If yes, click here to login.
BBB Accredited Business sinceAdditional Locations
BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.
This company offers new and used auto sales and services.
View Business Review Inquiries
A BBB Accredited Business since
BBB has determined that Fiat of Kirkland 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 affect the rating for Fiat of Kirkland include:
- Length of time business has been operating
- Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
- Response to 3 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||1|
|Total Closed Complaints||3|
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:
Type of Entity
Business ManagementMr. Greg Rairdon, President Mr. Micah Madche, Customer Relations Manager
Auto Dealers - New Cars New Car Dealers (NAICS: 441110)
Hours of OperationMonday - Friday
7:00am - 7:00pm
8:00am - 5:00pm
Alternate Business NamesFOK Inc
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: On March 28th, 2016, I contacted the Service Department at Rairdon of Kirkland to get information on scheduling a 30,000 Mile Scheduled Maintenance for my 2012 Fiat 500, which had 32,000 miles on it. At that time, I was told that such service would cost approximately $400.00. One week later, on April 4th, I called the Service Department to obtain an appointment, stating that the reason was for my 30,000 Mile Scheduled Maintenance. I was scheduled for the next morning. On April 5th I arrived at the Rairdon Service Department and talked to Robert L********. I state, again, that I was there for my scheduled maintenance. Mr. L******** presented a work order. He stated, “This is what we do.” He proceeded to read several of the items on the sheet, including a flush of both the injectors and brake lines. Price-$661 (later changes to $668). I was surprised by the amount and told Mr. L******** about the $400 estimate. He said, “Well, we could back these things out (flush of both systems) and get you down to that amount. As I plan to keep my car for a long a time, I said, “if that is part of what needs to be done, then I guess we should do it.” At no time during this conversation did Mr. L******** indicate that flushing both systems were not items on the scheduled maintenance checklist. I picked up my car on the same day and was told the price was $732. Mr. L******** failed to state the copy of the final paperwork is attached. When I got home I went to my Owner’s Manual. Flushes of the injectors or the brake lines are not listed as maintenance items on any of the mileage benchmarks. Three times I asked for the 30,000 Mile Scheduled Maintenance. At no time did I ask for any extra services. Mr. L******** did not indicate he was including additional items outside of those listed on the maintenance schedule. This was misleading at best, outright dishonest at worst.
Desired Settlement: I am requesting a refund for the two items not listed on the maintenance schedule, $339.19, which includes sales tax.
As the customer describes, although some of the the maintenance suggested is not scheduled maintenance as outlined in the vehicle's owner's manual, it was recommended to him by our service department in order to keep his vehicle in good running order. Often, additional services beyond the bare minimum recommended by the manufacturer is wise to perform for optimal performance.
The customer was aware of this, and signed an authorization for the amount of money he was charged before work was performed. We have attached a copy of the authorization form which he signed.
About the only thing the response was correct about was signing the form. At no point was I told these were services in addition to the scheduled maintenance as I would have declined them. It is irrelevant that there may be recommended additional services; the failure to advise me that they were additional services is the issue. The authorization was signed under the impression that only scheduled mainenence was being performed. Again, on three separate occasions I stated I wanted scheduled maintenance, nothing more, nothing less. It would appear that the service tech is going to stand behind his clear misrepresentation. As he stated, "This is what we do."
If a refund is desired for the items performed which were not recommended as basic services described in the owner's manual, this may be accomplished by contacting the service manager, Robert L********. Should the customer decide to opt for this refund, we must respectfully request that he have future services performed at another location.
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: Fiat of Kirkland signed a lease contract with me stipulating that first payment would be due 30 days after the signing. However, the dealer submitted paperwork to ******** ******* indicating that an additional payment was due (and unpaid) on the date the lease was signed. Furthermore, a few days after the close of the transaction, Fiat of Kirkland demanded that I sign new contract immediately due to "errors." I scrambled to get the contract signed but Fiat of Kirkland never provided me with the reasons for the new contract nor a copy of the new contract. Despite 6 calls and messages to the finance representative and the dealership, I received no return calls to explain or rectify the issue. These behaviors have not only resulted in me having to make extra payments to ******** ******* but it also smacks of unfair (at best) or unsavory (at worst) business practices.
Desired Settlement: Fiat of Kirkland should do the following: (1) reimburse me (or pay ******** ******* on my behalf) the sum of $192.40, which is equivalent to one payment that was added to my account due to the dealership error, (2) provide me with a copy of the final contract that is binding between Fiat of Kirkland, ******** ******* and myself, (3) extend to me a courtesy of (a) free oil change/car service and (b) a free car detailing service as a way to make amends for the trouble caused to me due to their errors and their lack of efforts to resolve the issue.
Business Response: We apologize for the miscommunication. We will gladly reimburse our customer for 1 payment as well as providing an oil change, car wash, and vacuum at their convenience. The check and copies of their contract will be available at the dealership. We will contact our customer when the check is available for them to pick up.
