Are you the Owner of this Business? ×
BBB® Accredited Business Seal

Are you...?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

BBB Accredited Business since

Hawaii Nissan Inc

Phone: (808) 524-9111 Fax: (808) 540-3286 View Additional Phone Numbers 2295 N King St, Honolulu, HI 96819

BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


This company is an automobile dealership.

BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Hawaii Nissan Inc meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Hawaii Nissan Inc include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 9 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business

Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

9 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 3 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 4
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 1
Problems with Product/Service 4
Total Closed Complaints 9

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Hawaii Nissan Inc
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: September 28, 1995 Business started: 07/21/1995 in HI Business started locally: 07/21/1995 Business incorporated 08/01/1995 in HI
Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

State of Hawaii Department of Taxation
PO Box 1425, Honolulu HI 96806
Phone Number: (808) 587-4242
The number is W20500034-01.

DCCA Consumer Resource Center
235 S. Beretania Street, 8th & 9th Floors, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: 808-587-4272
The number is MVD525.

DCCA Consumer Resource Center
235 S. Beretania Street, 8th & 9th Floors, Honolulu HI 96813
Phone Number: 808-587-4272
The number is RD3110.

Business Management
Mr. John Uekawa, President/General Ms. Marietta Fujio, Vice President Mr. Frank Kudo, Chairman, CEO Gwen Otani, HR Dept Mr. Ryan Takata, Sales Manager
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. John Uekawa, President/General
Business Category

Auto Dealers - New Cars Auto Parts & Supplies - New Auto Repair & Service

Alternate Business Names
New City Nissan
Industry Tips

Additional Locations


BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

4/7/2016 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I was shopping for a new Nissan. At *********** I found pricing info as well as a Price Promise. I was given a confirmed price and a contact phone # at New City. Allegedly there would be no haggling or negotiation - I had a confirmed price for a specific vehicle. I made an appt and drove to New City Nissan only to be told by Brian and Bobby that they had no idea where ******* got their MSRP or the promised price. Bobby did offer a "deal" which was higher priced than newspaper advertised price. I departed. I noted back on ******* site that several people wrote in to complain that the Price Promise was useless... dealer refused to honor the price and attempted to sell the vehicle at a higher price. Certainly seems like bait & switch to me...

Desired Settlement: Would like the described vehicle sold to me at the promised price

Business Response:

The *********** “Price Promise” program is a program where New City Nissan agrees to sell all new vehicles at $300 below the MRSP minus any rebate.  Simply put, there was a typographical error made by our inventory clerk when she inputted the MSRP into our computer system.  The clerk inputted $13,385 for the MSRP rather than the actual MSRP of $18,385.  *********** takes an inventory feed from our computer system in order to list our inventory on their site.  Unfortunately, this error migrated into the *********** system.

Our computer records do not show that Mr. ******* received pricing confirmation via phone or email from New City Nissan prior to his visit to the store.  Mr. ******* visited New City Nissan on March 25th.  It was Mr. *******’s visit that alerted us to this clerical error.  We explained to Mr. ******* that the Nissan Sentra that he was looking at had an actual MSRP of $18,385 and not the $13,385 that was inadvertently posted on the Edmund’s site.  We explained that the starting sale price should have been calculated from the $18,385 MSRP.  We apologized to Mr. ******* for the inconvenience and immediately made the correction to our computer system.

As mentioned, the pricing mistake was simply the result of human error and not of malicious intent as suggested by Mr. *******.  While we apologize to Mr. ******* for the inconvenience and misunderstanding, we cannot sell him the vehicle at a price calculated from the wrong MSRP.  While people do make mistakes, we have also taken measures internally to try and prevent this from occurring in the future.

2/12/2016 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I was serviced by a man named Ralon. Upon arriving to the service department, he helped me check in and offered various services, one of them being a service to change my spark plugs. He verbally mentioned that it would be around an extra 100 dollars in which I agreed to. He then provided me a BLANK service agreement to sign, in which I thought was protocol. Unfortunately, when it came to pay for the services, it turned out to be a 411 dollar service! When I tried to dispute, he pointed to my signature, and the charges were marked above it, AFTER I had signed. This is a procedure that is practiced my scam artists, and that's exactly what he did.

Desired Settlement: I would like to receive a refund of atleast 200 dollars, considering that a single spark plug costs 10 dollars on average.

