BBB Accredited Business since
Phone: (651) 457-5757 Fax: (651) 457-5009 1470 50th St E, Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
Request a Quote
View Business Review Inquiries
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that Luther Nissan KIA 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 Luther Nissan KIA include:
- Length of time business has been operating
- Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
- Response to 7 complaint(s) filed against business
- Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business
Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details
|Complaint Type||Total Closed Complaints|
|Problems with Product/Service||4|
|Total Closed Complaints||7|
Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews
|Customer Experience||Total Customer Reviews|
|Total Customer Reviews||0|
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:
Minnesota Secretary of State
180 State Office Bldg, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Saint Paul MN 55155
Phone Number: (651) 296-2803
Business ManagementBrad Knutson, General Manager David Luther, President Shelley Riach
Auto Dealers - New Cars Auto Dealers - Used Cars
Alternate Business NamesLuther Metro Nissan/Kia Metro Nissan
Products & Services
According to the information provided by Luther Nissan Kia, this dealership offers new and used vehicle sales, service, and parts.
Industry TipsBuying A New Car BUYING A USED CAR USED CAR WARRANTY LAW
1470 50th St E
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 (651) 457-5757 Directions
What is a BBB Business Review?
We offer free reviews on businesses that include background, licensing, consumer experience and other information such as governmental actions that is known to BBB. These reviews are provided for businesses that are BBB accredited and also for businesses that are not BBB accredited.
About BBB Business Review Content & Services:
Some Better Business Bureaus offer additional content & services in BBB Business Reviews.
The additional content & services are typically regional in nature or, in some cases, a new product or service that is being tested prior to a more general release.
Not all enhanced content & services are available at all Better Business Bureaus.
Types of Complaints Handled by BBB
BBB handles the following types of complaints between businesses and their customers so long as they are not, or have not been, litigated:
- Advertising or Sales
- Billing or Collection
- Problems with Products or Services
- Guarantee or Warranty
We do not handle workplace disputes, discrimination claims or claims about the quality of health or legal services.
BBB Complaint Process
Your complaint will be forwarded to the business within two business days. The business will be asked to respond within 14 days, and if a response is not received, a second request will be made. You will be notified of the business's response when we receive it (or notified that we received no response). Complaints are usually closed within 30 business days.
What is BBB Advertising Review?
BBB promotes truth in advertising by contacting advertisers whose claims conflict with the BBB Code of Advertising. These claims come to our attention from our internal review of advertising, consumer complaints and competitor challenges. BBB asks advertisers to prove their claims, change ads to make offers more clear to consumers, and remove misleading or deceptive statements.
What government actions does BBB report on?
BBB reports on known government actions that are relevant to the business's marketplace dealings with the public.
BBB Reporting Policy
As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business.
BBB Business Reviews are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. Information in this BBB Business Review is believed reliable but not guaranteed as to accuracy.
BBB Business Reviews generally cover a three-year reporting period. BBB Business Reviews are subject to change at any time.
Complaint Trends - Last 3 Years
Customer Review Trends
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
Star Rating scale
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.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: I made a decision to purchase a car from this dealer because they advertise that they help people with bad credit. I was treated as if I was lucky to even be allowed in the doors the original finance manager that spoke to my husband and I was extremely rude they never showed me the car until after the paper work was signed and they made me post date a check and told me to lie to the bank about the car. We tried to bring the car back as we were told one day we could and the next we could not, the general manager told me they got their money because the loan had been funded and when I question their treatment of me and my family the man laughed at me so I placed a stop payment on the check. The car was purchased on February 6, 2016 and as of today April 3, 3016 I have not gotten my plates that were paid for by the loan and the car has not been titled or registered in the state of Minnesota
Desired Settlement: I would like my car to be registered and I would like my plates for my car
Left VM for Ms *******, advising that case will be closed 'Resolved' at this time.
(If additional issues remain to be addressed, Ms ******* may contact BBB to have case re-opened.)
