to the customer as we did indeed pay *** fees as stated on the contract. 

  If the customer had called us back before being pulled over or even called us back afterwards we could have gotten her the Metal Plate we had already processed so that she did not need to go and get another plate from the *** but when we finally heard form her, what we were told was that she already had a new plate. 

  This was explained to the customer and we will be happy to go over the details with them again if necessary. We do not want anyone to think we are keeping money that is not ours to keep. ************************** is my direct line should anyone need to reach me to discuss further. 

  Thank you!

• Initial Complaint

  03/21/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I purchased a used Nissan Rogue from Motory Group in Gainesville Florida on ******* *** ***** financed by First Union Financials LLC. When I purchased the vehicle, it had 112, 110 miles and it had been involved in two major accidents which the seller (Motory Group), was privy to but failed to disclose. In fact, on the material day of purchase, the sales agent team seemed to be in a rush to finish the deal faster. When I asked about the Carfax report, they refused to provide any, yet they mentioned they dealt in cars with Carfax reports only. They were in such a rush that they could not even remove the advert from the vehicle in a professional manner and their actions prompted me to get the Carfax report. Upon getting the Carfax report, I realized that I had been conned into signing the deal on a car that was overvalued. According to the Carfax report, the vehicle was worth $1***** yet Motory Group and First Union Financials LLC priced it at $********* by the end of the contract. After getting the Carfax report and seeing the discrepancies in the figures, I contacted Motory Group and returned the car after a day, and they refused to take the car saying I had signed the contract. I told them the vehicle was not worth the price based on the number of accidents it had been involved in, which they knew but failed to disclose nor provide the car fax report for the same. They told me to go back with the car and a manager would call. I did as instructed trusting the manager would call so that we solve the issue of undisclosed accidents which if disclosed would have substantially reduced the price of the vehicle. I continued paying but there was no communication from Motory Group. I called the financing company, First Union Financial LLC, but they said they had no jurisdiction in the contract negotiations. What is more perplexing is how Motory Group and First Union Financials LLC operate like they are independent organizations that are unrelated while the company is owned by the same person and colludes in engaging in financial fraud. The least these companies ought to do is disclose their relationships and inform customers about their relationships rather than masquerading as independent companies. I have approached two banks to refinance the loan, but they said the vehicle was extremely overvalued and that they could not help. The same script played out when I approached two separate car dealerships which told me they could not help in any way because the vehicle was overpriced. Since I was working hard to rebuild my credit, I kept paying with the hope I would finally get a callback, but no one called. I finally wrote a review on Google to help other potential customers know the business malpractices of these two companies (which operate as independent though are one). In retaliation, Motory Group and First Union Financial LLC reported to Credit bureaus that I had missed a payment. Their decision messed up my credit despite the overvalued price and the regular payments I have been making. First Union Financial LLC contacted me with the offer to delete the review from Google and Facebook in exchange for the repair of my credit score, but I politely declined informing them it would contravene business ethics and the sole purpose of reviews. It was this particular incident and the decision of First Union Financial and Motory Group to threaten and knowingly report my car payment as unpaid that prompted me to seek legal redress to bring their unscrupulous business practices to the public limelight. I have suffered financial and emotional stress due to the lack of integrity of the business. Had they provided vehicle history as promised in their advertisement, I would have known the number of accidents the vehicle had and made an informed decision. Their failure to disclose the information about the accidents has put me in a precarious situation.

  Business response

  04/01/2024

  First Union Financial has been trying to work with Mr. ******* who has also filed a complaint with the Florida OFR. We are working on reaching an amicable solution. Mr. ******* purchased a **** Nissan Rogue from Motory Group in October ***** Subsequently, this account was purchased by First Union Financial, which is the related finance company of the selling dealer. Contrary to Mr. *******’s assertions, there is nothing wrong with a finance company purchasing a contract from a related dealership. This is a routine transaction that happens thousands of times a day in the State of Florida. The functions of the companies are different, sales for the dealership and collections and servicing for the finance company, and it is disclosed in numerous documents in the transaction that the contract will be assigned to another party. In fact, the Privacy Notice from First Union Financial was provided to him at the time of sale.
  First Union Financial denies all of the allegations of wrongdoing in the complaint that are directed towards it. In no way did we act improperly in reporting credit history. At the time of sale, he signed documentation advising that credit performance would be reported, both good and bad.  We have been trying to work towards an amicable resolution to this matter. As Mr. *******, in his complaint and conversations with First Union Financial representatives, communicated that since he was waiting for a response back, he withheld his payment. This action resulted in a late payment reported to the credit reporting agency. Although not a reason to withhold payment, First Union Financial is offering to remove the late payment for January ****, as to offer an accommodation to Mr. ******* as a resolution based on his misunderstanding or concerns.