Business Response:

We would like to clarify some of the details of Mr. *****’s account of his visit to New City ******.  New City ****** did nothing wrong and does not feel that this situation warrants a reimbursement.

On January 29, 2016, Mr. ***** brought his 2006 ****** ******** ******* into New City ****** to have maintenance services performed.  All services performed on his vehicle were at the request of Mr. *****.  He requested that a 105,000 maintenance service package be performed on the vehicle but opted not to have the oil and filter changed, which is part of that package.   Mr. ***** also requested that the spark plugs be changed.  After doing an inspection of the vehicle, the service advisor, Ralon, wrote a price quote for the 105,000 mile service package at $190.00 less the cost of the oil and filter change and a price quote for the spark plugs change at $580.  Mr. ***** agreed to have the work performed and signed the estimate.

After the work was performed, Ralon presented a bill to Mr. ***** showing that the spark plug change was actually less than the $580 quoted price.  Mr. ***** was actually charged $450 for that service.  It was then that Mr. ***** expressed to Ralon that he thought that the spark plugs change was $100.  We do not understand how Mr. ***** came up with that amount.  As the work was already completed, Ralon could only point out to Mr. ***** that he had agreed to the price quote of $580 with his signature.

Simply put, New City ****** does not engage in the inappropriate business practices that Mr. ***** is suggesting.  Ralon is an advisor with over 30 years of experience and has an impeccable record of customer service.  As we have stated, Mr. ***** requested that the spark plugs be changed and this service was not performed as a recommendation by the service advisor as claimed by Mr. ***** in his complaint to your office.  Furthermore, we do not understand how Mr. ***** arrived at $200 as the amount he feels entitled to based on this alleged misunderstanding.  Again, we firmly believe that New City ****** did not do anything wrong and will have to decline to agree to the requested settlement in that amount.

Consumer Response:
Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because:

The request for the $200 reimbursement were for the following reasons:

To be compensated for the complacency of the service advisor of 30+ years of experience.

To sustain the credibility and reputation of New City ****** to future potential customers.

To elaborate, I believe the service I had received from Ralon was nothing less then lackadaisical. According to the complaint response from New City ******, I had requested the change of my spark plugs from the very beginning. That is false. I originally only wanted them checked, but I was informed by Ralon that they do not provide that service and that they only replace the spark plugs. It was then that I had asked the price for that service and the service advisor, Ralon, verbally stated it would be around 100 dollars. Had he then written down the projected total on the service agreement prior to my signature, I would have been aware of the actual price and we would not be in this predicament today. This is not my first time at this particular location and regretfully believed that I could trust the integrity of the service advisors, which is why I decided to go ahead and sign the agreement prematurely.

In addition, I recently called this particular location and asked for a quote for a spark plug change on a 2005 ****** ********, which is only a year older than mine. The answer I received from them this time was 440 dollars. According to the complaint response of New City ******, I would have been charged 580 dollars for the service. That's a 140 dollar difference for a model that's just a year apart. Not to mention that the amount they charge is outrageous in itself, considering they only charge 17 dollars for each spark plug. Overall, it seems as if New City ****** charges what they please at any given time.

I want to be clear that I have never felt the need to take a complaint to this level. It's a shame that New City ****** refuses to admit a mistake due to complacency. I'm an active duty member of the armed forces who takes integrity as one of my core values very seriously. I deeply suggest that they reconsider their decision to ignore the complaint. In the event that they continue to leave it unresolved, I have no choice but to warn others about the practices of this establishment to ensure it does not happen to them.


**** *****

7/2/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Brought in my car to have the transmission worked on. After about 3 days, I received a call back that the transmission solenoid needed replacing, costing about $1,200. I agreed to have the service done on my vehicle. After waiting roughly 2 weeks for the parts to come in, the vehicle was finally worked on. I went back to pick up the vehicle, but the problem still existed. I told them that the issue was not resolved and they agreed to fix the problem again. After leaving the vehicle at the dealership for another 4 days, I received a phone call that the car needed a whole new transmission and the problem could not be fixed. They wanted another $3,000 for a new transmission. I declined the offer to have the car worked on further. I tried to contact the service manager on multiple occasions by telephone and email, but I received no contact back from the service manager. I am now $1,200 poorer and the problem was not fixed, and now the managers seem to be missing every time I try to contact them about the repair service I received. I only agreed to have the car worked on in the first place because I believed the service personnel when they told me that replacing the transmission solenoid would fix the problem.