Ms. *******'s plates are here for her to pick up.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: Luther failed their promise to "exceed our expectations" when we bought a car. The car heater was ineffective, but they refused to refund our money. On January, 14, 2016, we paid $32,436 minus a $2,250 rebate for a Nissan Murano, VIN *************, from Luther Nissan in Inver Grove Heights MN. This included a trade-in of our 2009 Toyota Venza for which Luther credited us with $11,000. This was financed by Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation. The sales rep was Phil ********. After driving it several days, we realized the heater seemed to have marginal heat output on short trips. When we brought it into Nissan service they said it was fully functional, however they allowed us to trade to a different Murano. This too proved to be ineffective. I then did some temperature tests and found the floor temperature was about 30 cooler than our other car, a Jeep Wrangler, after driving an equal distance. This appeared to be related to a very low blower output. We felt that the car was not satisfactory for Minnesota winters. A Nissan Engineer also reviewed the heater and said it was functional, but he stated different cars have different outputs and "kudios to Jeep." Our Murano had only 300 miles on it, so we asked the General Manager, Brad *******, if we could trade it for one of the thousands of cars they have in stock that had a better heater. He said they could only give us used-car value on a trade-in since it was now titled. That would have cost us about $5,000-7,000. The dealer advertises on their website in the "ABOUT" section, http://www.luthernissan.com/dealership/about.htm. Customer service is an integral part of everything we do at Luther Nissan. We promise a car-buying experience that exceeds your expectations. Your complete satisfaction is our number one priority. My expectations are for a heater that works well and if they can't provide that then return my money. If their promise forces them to take back the Murano and sell it as a used car that should be their cost, not mine. Their promise is fraudulent.
Desired Settlement: I would like to return the Murano to Luther Nissan. I would like them to cancel the purchase and service contract and all charged costs, to include the sales tax, license fees and all other charges. They should reimburse me for all car payments made so far, 2 x $662.51 ($1,325.02). They should also return the $11,000 for the trade-in value of the Venza. They should reimburse me $120 for the floor mats. As of today, 3/22/16, that would be $12,445.02.
Business response received via e-mail to BBB, 3/30/16. Scan is attached; text of response reads as follows:
"March 30, 2016
To Whom It May Concern:
RE: ******** ***** concern -- Complaint number ********
In regards to Mr *****'s frustrations with his vehicle heater, we are unable to let him return the vehicle. The vehicle selected and purchased by Mr ***** is performing to the Nissan standards as verified by the Nissan Engineer that met and discussed this with him.
We apologize if he is not satisfied with Nissan's vehicle standards. However, as a dealer, this is out of our control as we have no input on the vehicle design or specifications. If Mr ***** has any further concerns, he would need to contact Nissan North America Consumer Affairs for further assistance.
Luther Nissan Kia"
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: Received offer from Capital One Auto Finance for Luther Nissan Kia. Brought to dealership, clearly told I only wanted this check, no shop to others. I brought in a Capital One Auto Finance letter valid at Luther Nissan Kia on April 18, 2015 to look at trading on a new(er) vehicle. I was very specific with the sales person, ****, that I ONLY wanted Capital One checked to see if I qualified, that I DID NOT want to be shopped to any number of other finance options. I was ASSURED by **** that Capital One would be the only source they would check as I was already preapproved. After several minutes **** came back to me and told me that I was approved for a 2015 Nissan Sentra, and had me test drive it. He told me that the only missing piece of info was my most recent pay stub, and that I should bring that in and then I would sign all of the paperwork. I have come to find out that the dealership shopped me to 12 other finance companies without my approval, which has caused my credit score to drop 15 points since April 18, 2015. See below list of hard inquiries on my credit since my visit to Luther Nissan Kia: AMERICREDIT FINANCIA Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax FLAGSHIP CRE Finance Apr 20, 2015 TransUnion CAPITAL ONE Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax WELLS FARGO DEALER S Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax JPMORGAN CHASE BANK Bank Apr 20, 2015 Equifax CONSUMER PORTFOLIO S Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax ALLY FINANCIAL Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax FIRST INVESTORS FIN Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax JPMORGAN CHASE BANK Finance Apr 20, 2015 Equifax EXETER FIN Finance Apr 20, 2015 TransUnion KMF Finance Apr 20, 2015 TransUnion COAF Finance Apr 20, 2015 TransUnion CREDCO Miscellaneous Apr 18, 2015 Equifax & TransUnion The only authorized finance institution was Capital One Auto Finance. I was verbally assured by ****, as well as Finance reps *************, that only Capital One was being submitted. **** also told me that he had a hard approval from Capital One. I called Capital One Auto Finance on April 21, 2015 and there were multiple applications in my name ad Social Security number, both with denails for approval. Not only was I lied to that there was an approval, I was lied to that they were only shopping Capital One Auto Finance. I am in a credit repairing status on my credit and DID NOT want to be shopped to multiple locations as I know the negative affect that has on a credit score. The finance department at Luther Nissan Kia did not operate in my best interest as a consumer, they did what they wanted to do in trying to make a sale. This has negatively affected my credit score due to the 12 unauthorized inquiries they made without my consent. The General Manager, ************, called me at my office number on April 22, 2015 and showed no interest in taking responsibility for his finance departments unauthorized use of my personal information. He threatened to hang up on me rather than listen to and take responsibility for poor business practices.
