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

Are you...?

If yes, click here to login.

Are you...?

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

Description

This company offers new and used car sales, auto parts, and tires. The business also offers auto repair services including brakes, oil changes, transmissions, alignments, diagnostics, and electrical work.


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Eric Von Schledorn Chevrolet Buick Cadillac 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 lowered the rating for Eric Von Schledorn Chevrolet Buick Cadillac include:

  • 6 complaint(s) filed against business

Factors that raised the rating for Eric Von Schledorn Chevrolet Buick Cadillac include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Response to 6 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

6 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 4 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 2
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 2
Problems with Product/Service 2
Total Closed Complaints 6

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

2 Customer Reviews on Eric Von Schledorn Chevrolet Buick Cadillac
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 2
Total Customer Reviews 2

Additional Information

BBB file opened: July 17, 1996 Business started: 03/28/1990 in WI Business started locally: 03/28/1990 Business incorporated 03/28/1990 in WI
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:

Wisconsin Department of Transportation
4802 Sheboygan Avenue, P.O. Box 7910, Madison WI 53707
http://www.dot.state.wi.us
Phone Number: (800) 924-3570
driverrecords.dmv@dot.wi.gov

Wisconsin Dept of Financial Institutions
345 W Washington Ave, Madison WI 53703
http://www.wdfi.org
Phone Number: (608) 261-9555
Fax Number: (608) 261-7200
askthesecretary@dfi.state.wi.us

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Mr. Eric Von Schledorn, Owner/President Ms. Jennifer Wenzel, Office Manager
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Eric Von Schledorn, Owner/President
Customer Contact: Ms. Jennifer Wenzel, Office Manager
Business Category

Auto Dealers - New Cars Auto Dealers - Used Cars Auto Parts & Supplies - New Tire Dealers Auto Diagnostic Service Auto Electric Service Auto Repair & Service Brake Service Lubricating Service - Automotive Radiators - Automotive Transmissions - Automobile Wheel Alignment, Frame & Axle Service - Auto Auto Dealers - Online General Automotive Repair (NAICS: 811111)

Alternate Business Names
Ernie Von Schledorn Saukville, Inc.
Industry Tips
Auto Repair and Services Auto-Buyback Guarantee-Terms & Conditions for Consumers Flood-Damaged Cars Protecting Your Auto Repair Investment

Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Summary

Eric Von Schledorn Chevrolet Buick Cadillac has received 0 out of 5 stars based on 0 Customer Reviews and a BBB Rating of B+.

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview

Additional Locations

  • 805 E Green Bay Ave

    Saukville, WI 53080 (262) 988-4298 (262) 284-8000 (800) 648-6789 (888) 692-0955

X

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.
Details

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)

5/19/2015 Guarantee/Warranty Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I bought a used car from this dealership less than a month ago that was advertised as the deluxe model, including navigation system. I opted to purchase the full bumper-to-bumper warranty because the sales manager had assured me this would cover the navigation system if something were to go wrong. I had my car worked on for a fuel gage concern, and when I picked the car up, the navigation system was not working properly. When I immediately brought it to the attention of the service manager, he shared it was an after factory installation that would not be covered by the extended warranty I purchased. I spoke to a number of people, including the salesperson who sold me the car- and all are stating that it was an after factory install therefore they will not touch it, even though the problem occurred while in their possession. Never was it told to me that the navigation system was an after factory install, nor would I have anticipated that it would have been considering it was advertised as being the deluxe model including navigation system. When I asked specifically during the time of purchase if the warranty would cover the navigation system in my car, I was told yes. Again, it was never disclosed to me that the navigation system was an after factory install and no where in the paperwork/advertisement does it disclose this information.

Desired Settlement: I would like this dealership to repair the areas of my navigation system that were broken during the repair of my fuel gage. I also want my warranty to include what I was assured would be covered.

Business Response: Our staff worked directly with Mr. ****** and believe that all matters have been addressed and issues resolved.

Consumer Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

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. 