Desired Settlement: I paid way too much money and wasted too much time to have the car worked on without the issue being solved. The parts and labor that I paid for, not to mention time wasted, did not fix the problem after I was convinced it would fix the problem.

Business Response: Re:       #********* **********

Dear Mr. ********,

I am respondingto a complaint  thatwas filed with your office by ****** ****.  After researching the incident
in question, I feel that there are some important factsthat should be mentioned to better clarifythe situation with Mr. ****'s vehicle's  repair.  I believethat Mr. **** has already been offereda very fair resolution that would ultimately address his desireto have his vehicle's problem fixed.

Mr. **** brought his **** ****** ****** (mileageat 111,101) into our servicedepartment because his vehicle wasjerking forward betweenfirst and secondgear after warmingup.  Afterchecking the ****** database, our service department found a servicebulletin (see exhibitA) that could have been a potentialfix to Mr. ****'s problems with his transmission. Mr. **** was contactedand informed of the cost of the fix.  He approvedthe cost of the service,which came out to $870.44and the cost to resolvea brake issue, which came out to $319.45 (total ofboth  repairs came to $1268.14.  Exhibit B).  Uponhis approval, the parts were ordered with ****** and the servicewas performed upon the parts'arrival.  Uponcompletion of the service, Mr. **** pickedup his vehicle only to find that the servicedid not remedy the problem.  Afterfurther consultation  with ****** technical experts, it was determined  that, since the recommended service did not work, the next remedy would be to replace the transmission.

The cost of the transmission  replacement  is estimatedto be $4000.  Out of good will, we are willing to creditthe
$870.44 that Mr. **** paid for the initialtransmission repair toward the cost of replacingthe transmission. With additional labor discounts,  we estimatethe transmission replacement  to be around $2,500.

We understand that Mr. ****'s ultimate goal is to have his **** ****** ******'s transmission fixed.  All indications are that the only remedyat this time would be to replacethe transmission. We feel that creditingthe amount that he paid for the initial transmission  work toward the transmission replacement is a fair compromise in order to assist Mr. **** in reaching his goal of having his vehicle operateproperly.  Thankyou for allowing us to add clarity to this situation.   I look forwardto hearing from you.


Mike C******--. Controller

Consumer Response:  
Complaint: ********

I am rejecting this response because:

I already understand what the problem was. The response only reiterated the issues. My issue with the 'service' provided was that after convincing me the parts would fix the transmission but didn't then told me to just throw more money at the company to fix the problem, but I don't believe that they would fix it . I tried to contact the management on multiple occasions to complain but all the times I called, there was always no manager available to talk to. I want a refund of services provided becausr of all the work done, my car is in a worse state.


****** ****

4/7/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: I bought/leased a new ****** **** ** with optional fast charging port (which is more expensive than the standard one without it) knowing that I won't be waiting for a long time charging the vehicle. For the past four months or so their fast charger broke down and it seems they don't want to have it fixed. Till now the charger is still out of order and it's so frustrating to be waiting everyday for hours just to charge the vehicle. I'm leasing this car for $600.00 plus a month for 36 months and yet I'm getting frustration charging it everyday. If I can return this vehicle without penalty I'm going to do so.My main concern/complain is to have that fast charger fixed cause I'm paying extra for that fast charging port on that car.....

Desired Settlement: Have the fast charger fixed !

Business Response: New City Nissan installed the quick charger system as a convenience for New City Nissan customers.  It was unexpected that, due to our location, the quick charger unit has experienced an extremely high volume of use by customers from other dealerships and manufacturers as well.  Unfortunately, the unexpected high usage and occasional mis-use, has caused the dealership to repair the quick charge unit on numerous occasions.

Because this quick charge unit is new technology and highly sensitive, parts and service for this unit comes from the mainland.  This makes the repair process lengthy.  We are again in the process (and have been in the process) of repairing the unit. 