• Initial Complaint

  11/07/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I got a 2007 ***** ***** from this business on August 25, 2022, I had a 2014 ****** ******* from the same company 3 year's before never had a issue from the company.. Now I have expressed my issues with this company and they have not been willing to work with me I asked to be put into a different vehicle and was told by this company that they would have to add on the balance of what is owed on this vehicle, two weeks after getting the vehicle I had to spend out of my own pocket 400 to replace two parts then 150 for a water pump never did they mention that this vehicle has had problems with the engine in the past was just informed that they got it from a action and they don't check everything before it's put on the lot to sell.. I looked up the ****** and it shows alot of work had to be done to the engine in the past.. there was no ****** given I was told by the sales person that I got a good car NO that is not true I got a LEMON.. Not to mention the O2 sensor needs to be replaced and they have not done that, on top of the gas gage shows a full tank of gas @ 253 miles.. please guide me in the right direction.

  Business response

  11/18/2022

  RESPONSE:

  At Motory Group we strive for the complete satisfaction of all customers and take complaints very seriously. When a customer brings in their vehicle to address mechanical issues we inspect the vehicle and provide a written estimate of repairs. Our repair rates are quite reasonable and lower than most other service centers. More importantly, we never try to upsell customers to get more repairs than necessary.

   

  This customer purchased a used vehicle with 137,877 miles on it with a 12 month/12,000 mile limited powertrain warranty which only covers major engine or transmission failure and doesn’t cover any regular maintenance such as those problems reported by the customers. Used vehicles with high mileage require maintenance and repairs and it is unreasonable to expect otherwise. Thus the State of Florida lemon law doesn’t apply to used vehicle sales thus no used vehicle can be legitimately claimed to be a lemon. 

   

  This customer brought the vehicle in for service the first time on September 9, 2022 about 15 days after purchasing it and was offered some minor needed maintenance at very reasonable rates and she declined the maintenance and appears to have gotten that maintenance at another shop. The second time the customer brought the vehicle in was September 30, 2022 and we performed some minor maintenance at very reasonable rates. In the 36 days since purchasing the vehicle the vehicle had been driven 10,087 miles, an average of 280 miles per day. On average, Americans drive 14,263 miles per year. This customer is driving at a rate that in 50 days will be the same amount of miles as the average American drives in one year. It is reasonable to expect that driving a vehicle this much will wear out parts faster than average and require more maintenance than average.  

   

  The customer has not brought the car into our service center to report any mechanical issues since September 30, 2022 so we find it unreasonable for her to claim that “I have expressed my issues with this company and they have not been willing to work with me” when we have offered low cost repairs when she has brought the vehicle in and she is complaining to BBB about repair issues she has not asked us to address. 

   

  The customer is complaining that we did not inform her that we purchased the car at an auction. The vast majority of used cars for sale were purchased at auction, and we are not aware of any proven qualitative difference between cars purchased at auction and cars purchased in other ways.

   

  The customer is claiming that someone in our business told her that we don’t check everything before we put it on the lot to sell and is insinuating that we should. It is impractical to inspect 100% of the parts in a used car. It is impractical to replace every part that shows any wear. It is impossible to determine how long a worn part will last before it needs replacing. Our inspection is thorough and covers what most auto mechanics would typically inspect when presented with a used car for inspection. We replace the parts that we find have exceeded their useful life and are in need of replacement. In this case we invested about $4,000 in repairs on this vehicle before we put it up for sale.

   

  This customer is asserting that a lot of repairs were done to the engine in the past according to CarFax. We do not typically pull CarFax reports and we do not have one for this vehicle so I cannot address this claim. However, past repairs on a high mileage used vehicle may be viewed as a positive as those recently replaced parts are less likely to need replacing again soon.

   

  This customer is asking us to put her into a different vehicle at our expense. We cannot guarantee that any vehicle will not require repairs especially when driven excessively and she cannot guarantee that she will be happy with the next vehicle so it would be unwise for us to put her in a different vehicle. 

   

  Our proposal is that the customer brings the car to our service center or the service center of her choosing to address the vehicle’s maintenance issues and be prepared to pay for the repairs the same as everyone else does with their vehicles.

   

  Customer response

  11/18/2022

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

   Complaint: ********

  I am rejecting this response because:

  Regards,

  ****** *******

*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. ↩