Desired Settlement: I want the dealership to contact all 3 credit bureaus so that my credit score is repaired immediately due to the 12 unauthorized hard inquiries which adversely affected my credit score.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/04/30) */ In response to Ms. *******'s concerns, we apologize for her frustration on this situation. Ms. ******* did sign the credit application clearly stating it may be sent to multiple financial institutions, and we apologize for any misunderstanding regarding that. We do our best to find an acceptable loan for all of our customers so they may purchase the vehicle they want, and that is what we did for her as well. We work with multiple banks, and we work very hard on our customer's behalf to obtain an acceptable approval. This sometimes includes contacting multiple banks to compare the rates offered. We did have the approval with Capital One. However, this included some conditions, and Ms. ******* could not verify her stated income to make this approval work. Our customers come to us in hopes of leaving with a new car, and we do our best to help them with that. We do apologize that it could not work out in this case. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/04/30) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Capital One Can verify there was NEVER an approval, only the PRE APPROVAL letter that I brought in. I spoke directly with Capital One Auto Finance, and was told that 2 applications were submitted and BOTH were denied. Additionally, I was told that I had to sign the credit authorization in order for the dealership to speak with Capital One Auto Finance. I was VERY clear that I only wanted them to source Capital One, that I DID NOT want to be shopped to ANY other source. The dealership completely disreagarded that and did it anyway against my will. They used my personal information and outsorced it without my consent. I was Verbally assured that only Capital One Auto Finance was being looked at. This was never an issue of me veryifying my stated income. That was never in question as I supplied the dealership with my pay stub, so it was clear and in black and white what my income was. I feel the dealership is attempting to hide the fact that they used my Social Security number in an unauthorized fashion. If you would like to contact Capital One Auto Finance they will relay to you that there was never an approval under my information.
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: I am very disappointed by the response I have received at both the dealership and corporate level regarding a series of serious vehicle failures. In October 2011, as the current owner of a Kia Spectra that I was very happy with, I purchased a 2009 Kia Borrego (VIN# *****************) from the same dealership I had purchased my earlier car. The vehicle performed well and was maintained by my husband and me. At the end of April 2014, the Borrego's check engine light came on and I brought it to the dealership to be looked at on May 1. The diagnostic code was P0018. I was told by the dealership that the problem was with the oil control valve and quoted $793 to make that repair. I was later contacted (May 6) and told that the faulty oil control valve caused additional damage and that the bank 2 camshaft and sprocket would also need to be replaced. The new total was $2364. We agreed to have the repairs completed. There were issues getting the correct parts and the vehicle was finally able to be picked up May 16. I drove the vehicle towards my home, but after stopping on an errand on the way the home, the vehicle would not start and had to be towed back to the dealership ($90). We were told that the starter had failed and that it would cost $469.56 to repair it. I picked the vehicle up when the work was completed on May 22. I drove the vehicle until July 16 (I only drive 3 miles each way to work) when the check engine light came on and the vehicle started running very rough. I had the Borrego hooked up to a computer at the parts store and learned that the codes were P0346 and P0175. I contacted the dealership and was told to bring the vehicle into the dealership. I attempted to drive it to the dealership on Saturday (July 19), but the vehicle stalled on the freeway before I could reach the dealership and needed to be towed ($86). On Tuesday, July 22, I was contacted by the dealership and told that the problem had nothing to do with any of the previous work, that they recommended replacing the engine and that it would cost at least $7400 - 8200. I currently owe $10,000 on the Borrego. According to the dealership, the used engine alone would cost $5200 ( with 77,000 miles and 12mo/12k mile warranty) - $6100 (with 42,000 miles and 12mo/12k