Business Response:

As an update and to clarify the situation, Nissan North America’s technical specialists have been and are still trying to figure out why the quick charge unit produces error messages when trying to communicate with a ****.  As of now, they are trying to diagnose if the problem is from the electrical wiring, a hardware issue or if the unit is outright defective.  They are also trying to determine if this issue could have been caused by a non-Nissan being hooked up to this unit in the past.  Nissan oversaw the installation of the unit and has the lead in trying to resolve this issue.
We want to see this unit fixed also and have been working with the necessary parties to do so.  While the quick charge unit’s breakdown is inconvenient, Mr. *****’s purchase of a **** with the quick charge package still gives him the opportunity to have the quick charge capability to him when or where he should he need it.  Our quick charge unit, when operational, is made available to Mr. ***** for his convenience and not as a legal right that he received as part of the purchase because his vehicle had the quick charge option.
Again, we are working with the technical team from Nissan North America to try and get this resolved.  This includes the electricians who ran the wiring, the electricians who installed the unit and the technical support people who work for the quick charge unit’s manufacturer.  
We do not believe that New City Nissan has ever acted in bad faith in regards to Mr. ***** and, as we continue to work toward a remedy for the malfunctioning quick charger, do not believe we are operating out of the standards of the Better Business Bureau.

Consumer Response:  
Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.


***** *****

12/13/2014 Problems with Product/Service
6/5/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Dealer increased down payment by 500.00 Down payment was increased 500.00. It was sent to collection in May 2008. State of Hawaii Statute of Limitation is 6 years. It has been 6 years from the date of the collection and 6 1/2 years from the date of the contract. This collection must be deleted from my credit file and all collection agencies working on behalf of New City Nissan (******** ******** ****** and ******** ********) must also delete this collection as it is no longer a valid account.

Desired Settlement: Cancel this account as it is no longer a collectible or valid debt and delete from *******, ********, & **********

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/14) */ Mr. ********* never made good on the $500 he owed New City Nissan as part of a legally, binding contract. Unable to acquire the money owed, New City Nissan turned this issue over to a collection agency. New City Nissan is no longer involved in this matter. The collection agency has had all communication with Mr. ********* regarding his unpaid debt from the time that New City Nissan turned this issue over to them and they would better understand the terms of the statute of limitations in Mr. *********'s case and their responsibility to report his collection account to credit reporting agencies. Since New City Nissan relinquished any dealings with this issue to the collection agency, Mr. ********* needs to contact the collection agency regarding his demand of having this information removed from his credit burueas. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/05/15) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I completely understand the collection and reporting of debts to credit bureau's. I understand that New City Nissan sold this account to an agency under two different names, in Harrisburg, PA. I will deal with that agency separately. However, New City Nissan IS reporting this to ******* as their own collection account. ******** and ********** are being reported by ******** ******** ****** and ******** ********, respectively, on behalf of New City. If New City Nissan is going to report directly to a credit bureau, they are required to know and follow the laws in the Fair Credit Reporting Act. That is why I am asking them to remove this from ******* because the State of Hawaii 6 year statute of limitation has run out and this is no longer a collectible debt. There is only one issue involved here and that is the statute of limitation and not weather or not the contract is legal. If the contract is legal, the stature still applies and if it is illegal it still applies. That part is not up for debate. I have a copy of my credit report and can prove that New City is reporting to Equifax as its own collection agency and creditor. I have not been contacted by New City Nissan or any collection agency on their behalf, during the last six years. This account has remained dormant. So, it's up to New City Nissan as to what the next step is. There are numerous State and Federal Agencies that can resolve this, but we don't need to get that involved if New City will just remove this from Equifax. I don't want this to escalate any further so lets get this settled now. Mahalo Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2014/05/29) */ If New City Nissan could simply remove this information from the credit bureau, we would consider doing so. However, New City Nissan relinquished all rights pertaining to this debt to the collection agencies who in turn reported it to the credit bureaus. New City Nissan did not directly report this to any credit reporting agency including Equifax. The customer needs to engage the collection agencies regarding having this removed from all three of the credit reporting agencies citing the statute of limitations as the reason for the removal. Simply put, this reported debt is not in New City Nissan's authority to remove as we were not the ones who reported it. Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2014/06/03) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) New City: I will work with the collection agencies (National Recovery and American Agencies, which have the same mailing address) who now hold this account. They have assigned account #13735 to this account at all three bureau's. This may simply be a reporting error on their part. The account number is common among all three bureau's and therefore must have been assigned by the collection agency who bought this account. This concludes our correspondence, unless the agencies send me back to you. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

