The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website
Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In

General Motors Corp. / had me sell my vehicle then provided no financing

1 United States Review updated:
Contact information:

I was driving a full sized GMC 4x4 Z71 pickup, probably the most loved vehicle that I have ever owned, and one that I thought I would never have to sell, but I knew that I had to do something about the amount of fuel I was using.

I wasn’t sure if my credit was in good enough shape to purchase a new Chevrolet vehicle, and thought it a good idea to test the water despite the IRS having a lien on my credit, and despite the fact that I was working on the lien and knew that it would be released soon. I was worried about the fact that I was spending way too much on fuel.

I had been spying the Chevrolet HHR, a very similar vehicle to the PT Cruiser, and felt sure that it was a good buy for me since it was so reasonably priced and would get 30 miles per gallon. Additionally, the Chevrolet HHR was roomy enough to accommodate my DJ equipment for my 2nd job.

And since I was spending $600 per month on fuel, I realized that I could afford a small car payment and the fuel for a car like the Chevrolet HHR. But what I would also gain from this purchase is a reliable vehicle with a warranty, and a vehicle that I wouldn't have to worry about reselling in an increasingly fuel conscious economy.

I went on over to Parkway Chevrolet in Tomball, Texas to take a look at the HHR and see if the financing would be a problem. I met with the Internet sales person since I had been looking into the Chevrolet HHR on the Parkway Chevrolet web site and had already taken part in correspondence via the Internet.

I explained to him that I wasn’t sure if he could get me financed, but felt it a good idea to look into getting a new Chevrolet it at this point. He ran my credit and came back to tell me that it would not be a problem.

Next, I let them take a look at my GMC truck as a possible trade in, but of course they came back with an offer that was ridiculous, so I turned them down on trading in my truck. He then told me that I only needed $2, 000 down to buy this new vehicle from Parkway Chevrolet, and said that I could easily come up with that if I were to sell my GMC truck.

So, I left the Parkway Chevrolet dealership that day, and spent the entire next day cleaning and detailing my truck to see if I could get it sold. And since it was in such good shape and ran so well, I was hopeful that it would sell… and it did the next day, to the first guy that came along to look at it.

The next day I headed to Parkway Chevrolet to get the new HHR that I had discussed with them in my previous visit. And now I really felt optimistic, because I would now be able to put down twice the money as originally discussed.

Needless to say, I hung out in the Parkway Chevrolet dealership all day long, only to be told at the end of the day that they could not get me financed. I could not believe what I was hearing! I just sold my vehicle and now was being told by Parkway Chevrolet that I could not get financed!

Needless to say, at this point I was pretty upset and not sure what to do about the situation that I was put in by Parkway Chevrolet. I called the dealership back and spoke with the woman that is currently the General Manager and explained that I was lied to by her salesman. Her answer was for me to come back to Parkway Chevrolet and let them try to put me in a 3 or 4 year old vehicle… something that would put me back in the situation I was trying to escape.

I decided to try another dealership, and drove out to Ron Carter Chevrolet after speaking with an older sales person that seemed to be on the ball when it comes to getting me financed. But little did I realized that this was going to be every bit as traumatizing as my visit to Parkway Chevrolet.

My sales person at Ron Carter Chevrolet strung me along for 4 days. That’s 4 days of driving 125 miles round trip! During this time, I only saw my sales person a few times for only a few minutes total, as he was working other deals and fitting mine in when he could. Needless to say, I didn’t feel like a customer at Ron Carter Chevrolet because I certainly wasn’t being treated like one.

Despite the fact that I knew something about car sales and told him that (having been a car salesman at one time), this guy decided that I wouldn’t know the difference if he and his peers at Ron Carter Chevrolet lied to me too. He called me on day 4 and told me that he was going to get me into a Chevy HHR, and to come on down to the dealership.

I took my final drive to Ron Carter Chevrolet only to find out that he was planning to put me in a Chevrolet HHR that was pre-owned. But the real kicker was that he told me that the bank told them to put me in this vehicle, and no other. He actually told me that the bank was telling me what I could drive.

He then told me that I would be paying Ron Carter Chevrolet right at $16, 000 plus tax, title & license for this 2 year old HHR (2006) that had 32, 000 miles on it.

My first question was how could Ron Carter Chevrolet put me in an HHR that was only a few thousand miles away from having no warranty (since the 2006 model only came with a 36, 000 / 36 month warranty) and asking me to pay a price that was almost that of a new Chevrolet HHR.

Again, he told me that the bank was telling them what I was going to be driving and what I was going to be paying. But worse, I had seen this vehicle online on their web site for almost $2, 000 less. Additionally, further inspection revealed that the vehicle’s tires were worn out.

I then asked what kind of finance company would set me up with a Chevrolet vehicle that was about to be out of warranty, and send me down the road on a bad set of tires? It was obvious to me that this was a Ron Carter Chevrolet that they badly needed to get rid of before 36 months came around, or they had just had it on the lot too long.

And needless to say, Ron Carter Chevrolet said that even if I bought this vehicle they would not put good tires on it, or give me a warranty.

Ok, now I had been to 2 different Chevrolet dealerships, Ron Carter and Parkway, and they had lied to me, and had no vehicle to drive other than a rent car that I had been in for too long already. Needless to say, I was put out by these antics at Ron Carter Chevrolet and Parkway Chevrolet since I was a long time GM customer that has been driving GM vehicles for 30 years.