mile warranty). I have found used engines for that model vehicle online with a similar warranty for nearly half that price. Regardless, a vehicle that has been driven conservatively and responsibly should not require a new engine when only five years old and with less than 66,000 miles on it. I went back to Kia for this vehicle because I had a very positive experience with my other Kia. I feel very disappointed at this point in both the quality of the product I was sold and the service that was provided by the dealership. I am exploring my options, but may end up just junking the vehicle and continuing to make the payments. I cannot afford to double the debt associated with this vehicle and, frankly, I am not confident that if I did it, it would be worth it. My family cannot manage with only one vehicle, so I do not know what I can do. I have contacted KIA Consumer Affairs and have received no assistance. I sought assistance with repairing the vehicle or assistance satisfying my current auto loan with an understanding that I would then purchase a new Kia model. I would appreciate a response to this complaint. Sincerely, **********************
Desired Settlement: I would either like the vehicle repaired at a greatly reduced cost or have the remaining auto loan satisfied and purchase a new Kia vehicle from the dealership.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2014/08/12) */ Good Morning, This is just an update to this complaint. I do not have a resolution yet. This is a manufacturer issue and not fault of the dealer. As the dealer rep I have reached out the the Kia District rep and this morning to the Kia regional consumer affairs rep. I will be updating the case when I have more information from the Kia regional office or the district rep. We do want a fair resolution for the consumer and will do all we can to assist in this. Final Business Response /* (4000, 13, 2014/08/12) */ Customer has agreed to terms of the repair.
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: KIA is unable to fix a problem with a new Sorento and will not respond to my replacement request. I purchased a new KIA Sorento at the end of Dec 2013. The ESC (skid control) dash light came on and my wife took it in. It took Kia 7 calendar days to resolve. A week later (Jan 30), the problem came back, including the ABS dash light. KIA has worked on it for a day with no progress. The car has less than 170 miles on it. I contacted both KIA Corp, and the dealer's General Sales Mgr and requested a replacement. No one has answered my request.
Desired Settlement: I do not want this defective vehicle - it is a defect and KIA should take it back. I want a replacement vehicle with no additional cost to me. I want it acted on immediately.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2014/02/03) */ We have an appointment with this custoemr this evening, 2/3, and plan to replace the vehicle for him. Please let me know if any further information is needed. Thank you. Consumer Response /* (3000, 12, 2014/03/17) */ Received e-mail from consumer, indicating that he'd experienced difficulties accessing his complaint, but wished to inform the BBB that the matter was resolved to his satisfaction in February: "It was solved very much to my satisfaction, and the KIA dealership went above and beyond to solve my problem."
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: LUTHER NISSAN KIA SOLD ME A 2010 TOYOTA COROLLA on May 29, 2012. MILEAGE=34340. NEGLECTED TO TELL ME THAT IT HAD A DAMAGED REAR AXLE. LOSS $2945.06 Luther Nissan KIA (Metro Motors, LLC) sold me a 2010 Toyota Corolla on May 29, 2012. It had four balding tires just 1/32" away from being street illegal and the car's rear bumper had a bad paint job and needed to be buffed out. I asked the Used Car Manager to replace the four balding tires before I bought the car. I pointed out to him that the tires had excessive tread wear for just 34,340 miles on them. He refused to replace the tires and said they still had 1/32" of tread left on them. What I did not know prior to buying the car was that it had a damaged rear axle. The damaged rear axle was a pre-existing condition and the Used Car Salesman and Used Car Manager neglected to inform me of this prior to buying the car. Had I known the car had a damaged rear axle, I would not have purchased it. Car dealers generally have a higher disclosure obligation than an ordinary consumer would when selling cars. Wrecked and repaired cars can be dangerous because you don't know the quality of the repair job or the repairman. There is a big difference in value between a car that has never been wrecked and one that has, even when the repairs are done right. It's called "diminished value" and it means your car is worth