5/26/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: dealership wants me to take back a car that they already took back in their possesion from me. 4/22/2014 i purchased a preowned nissan quest 2012 from new city nissasn. signed a contract with the terms we agreed upon and drove off the lot with the car. the very next day bill from finance calls and tells me that when i signed the contract the banks were closed and they now want 3% highter interest than what i originally agreed to. I said thats not fair and i will not be giving them any more money. He said if I don't want to pay than I have to return the car. I called **** who was the sales manager the night I signed the original contract and he said the same thing about the banks and how they can go back on the contract if the banks are unable to approve the loan. so I told him fine i will be returning the car the next day at 9am. 4/24 i show up to the dealership and transfer all my belonging from the van into my boyfriends car. I go inside and meet with ***** who was my salesman i had worked with on the 22nd. He takes the 2 keys from me and goes outside and does a final inspection of the car to make sure everything was the same as it was when i drove off the lot with it. While ***** is inspecting the car the manager **** comes and tries to talk me into accepting the higher rate saying if i take off the warranty that i had purchased my monthly payments would be the same and i told him no thank you we will just return the car. he says ok well we just wanted to give you all your options. ***** comes back in and says everything is ok with the car. **** asks me for my copies of the contracts they gave me and i told him i didn't have it cause i couldn't find it and i would run home and look for it. So i leave the dealership and return with the contracts and as i was trying to hand it over to him he says my boss would like to talk to you because he feels bad about what happened here. We said we just want to be on our way because we already had enough but ended up waiting for his boss *****. Eddie comes out and tells us now that they are not going to take the van back because he had made a call and was able to approve the original loan that i signed. I told him but you guys already took the van back and I don't want it anymore after everything this company has done and the experience i am having. He says i only have 2 options. a. take the original contract or b.he can help me out and take a 1000 dollars off the original contract which will lower my montly payments by $20. told him that we didnt want the car anymore and that they had already taken the car back and he said even if i leave the lot without the van they will send me my montly payments so i have the two options he gave me. I told him i would have to come back later and decide because my daughter had a mri that day and we were running late. so we left and i called a few lawyers and they said the moment the dealership asked me to take the car back and when they actually took posession of the car they had rescinded the original contract and that i am no longer binded to it. the dealership still has posession of the van and ***** advised me that if i dont pick up the van he will just cash it out and send me my montly payments and each day that i leave it there i will be charged storage fees. I have evidence of ***** saying that they took the car back and that i am no longer obligated to the car. but ***** says that ***** is just a salesman and he has the final say. i feel they are trying to take advantage of me and since they already took posession of the car before they got the original loan approved thats their problem and they cant force something back on me that they already willingly accepted back.

Desired Settlement: to have nothing to do with this car anymore. they already took it back from me. how can they threaten to charge me for a van that i dont have and storage fees when they asked me to bring the car back. this has to be illegal and i should not have to be forced back into something that they rescinded on.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2014/05/14) */ New City Nissan is not a lender so credit approval is at the discretion of the various financial institutions that we deal with. With that in mind, a deal contract is binding when financing is secured with a financial institution at the agreed price and terms. Due to the confusion of the circumstances, New City Nissan gave Ms. ***** a $1000 discount on the vehicle. Ms. ***** took the offer, came in and re-signed a new buyer's contract and provided New City with the required documentation to secure her financing. Because of Ms. *****'s participation in providing us with the necessary information to secure her financing, it was our feeling that Ms. ***** was satisfied with the compensation of the discount for her incovenience.

