Through a cars.com search I located a (used) vehicle of interest at Flow BMW. I called the dealership and spoke with Bob Smith (Used Car Sales Mgr) to confirm details/availability. He confirmed that the vehicle met the listed specifications, and he verified that (a) the vehicle had never been in an accident, and (b) the vehicle had never been repainted, etc. Based upon his glowing report, my family decided to proceed with the 200mi-3.5hr trek to Winston-Salem. Oh yeah, Bob also mentioned that they had paid $1200 to get 4 new PAX tires put on the vehicle.
Upon arrival at the lot, I was greeted by salesman Ed Simmons. After a brief inspection of the vehicle, I noticed several anomalies with the paint: 1. Left rear edge of roof was rough, 2. Rear left corner of bumper cover kept popping loose, 3. Bumper cover had an average quality paint job (i.E. The fact it had been repainted was glaringly obvious), and 4. The rear hatch (minivan) did not close evenly — there was a large gap on the right but not on the left.
I was asking Ed open-ended questions about these issues, searching for an explanation since Bob Smith had assured me the vehicle was accident-free. At this point, Ed went inside to pull the CarFax report on vehicle. He came back a few minutes later and let me know that CarFax was reporting that the vehicle _had_ been in an accident, requiring work to the rear bumper cover and decklid.
At this point I was pretty annoyed that Bob had misled me about the condition of the car. To paraphrase Ed's response: "I'm sure Bob was just confused, and not trying to mislead you. Besides, the CarFax report was freely available on our website." Ed was actually getting a bit snippy at this point — I definitely didn't need that. Honestly, I don't recall if I saw the link or not — regardless, Bob obviously had access to this freely available CarFax report, too. However, he chose either to not read it, or to ignore it. Ed had no response for this.
Next I asked Ed to call the previous owner so that they could give me some details about the true severity of the accident. At first he refused, but he eventually relented and went inside. He came back outside ~20mins later and said that the previous owner was on vacation and could not be contacted, but he spoke with the sales rep that had handled theirr trade. She told Ed that the previous owner stated that they had backed into a mailbox, sustaining only minor cosmetic damage.
I pressed for Ed to try calling the ex-owner on their cell phone but he refused. While the family and I were deciding on our path forward, the General Manager of Flow BMW (forgot his name...) came out to meet me and apologize for the miscommunication. He assured me that no one at Flow BMW was deliberately trying to deceive me, and that Bob's error was merely an accident. Furthermore, he stated that he had personally worked on the trade with the previous owner and he confirmed that the damage was due to a minor "mailbox" impact.
Since it was getting late and I had no way of directly contacting the previous owner that evening, we agreed to make the 3.5hr trek back home and followup with Flow BMW on Monday morning. Ed agreed to contact the previous owner and ask them to contact me to discuss details of the accident.
By collecting the VIN and other information from the vehicle, I was ultimately able to track down the name/address/phone of the previous owner once I left the dealership. My sleuthing also determined that the previous owner had replaced one of the tires a week or two before trading the van in to Flow BMW. That casts quite a bit of doubt on Bob's claim of having to put 4 new tires on the van.
Over the weekend I called the previous owner's home, and spoke to their spouse (or maybe older kid). I gave them my name and told them I was looking at their previous vehicle, but I wanted more details about their mailbox incident. I could visualize their furrowed brow as they said "What mailbox? We were rear-ended in the left rear quarter at a stoplight."
It turns out that the rear bumper and decklid were replaced, and the rear left quarter-panel was moderately damaged. It was not a minor, cosmetic accident. I thanked them for their time, and let 'em go.
On Monday morning, Ed called to let me know that the previous owner had agreed to call me to discuss the details of the accident. He reiterated that it was a minor collision, but they would clear up the details later in the day.
I then informed Ed that I had spoken with the previous owner's family, and that I now had the factual details of the accident. I told him that the vehicle was no longer a candidate for purchase because of the repair history combined with their unethical behavior.
The only thing Ed could say now was that they were merely conveying the details as the previous owner had reported them. He then began attacking me for violating their legal agreements not to give out customer contact info, threatening lawsuits, etc.in other words, being quite rude & hateful since they had lied their way out of a car sale.
I calmly explained that as I am not an employee of Flow BMW, I am not bound by any agreements. Furthermore, the information that I used to track down the previous owner was not concealed or secured (e.G. The VIN is in plain sight). Also, the previous owner's family was happy to straighten out Flow BMW's misunderstandings with me.
At the end of this ordeal, I am most annoyed by the fact that I made my young kids ride in the car for 7 hrs and sit in the showroom for 2 hrs. The lesson for me is that I need to do even more investigation before heading off to a distant car lot. The lesson for others? Maybe this isn't typical behavior for car salesman these days — but it's certainly stereotypical behavior.
Watch out for Flow BMW in Winston-Salem!
B
Kingsport, Tennessee
U.S.A.
0 comments