much less than one that was not wrecked and repaired. I am concerned that Nissan KIA (Metro Motors, LLC) knew something about the car and realized that I would like to know about it as well. But they choose not to disclose it and instead kept the information concealed. How did I find out about the damaged rear axle? After buying the 2010 Toyota Corolla, I found out from three different certified Dealerships that my car had a damaged rear axle. They each noted that the rear axle had non-manufacture weld beads and the welding job was poorly done. The four balding tires were just 1/32" away from being street illegal and needed to be replaced. Luther Nissan KIA refused to replace them before I bought the car so I now had to pay out of pocket for new tires. Best practices say, after buying new tires, have a four wheel alignment done to ensure safe road handling and ensure the tire tread wears evenly. Four tires were installed but the first certified Dealership was unable to complete a four wheel alignment because the rear axle was bent. Concerned, I took the car to a small certified Toyota Dealership. They too were unable to complete a four wheel alignment because of a bent rear axle. The technician noted that the rear axle was bent because it was damaged,and it did not match manufacture welds and that the repair was a poor weld job and bad bead placement. Wrecked and repaired cars can be dangerous because you don't know the quality of the repair job or the repairman. I was so concerned for the safety of the driver, I took the 2010 Toyota Corolla to a big volume Toyota Dealership in Fargo, ND and had the rear axle replaced. The Technician came out to talk with me and he said that indeed the rear axle was damaged. He also noted that the rear axle was bent because it was damaged, did not match manufacture welds and that the repair was a poor weld job and bad bead placement. He gave me the damaged rear axle to take home. I currently have it in my garage. I bought the car with 34,340 miles on the tires and the tires were almost bald with very little tread wear. The reason why the tread wear was worn away is because the rear axle was bent and damaged prior to my buying the car. Luther Nissan KIA (Metro Motors, LLC) sold me a 2010 Toyota Corolla with a damaged rear axle, four bald tires prematurely worn at 34,340 miles (1/32" away from being street illegal) and a rear bumper that had a paint coating not matching the rest of the car.
Desired Settlement: I am asking for a fair and well documented reimbursement of $2,945.06 for my loss and out of pocket expenses that was used to replace a damaged rear axle, 4 wheel alignment and 4 new tires. What I bought from Luther Nissan KIA on May 29, 2012 was a damaged car. The rear axle was damaged and out of alignment causing the tire tread to wear down prematurely, and the rear bumper paint job was not the original paint job. Given all three facts, I believe the car was in an accident and Luther Nissan KIA neglected to notify me of this prior to buying the car. Car dealers generally have a higher disclosure obligation than an ordinary consumer would when selling cars. I chose not to bring the 2010 Toyota Corolla to Luther Nissan KIA (Metro Motors, LLC) for the following repairs because the car was being used out of state, and because I did not trust Luther Nissan KIA. After all, they sold me the 2010 Toyota Corolla with a damaged rear axle, 4 bald tires (because of the bent rear axle) and a car with a mismatch paint job on the rear bumper. I also read the other 9 complaints on the BBB website and was convince not to take the car back to Luther Nissan KIA (Metro Motors, LLC) for remediation. I am asking for a fair and well documented reimbursement of $2,945.06 for my loss and out of pocket expenses that was used to replace a damaged rear axle, 4 wheel alignment and 4 new tires. LOSS AND OUT OF POCKET EXPENSE DETAILS: UNSAFE DAMAGED REAR AXLE REPLACED Corwin Toyota, 222 40th Street South, Fargo, North Dakota Replace rear axle and bushings($584.10) Beam SUB-ASSY, RR AX($1384.44) Bush, RR Suspension($226.82) Rotate tires (uneven wear from bent axle, rotation needed)($19.95) Sub total($2,195.36) Sales Tax ($140.79) Total compensation for damaged rear axle($2,336.15) UNSAFE DAMAGED REAR AXLE CAUSED EXCESSIVE TREADWEAR ON ORIGINAL TIRES. ONLY 34,340 MILES. 