3/18/2014 Guarantee/Warranty Issues | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Warranty covers issue, however company is refusing to fix and cover the issue. I purchased a ***** from New City Nissan along with an extended warranty. Among other things, my compressor is broken in my car. I was told that the warrant covers the compressor but they wont do it because it's expensive. They have attached contingencies, which could end up charging me an excess of $2200. I am told that the piece is in a very difficult area and they need to have a representative (from the warranty) come out to prove that that specific piece is broken, however, if it's not broken then I will be charged for the labor which I am told (by the dealership) will come to about $2200. I don't have $2200 to take that risk, which is why I pay for the coverage, so they can take that risk and fix it. I took it to another location that said, without a doubt, it is the compressor; unfortunately this issue has made it so I no longer trust the dealership or warranty company to be truthful and honest. I am worried that I will take it in they will say it's not the compressor, even though this other location ran a test and said 100% it's the compressor, just so they can charge me the $2200 for labor. All I want replaced is the compressor, that is what is broken and is covered under the warranty that I am paying for. If the dealership had just fixed it to begin with I wouldn't have issues trusting them. Instead they added on this contingency trying to get more money out of me, knowing that I, like most people, couldn't afford to take that risk and end up having to pay $2200. I trust this other location 100% but they don't deal with warranties so they cannot fix it. I tried to contact Nissan to get this situation sorted out, but they informed me that since it is a ***** there is nothing they can do. So Nissan sold me a ***** and an extended warranty to cover the ***** but wont cover it because it's a *****. I have an email and a voicemail from Nissan representatives saying that since it's a ***** and not a Nissan there is nothing they can do. Nissan sold me a warranty knowing that they weren't going to cover the issues if something where to break on my *****. I am paying for a warranty to cover when something is broken so I want what I paid for. It shouldn't have gotten this far, I don't want anything unreasonable, I simply want them to cover the issue when it's covered, and in this case, it's covered. If it's true that they sold me the warranty knowing that it wouldn't cover the ***** because it's not a Nissan then they lied and stole from me and I want a refund on the extended warranty that I purchased.

Desired Settlement: I want them to fix the compressor on my car since it's covered under the extended warranty that I purchase when I purchased the car from them.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/03/04) */ As of today, the issues that Ms. ********** mentions are being fully resolved. The extended service contract company has given approval to cover the costs to repair the compressor and evaporator of Ms. *********** vehicle. Still, for the sake of clarification and understanding, I would like to better explain the circumstances of this situation. New City Nissan's representatives did not intend to imply that we did not want or were unwilling to repair Ms. ************ vehicle. We were simply trying to explain what is required of all parties to get Ms. ************ vehicle repaired under the coverage of her service contract. After diagnosing Ms. ************ vehicle, it was determined that the extent of the repair was at an amount that required the approval of Ms. ************ service contract company. This is the policy of the service contract company and it simply means that they need to be given the time to do their due diligence before providing an approval to proceed with the repair. Part of their process requires that their inspector comes down to inspect the vehicle to verify the diagnosis and that the recommended repair is justified. This, unfortunately, entailed scheduling a future time for their inspector to come down to New City Nissan to perform the inspection. This process would be in effect at any repair facility that honors this company's service contract. As mentioned above, as of this date, Ms. ************ service contract company has concluded their due diligence, approved the repair and New City Nissan is in the process of repairing her vehicle. As an added note, Ms. ************ service contract company has authorized 6 days of rental use. In good faith, New City Nissan will cover any additional days should any be needed. Thank you for this opportunity to clarify the circumstances of this situation.

9/12/2013 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details

Additional Notes

Complaint: Purchased a "NEW" vehicle on Aug. 31, but could not take the vehicle because the safety check was expired went back to pick it us Sept 3 and its "USED Went to New City Nissan today to pickup a "NEW" vehicle that I had purchased on Aug. 31. While my sister and I were sitting in the vehicle to drive off my sales guy came out to have me sign a form showing that the "amount of my check and the amount of the contract were the same." He asked me to sign then initial in 2 separate places which I did. When purchasing a "NEW" vehicle it said on the paperwork that the vehicle would come with a full tank of gas and I noticed that the tank was not full, so I asked about the gas and the salesman said he would check and come back. While sitting there with my sister something told me to go inside and get a copy of the paperwork that I had just signed and initialed, so I went in looking for the salesman. I went back in and asked to get a copy of the paperwork, he gave it to me and I noticed it was a different sales contract then the one I had originally signed on Aug. 31. I asked him why would I have to sign another sales contract? After looking at the second contract that he brought out for me to sign I noticed that New City Nissan had changed the "NEW" vehicle to a "USED" vehicle on the contract. Now the contract was showing that I was purchasing a "USED" vehicle instead of a "NEW" vehicle. WHAT?!?!?! I was livid!!!! Shame on you New City Nissan for trying to pull one over on me. I wonder how many other people they have done this too. Shady business practices will never get repeat customers. On top of all of this the floor manager has the nerve to tell me "according to the State of Hawaii the vehicle has to be sold as "USED" because it has more than 500 miles, but it's still considered "NEW". Meanwhile they have me sign an "AS IS" section saying that the vehicle has no warranties, but when I purchased the vehicle on Aug. 31 it was a "NEW" vehicle with a 3 year 36,000 mile warranty. I am so disappointed with the customer service and the experience with New City Nissan that I would like to tell all of my friends and family to never purchase anything from New City Nissan. If you do please don't let them double talk and con you this is not a way that business should be done. It's dealerships like New City Nissan that gives other dealerships a bad reputation.