Read Complaint Details
Complaint: we purchased a 2014 fiat 500L on 2/8/2014 from *******. we were shown one model with a sunroof on it and were ultimately quoted a price for the vehicle along with a trade-in value for our car. we decided that we did not need the sunroof and were subsequently shown another identical car w/o the sunroof option. we were then quoted a new price of $1100.00 higher than the previous quote even though our new option was w/o the one expensive option. in spite of this bait- and - switch tactic, we ultimately settled on a price of $200.00 higher than oru original quoted price and signed the documents. we took the car home and then started to do a little research on the price of these cars. (at this point,i must state that we were very naive and stupid in this purchase deal as we should have done our research prior to signing. but we trusted the people we were dealing with and felt that they were being honest with us.) the fair market value of the sale price for these cars was approximately $6000.00 less than what we had paid. further research showed that our car, not the exact vin#, but identical models to it, were currently being offered on web special prices for approximately $7500.00 less than or price. the trade-in value given for our car was approximately $1500.00 lower than the suggested Kelly Blue Book trade-in value. our car was given a value of $22500.00 and is currently for sale on their lot for $29,900.00, or something very close to that. we were never told of the true fair market value of our car, nor were we ever, at any time, told that they were, at that time, offering that car on a web special price significantly less than what we were charged, and asked if we would be interested inlooking at any of those models, even though they were identical to the one we were considering purchasing. we feel that we were very much taken advantage of on this deal, and lied to by not disclosing that the car was actually worth much less than what we were being charged, and could in fact be purchased for an even lower price than that due to current special pricing and advertising. we feel that this is illegal pricing and advertising, failure to disclose full and pertinent facts about the price of the car, a very illegal and immoral way of doing business. failure to do so on either of these options will result in immediate beginnings of legal action, which will not be good for either party but necessary as a choice of last resort. complaints will also be posted on available social media outlets if necessary, with every attempt possible being made on our part to damage the already questionable reputation of these salesmen involved and, unfortunately, the company name along with it, although neither of these have been done to this point.
Desired Settlement: we are requesting that the company either: 1)refund to us the price difference of of what were actually charged for the car and the current, at that time, web price being offered for the care of approxiamtely $7500.00 + tax., or 2) return oru original vehicle to us and we would do the same with our new vehicle to them, and refund to us the check we had written at the time of closing for $5090.00, minus a small fee of $500.00 - $1000.00 as a show of good faith on our part.
Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 10, 2014/02/21) */ The ***** make a number of allegations that are contrary to the facts they recite, and they are mistaken on many other factual matters. Each of the allegations against us is explored below, none of which allegations are true. Bait and Switch: By their own admission, they did not want to purchase the Fiat with a sun roof and elected to purchase one without that feature. We did not induce that decision; they made it which was their right. That is clearly not bait and switch. Price of Fiat: By their own admission, they knew the variance in the price between the two vehicles they considered and admit that they "ultimately settled on a price of $200.00 higher than (sic) original quoted price and signed the documents". Cars have different features and differing levels of supply and demand which affects pricing. They knowingly agreed to a price. We did not mislead them in any way. Post Purchase Research: After their purchase they apparently went on the web to discover various prices for different 2014 Fiat 500L's. Whether all of those were in our inventory or not we do not know, but as stated previously that is very common. But they do admit that none of the vehicles they saw on the web was the vehicle they purchased; we did not advertise the vehicle they purchased other than having a price posted on the car which was higher than what they paid. Trade in Value: The trade in was purchased by us at $22,831.61, not the figure they set forth in their complaint. They agreed to that price. We valued the vehicle at that in consideration of its condition, demand for such vehicles by our prospective customers, reconditioning and reported trade in values. In addition, the vehicle was appraised sight unseen, which placed a great amount of risk on our dealership. Had the vehicle not been as described, we certainly would not have asked the ***** to re-negotiate its value. We reconditioned the vehicle, performed maintenance on it, and put it in our used vehicle inventory. It has not yet sold which is evidence I suppose that the listed price is too high. Nothing improper was done in purchasing the trade vehicle. Illegal Pricing and Advertising: There was not any illegality in pricing our cars, nor any illegal advertising. We set our prices, as I commented earlier, on a number of factors and there is nothing illegal or unfair or deceptive of putting a price on a car and then selling it for less, as was done with the *****. And based on the earlier assertion of 'bait and switch' we would have been foolish to direct them to a car other than the one they selected and purchased knowing full well the price. Threat of Retaliation: The ***** threaten to disparage us concerning their purchase. Such a threat is reprehensible and amounts to extortion. Making such a threat certainly does not induce us to accede to the alternative proposals they set forth. There is freedom of speech, but the law does not allow commercial disparagement. We certainly hope the *****' will reconsider engaging in what they threaten as I submit they have nothing to gain and much to lose in doing that. ***** Proposed Resolutions: We cannot accept either of the *****' offers. Taking back a car sold new and now titled results in us having a used car that is worth much less than a new car. As we did nothing wrong we see no reason to do that, and to return of their trade vehicle which we on which we spent a good deal for reconditioning would similarly increase our loss. We also think the offer to pay them money in an amount of the purported difference in value is not acceptable or rational. Based on their multiple erroneous allegations, it appears that nothing we can possibly do will create customer satisfaction. They have already retained a lawyer who wrote to us and caused us to incur cost through our lawyer in responding to the allegation of selling a vehicle above the advertised price, a totally false allegation. Lastly, the retaliatory action the ***** threaten is unlikely to go away regardless of what we would be willing to do