1/32" FROM BEING STREET ILLEGAL. USED CAR MANAGER REFUSED TO REPLACE PRIOR TO CAR PURCHASE. Lithia Ford Lincoln of Grand Forks, 2273 32nd Avenue South, Grand Forks, North Dakota Mount/Balance 4 tires($58.00) Replaced bald tires with 4 new tires($425.28) 4 Tire Disposal($12.00) 4 Wheel weights($9.00) Other misc. charges($12.00) Sub total ($504.28) Sales Tax($30.12) Total compensation for bald tires because of damaged rear axle($534.40) ATTEMPTED TO DO A FOUR-WHEEL ALIGHNMENT, UNABLE TO COMPLETE ALIGHNMENT DO TO PRE-EXISITING CONDITION OF BENT REAR AXLE Lithia Toyota of Grand Forks, 2473 32nd Avenue South, Grand Forks, ND 58201 Labor($69.95) Misc charges($4.56) Total compensation for four-wheel alignment ($74.51) TOTAL LOSS AND OUT OF POCKET EXPENSE ($2,945.06) I am asking for a fair and well documented reimbursement of $2,945.06 for my loss and out of pocket expenses to replace a damaged rear axle, 4 wheel alignment and 4 new tires. I have the damaged rear axle in my garage and will be glad to bring it to Luther Nissan KIA as proof that they sold me a 2010 Toyota Corolla with a damaged rear axle. Three certified Dealerships agree with me. I can understand how frustrated Luther Nissan KIA must feel, but by sending me a check for $2,945.06 they will then have done all they can do. Thank you.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2014/02/18) */ I apologize, but we are unable to reimburse the expenses Mr. ***** has incurred. We also have this complaint with the Attorney General; I will send all the correspondence to the BBB as well. This vehicle was sold in good faith with no knowledge of any issues. We did address any and all of Mr. *****'s concerns, even after he had his personal mechanic perform a pre-purchase inspection. Even in this inspection, a bent axle was never mentioned or brought to our attention. Our biggest concern with this complaint is we were not even contacted regarding any issues until after 16 months of ownership by Mr. *****. We did correct multiple things at the time of purchase as requested by the customer. We in no way tried to deceive or misrepresent anything to this customer; we do not practice that at our dealership. We value our relationships with our custoemrs, but do not see his request for a full reimbursement a reasonable resolution for this situation. Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 12, 2014/02/19) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Thank you BBB of MN/ND for a public place to file a complaint against Luther Nissan KIA (Metro Motors LLC) 1470 50th Street East, Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55077. When I filed my BBB complaint against Luther Nissan KIA, I joined 9 other people who also filed complaints on your web site with the same Dealership, Luther Nissan KIA. On your web site you encourage each of us to first attempt to resolve our complaints directly with the company. I will assume each of the nine others did this making over 18 complaint contacts to Luther Nissan KIA. My 4 attempts make 22 contacts to Luther Nissan KIA to get a complaint resolved. I tried 4 times to recover my loss and out of pocket expenses of $2,945.06 prior to registering my complaint with the BBB. Here is a history of my reaching out to Luther Nissan KIA: 1ST OPPORTUNITY Personal email sent August 17, 2013 to General Manager, Luther Nissan KIA. I asked for reimbursement of my loss and out of pocket expenses. General Manager called me and said he would not reimburse me for my loss and out of pocket expenses. 2ND OPPORTUNITY Personal email sent August 26, 2013 to General Manager, Luther Nissan KIA. I asked for reimbursement of my loss and out of pocket expenses. I summarized our August 17, 2013 conversation on the phone and asked that the General Manager change his refusal to reimburse me for my loss and out of pocket expenses. General Manager again refused to reimburse me for my loss and out of pocket expenses. 3RD OPPORTUNITYContacted the State of Minnesota, Office of the Attorney General for assistance in recovering my loss and out of pocket expenses. August 28, 2013. The Office of the Attorney General mentioned they have other complaints against Luther Nissan KIA but are unable to make them public. The Attorney General's Office sent the General Manager of Luther Nissan KIA a letter on my behalf requesting that he address my concerns and my request for reimbursement for my loss and out of pocket expenses. Again the General Manager refused both me and the Attorney General's Office to reimburse me for my loss. 4th OPPORTUNITY I contacted the State of Minnesota, Office of the Attorney General for assistance in recovering my loss and out of pocket expenses. November 5, 2013. I asked for an opportunity for a rebuttal. The Attorney General's Office sent the General Manager of Luther Nissan KIA a 2nd letter on my behalf requesting that he address my additional concerns and my request for reimbursement for my loss and out of pocket expenses. Again Luther Nissan KIA refused both me and the Attorney General's Office to reimburse me for my loss. 5th OPPORTUNITY Thank you again BBB of MN/ND for a public place to file my 5th complaint against