Desired Settlement: When you enter into a contract to purchase a "NEW" vehicle you should be getting a "NEW" vehicle. The floor manager should not say that "according to the State of Hawaii the vehicle is "USED", but New City Nissan is selling it as "NEW"." The vehicle is either "NEW" or "USED" it can't be one way on paper and yet verbally it's "NEW". They should be selling me the same van at a "USED" car price and not as a "NEW" vehicle as my contract states.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2013/09/11) */ The vehicle that Ms. ***** agreed to purchase was a new vehicle. As a new vehicle, Ms. ***** would receive a full factory warranty and would benefit from the full $2500 rebate from Nissan for this new vehicle. The confusion stemmed only from the definition of a new vehicle. The Federal Automobile Information Disclosure Act states "the term new automobile means an automobile the equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred by a manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to an ultimate purchaser". By this federal definition, the vehicle that Ms. ***** agreed to purchase was a new vehicle. The confusion occurred because the Hawaii state statute states that a vehicle is a new vehicle if it has not been driven more than 500 miles. Ms. ***** was aware that the vehicle that she agreed to purchase had 1610 miles. When Ms. ***** returned to pick up the vehicle on September 3rd, New City Nissan representatives wanted to make Ms. ***** aware that the vehicle according to the Hawaii State statute definition wasn't considered new. It is only for that purpose that New City asked Ms. ***** to initial a second buyer's order acknowledging the vehicle as used according to the Hawaii definition. After seeking clarification, New City Nissan ultimately discovered that, based on the Supremacy Clause, federal law supersedes state law and Ms. ***** was officially purchasing a new vehicle. Whatever the case, Ms. ***** was ALWAYS set to receive the full benefits of a new vehicle owner by way of a full warranty and full factory rebates. Because of the confusion, Ms. ***** was not comfortable with the details of the transaction. New City Nissan agreed to cancel the transaction and void the buyer's order. As there is no transaction with Ms. *****, no compensation or concessions will be forthcoming. For your reference, the vehicle that Ms. ***** intended to purchase is available and will be sold as a new vehicle. However, at this time, New City Nissan does not wish to pursue a deal with Ms. *****. Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 7, 2013/09/12) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I would never purchase nor refer anyone to ever purchase a vehicle from New City Nissan EVER!!! When New City Nissan says that "When Ms. ***** returned to pick up the vehicle on September 3rd, New City Nissan representatives wanted to make Ms. ***** aware that the vehicle according to the Hawaii State statute definition wasn't considered new." this is a lie. The salesman came outside with the contract folded halfway down and asked me to sign if the total of my check matched the total on the bottom.. Never once did the salesmen explain about the "new" vs "used" definition until I went back inside to ask for a copy of the form that was signed. After signing the form the salesmen didn't offer me a copy either. This is not a way that a reputable company should be doing business. It was a sneaky way for New City Nissan to get me to sign a new contract stating that the vehicle was "USED". No compensation is desired I just wanted other consumers to know what goes on at New City Nissan, but as I read the other reports on Yelp from other consumers I am sure that New City Nissan is well aware that their dealership is not up to par. It's a shame that people don't have other convenient locations to buy a Nissan unless they drive to Mililani or Kaneohe.

Customer Review(s)

The customer review(s) below are un-filtered. These positive and negative reviews are not used in the calculation of the BBB Rating. If you wish to file a complaint and request a resolution to your issue please click here. This customer review section is not BBBs complaint resolution system. Customer Reviews are the subjective opinion of the individual who posted the review and not of Better Business Bureau. A customer review is not posted on a business if a BBB complaint on the same issue(s) is also filed. BBB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any customer review and is not responsible for the content of any customer review. Public comments are not customer reviews.

Customer Reviews Summary

0 Customer Reviews on Hawaii Nissan Inc
Positive Experience (0 reviews)
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Negative Experience (0 reviews)