I decided to go to one more Chevrolet dealership and give them a chance to get me in the right vehicle. I went to Lone Star Chevrolet the next day, and they were actually honest with me and tried once again to get me financed. Eventually, I found out that it just wasn’t going to happen.

So, here I sit with no vehicle, trying to decide what to do about the situation that Parkway Chevrolet and Ron Carter Chevrolet had put me in. I have been out looking at used vehicles that I can afford for the cash I have out of my truck, but everything is junk at that price, and a risk to buy.

What is the moral of this story? There is still plenty of dishonesty in car sales, and even though I felt some loyalty to Chevrolet and GM, they certainly felt no loyalty to me, a long time Chevrolet / GM customer that will certainly reconsider future Chevrolet purchases.

Va
Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  • Ra
      24th of Jul, 2008
    0 Votes

    Sir,
    I have 2002 Buik LaSabre, custom; only 22, 000 miles. Only I use the car, it looks like new. Asking direction, I opened right front window. But I was unable to close it. I open front windows only in rare cases - to ask something; maybe 10-15 times since 2002.
    Next day I came to Buick auto shop (the dealership where I bought the car in 2002) and I was told that this was window regulator and it would cost $760.
    I am a retiree and can't pay such amount. I opened a part of the door and found out that the reason was a defected top cam unit. I needed 3 small parts ( an top front cam, wheel (both from plastic) and a guide (from metal) that fix the cam and wheel to the frame. All these parts should cost only several dollars but nobody gave me their numbers. I was told that it is impossible to order them.
    On the Internet I found many similar complaints.
    As if the company deliberately put defected parts that can be easily changed but only by GM employees ( a customer leaves unnecessary defected unit) and sold again as new.
    Buik LeSabre was one of their best cars. But they deliberately use a part that cost them several cents and which can easily be broken. It looks thay violate law if they don't give parts numbers and it is impossible to buy them.

  • Qu
      10th of Feb, 2011
    0 Votes

    Do not trust Ron Carter. I have friends that are employee's and customers and I have never heard one good story.

    DO NOT TAKE YOUR VEHICLE TO BE REPAIRED AT RON CARTER.

  • Jk
      1st of Jul, 2011
    0 Votes
    General Motors Corp. - Corrosion failure of vehicle brake lines
    GENERAL MOTORS CORP.
    United States

    If you had a metal brake line corrosion failure or have a Chevrolet SUV or truck, read this. The metal brake lines used during manufacturing corrode easily leading to loss of braking and collisions.

    Report Date: January 26, 2011 at 10:34 AM
    NHTSA Action Number: EA11001

    N/A
    NHTSA Action Number: EA11001 NHTSA Recall Campaign Number: N/A
    Vehicle Make / Model: Model Year(s):
    CADILLAC / ESCALADE 2002-2003
    CHEVROLET / 1500 2003
    CHEVROLET / AVALANCHE 1500 2002-2003
    CHEVROLET / AVALANCHE 2500 2002-2003
    CHEVROLET / SIERRA 1999-2003
    CHEVROLET / SILVERADO 1999-2003
    CHEVROLET / SUBURBAN 1999-2003
    CHEVROLET / TAHOE 2000-2003
    CHEVROLET / YUKON 2000-2003
    CHEVROLET / YUKON XL 2000
    Manufacturer: GENERAL MOTORS CORP.
    Component(s):
    SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC
    SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS
    Date Investigation Opened : January 5, 2011
    Date Investigation Closed : Open
    Summary:
    The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received Defect Petition DP10-003 on March 2, 2010, requesting the investigation of model year (MY) 2003 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD 4WD pickup trucks for corrosion failures of the vehicle brake lines.

    DP10-003 was granted and on March 30, 2010, Preliminary Evaluation PE10-010 was opened on more than six million model year 1999 through 2003 light trucks and sport utility vehicles manufactured and sold by General Motors Corporation (GM).

    On July 2, 2010, ODI received GM's response to an information request, which included GM's assessment of the frequency and safety consequences of the alleged defect.

    GM stated that: (1) the brake system of the subject vehicles is split front/rear and should a brake pipe suddenly fail for any reason, the affected vehicle would be capable of stopping with the pressure supplied by the remaining circuit; (2) the subject vehicles were designed to meet the hydraulic circuit partial failure requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 105 and 135, Light Vehicle Brake Systems; and (3) should a brake fluid leak occur for any reason, the brake system malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) would illuminate and warn the driver before the brake fluid level was low enough to cause a loss of line pressure.

    Of the 890 total complaints for brake pipe corrosion identified, 761 were located in Salt Belt states (Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin).

    The complaint rate per 100, 000 vehicles sold is significantly higher in the Salt Belt, 43.0, compared with 3.0 for the remaining states. In approximately 25 percent of the complaints, the brake pipe failure has allegedly occurred suddenly, with no warning to the driver (i.e., no brake warning light), and resulted in extended stopping distances.

    In 26 of these incidents, the increase in stopping distance that resulted was alleged as a factor in a crash and in 10 others the vehicle was intentionally steered off the road or into another lane of travel in order to avoid a crash.

    An Engineering Analysis has been opened for subject vehicles sold or currently registered in Salt Belt states to further assess the scope, frequency and safety risks associated with sudden failures of corroded brake pipes that can result in decreased brake effectiveness. ODI will continue to gather information on subject vehicles outside the Salt Belt as well.

    If you have any additional facts/complaints, contact NHSTA. They still have an additional investigation open on this. As of now, GM is not doing a recall because no one has been killed.

Post your comment