Luther Nissan KIA. Luther Nissan KIA has again refused to reimburse me for my loss and expense of $2,945.06. Here is Luther Nissan KIA's standard response as seen with the other 9 complaints on the BBB website: START "I apologize, but we are unable to reimburse the expenses "...customer..." has incurred. We also have this complaint with the Attorney General; I will send all the correspondence to the BBB as well. This vehicle was sold in good faith with no knowledge of any issues. We did address any and all of "...customer's..." concerns, even after he had his personal mechanic perform a pre-purchase inspection. Even in this inspection, a bent axle was never mentioned or brought to our attention. Our biggest concern with this complaint is we were not even contacted regarding any issues until after 16 months of ownership by the "...customer..." We did correct multiple things at the time of purchase as requested by the customer. We in no way tried to deceive or misrepresent anything to this customer; we do not practice that at our dealership. We value our relationships with our customers, but do not see his request for a full reimbursement a reasonable resolution for this situation."END SURPRISED I am surprised that Luther Nissan KIA would not value a relationship with me as a customer and not offer a fair reasonable resolution to my loss, that they would send this message to all BBB readers. I am asking for a fair and well documented reimbursement of $2,945.06 for my loss and out of pocket expenses to replace a damaged rear axle, 4 wheel alignment and 4 new tires. I have the damaged rear axle in my garage and will be glad to bring it to Luther Nissan KIA as proof that they sold me a 2010 Toyota Corolla with a damaged rear axle. Three certified Dealerships agree with me. If Luther Nissan KIA wants to change their mind, I will be glad to update the information here at the BBB website. Until they change their mind, I will have to state, I DO NOT ACCEPT THE RESPONSE FROM THE COMPANY. Luther Nissan KIA had 5 opportunities to fix my problem and reimburse me for my loss and expenses. Instead, Luther Nissan KIA of Inver Grove Heights has chosen not value me as a customer and has failed to show good effort in bringing this to a reasonable resolution. WHY DOESN'T' LUTHER NISSAN KIA WANT TO SEE THE REAR AXLE? Not once did Luther Nissan KIA ask to see the damaged rear axle. They instead want to focus on how long it took for me to bring up the issue of a damaged rear axle. What they chose to not tell the reader is that I was laid off from my job, underwent chemotherapy for an illness and struggled to pay for automobile services. It took a while to get my health back, of course it wasn't 16 months. The time issue is a distraction from the real fact I have a damaged rear axle they do not want to see. As I mentioned in my complaint, I would be glad to bring the damaged rear axle over to their Inver Grove Heights Dealership, and have their General Manager, Auction Buyer, Service Department Manager, Used Car Manager and Salesman take a look at it. No one has called me and invited me to bring over the damaged rear axle as of today. THERE MUST BE A REASON WHY LUTHER NISSAN KIA DOES NOT WANT TO SEE THE DAMAGE REAR AXLE What I bought from Luther Nissan KIA on May 29, 2012 was a damaged car. The rear axle was damaged and out of alignment causing the tire tread to wear down prematurely, and the rear bumper paint job was not the original paint job. Given all three facts, I believe the car was in an accident and Luther Nissan KIA failed to notify me of this prior to buying the car. I was surprised that Luther Nissan KIA's Auction Buyer did not notice the car was damaged, that the Service Department Manager missed the damaged car during his inspection, that the Used Car Manager allowed the car to be put on the car lot with bald tires, and that the Salesman chose to sell it. None of the Managers came forward to disclose that the car was damaged. Car dealers generally have a higher disclosure obligation than an ordinary consumer would when selling cars. I chose not to bring the 2010 Toyota Corolla to Luther Nissan KIA for the following repairs because the car was being used out of state, and because I did not trust Luther Nissan KIA. After all, they sold me the 2010 Toyota Corolla with a damaged rear axle, 4 bald tires (because of the bent rear axle) and bad rear bumper paint job. I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW FRUSTRATED LUTHER NISSAN KIA MUST FEEL ABOUT THIS. After all, Luther Nissan KIA's General Manager, the Auction Buyer, Service Department Manager, Used Car Manager and Salesman missed what three Service Department technicians at three separate Certified Dealerships, Corwin Toyota Fargo, ND, Lithia Ford Lincoln of Grand Forks, ND, and Lithia Toyota of Grand Forks, ND found, a damaged rear axle. I believe in giving Luther Nissan KIA opportunities. Up to know, I have given Luther Nissan KIA 5 opportunities to reimburse me for my loss and expense of $2,945.06. They have declined me each time. Here is a 6th OPPORTUNITY: I still have the damaged rear axle in my garage and would be glad to drive it over to Luther Nissan KIA. Should they change their mind, and send me a check for $2,945.06, I will be glad to remove my response I DO NOT ACCEPT THE RESPONSE FROM THE COMPANY. Thank you BBB for the opportunity to let others know about my complaint against Luther Nissan KIA and that I do not accept Luther Nissan KIA's response. Final Business Response /* (4000, 17, 2014/03/11) */ In response to the additional complaint from Mr. *****, we are still not able to reimburse his expense. We do not in any way question he has had a damaged axle or problems because of it. However, we do know this axle was not damaged at the time we sold the vehicle to him. Our Service Department did not find it damaged in their very thorough inspection, nor did his personal mechanic in thier inspection prior to Mr. *****'s purchase. We addressed every concern of Mr. *****'s at the time of purchase. The only one we did not agree to was replacing all four tires. He at no time mentioned any issues with the axle; this was not brought to our attention until he had owned the vehicle for over 16 months! So although we can understand the frustration associated with vehicle repairs, we cannot reimburse him as this vehicle was not sold to Mr. ***** with any axle damage. Thank you.
Problems with Product/Service
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: improper repair, refused to refund me back $800 and my car still not fixed I started to have a misfiring issue with me car, so I took it to a shop in South St. Paul and he said that it's a crank sensor that is bad. After he changed it, the car still not fixed, so he did not charge me anything and asked me to take it to the dealer to do full diagnose on it. I went to Nissan Dealer IGH to have them do the full diagnose and fix the problem. They started with a sensor issue that was already new. I told them I just replaced it and the car still not fixed. They were very sure it's the problem. I spend $300 for diagnose and repair of the sensor and just as I'm leaving the dealer, the car started to misfire again. *****, is an advisor, offered to look at it again at no charge, so I took it back to the dealer and they said it's a coil that was bad, I spend another $200. Same problem happened again and third time. So I spend total of $800 and the car still not fixed. I took the car to pepboys to do a full diagnose on it. They charged me $80 for it and they found out it was the head gasket was leaking coolant into the coil, so they said it's not the coil that is bad but it is much bigger problem. They told me that if the dealer looked physically into the coil they would see that gasket is the main problem and not the coil itself. I went back to the dealer to show them the report and they were very angry that I took the care somewhere else. They refused to give me back my money. They also did not admit improper diagnose.
Desired Settlement: $800.00 pay back to me.
Business Response: Business' Initial Response /* (1000, 6, 2013/07/24) */ Although we can understand Mr. *******'s frustrations on this situation, we cannot offer a full refund for services performed. The customer's vehicle was repaired in good faith with the customer's authorization based on the Manufacturer's diagnostic codes stored in the vehicle's computer. These were the necessary repairs at the time the diagnosis was made, and these repairs are unrelated to the current problem with the head gasket. We have offered to repair the head gasket at a substantial discount for the customer; he has declined. Vehicle repairs are very frustrating. However, as vehicles age, they do happen. We do our very best at repairing the vehicles and satisfying the customers' needs as efficiently and cost effectively as we can. Although we cannot offer a refund for the services performed to this point, we will assist Mr. ******* by repairing the head gasket as needed at a discounted rate as previously discussed with him. Consumer's Final Response /* (3000, 8, 2013/07/25) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I paid $99 for a full diagnostic and not to just read a Manufacturer's Code for a check engine light. I get this code read anywhere for nothing!!!!!!!!! Sorry to say that, it's a great professional way of responding to back up dealer's fully improper full diagnostic. I did get what I paid for but not what I came for