Regards,

 

****** ******

 

 

 

4/27/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: A set of four new installed tires was noted on the sales contract as part of the deal. When I went to have the tires installed, I noticed that they wanted to put on "T" rated tires, instead of the required "V" rated tires. I caught this error before the work was completed, and the service man ordered the required "V" rated tires to put on the following day, and sent me home in a loaner. Before doing so, they tried telling me that the "T" rated tires would be fine. After looking into it, I learned that the sidewalls of the "T" rated tire were not strong enough to handle the suspension on a "V" rated car. Not only could the sidewalls blow by driving over 118 mph (they told me that if I didn't drive over 118 mph, I would be fine), the sidewalls were not strong enough for turns, and that the rollover of the sidewalls while turning could blow the tire. I contacted many tire dealers, and they all stated that no reputable dealer would put "T" rated tires on a "V" rated car. Totally Unsafe! I thought I had the problem resolved when the service man ordered the required "V" rated tires to be put on the following day. However the following day, instead of receiving a call that my car was finished and ready to be picked up with the "V" tires, I received a call saying that the car was finished, but they went ahead and installed the "T" rated tires. I honestly could not believe what I was hearing. I called and talked with the service man ... he said he was just in the middle, and couldn't do anything. That I needed to talk with someone else. So, I called the salesman that sold us the vehicle. I reached his voicemail, and left a message explaining the situation. Also, I had noticed that we were double charged taxes on the tires and installation, which I brought to their attention, but has not yet been resolved.

Desired Settlement: Would like the required "V" rated tires put on the vehicle so that it is safe to drive. Also, would like a refund for the difference in being double charged for the taxes on the tires and installation. Shouldn't have to go through all of this trouble and aggravation to get what should have been in the first place.

Business Response:  I was asked to get involved in this situation this afternoon regarding the tires and have done some investigating on both the behalf of the customer and the dealership.  The tires that were initially ordered by the salesman and okayed by the customer prior to installation are not unsafe however, they would not provide the comfort level that you would expect from a Lincoln. We(the dealership) decided that at some point there was a lack of communication or a misunderstanding between the customer and the sales person so we elected to waive the cost difference between the different tires and the reinstall price. The V rated tires have been installed and the vehicle is ready to be taken. Through this process the service department has made every effort to accommodate the customer and address her concerns. 

Business Response:

Good morning,

 This email is to help clear up any confusion regarding the safety of the tires that had been initially selected for the 2007 Lincoln MKZ and to address the concern of an overcharge of $24.21 in tax. We have issued a check in the amount of $24.21 to Mr. ****** ******** after discussing the issue with our finance personnel and confirming the error. The claim that the tires were going to be unsafe is an absolute false statement and goes without research. The consumer refers to V and T ratings as if that is the tires capability to carry a load, it is actually the speed rating of the tire. The original tire to be installed was GM part number 19253331 Uniroyal Tiger Paw Touring 94T and the tire which was ultimately installed was GM part number 19194841 Uniroyal Tiger Paw Touring 94V, I am providing information describing the load and speed rating from an independent source (Tire Rack) obtained from the following site *********************************************************************************************************************************************** that will confirm my statements.

 

Load Index

Pounds

Kilograms

Load Index

Pounds

Kilograms

71

761

345

91

1356

615

72

783

355

92

1389

630

73

805

365

93

1433

650

74

827

375

94

1477

670

75

853

387

95

1521

690

76

882

400

96

1565

710

77

908

412

97

1609

730

78

937

425

98

1653

750

79

963

437

99

1709

775

80

992

450

100

1764

800

81

1019

462

101

1819

825

82

1047

475

102

1874

850

83

1074

487

103

1929

875

84

1102

500

104

1984

900

85

1135

515

105

2039

925

86

1168

530

106

2094

950

87

1201

545

107

2149

975

88

1235

560

108

2205

1000

89

1279

580

109

2271

1030

90

1323

600

110

2337

1060

As shown in the graph the numerical portion of the tire rating (94) indicates the weight rating is exactly the same for both the tires in question thus being capable of the 2007 Lincoln MKZ gross vehicle weight of 5370lbs(Edmunds). The T and V indicate the speed rating and the recommended maximum speeds to which the manufacturer of the tire guarantees its integrity. Once again I have used an independent source (Tire Rack) to supply the explanation as follows:

 

L

75 mph

120 km/h

Off-Road & Light Truck Tires

M

81 mph

130 km/h

Temporary Spare Tires

N

87 mph

140km/h

P

93 mph

150 km/h

Q

99 mph

160 km/h

Studless & Studdable Winter Tires

R

106 mph

170 km/h

H.D. Light Truck Tires

S

112 mph

180 km/h

Family Sedans & Vans

T

118 mph

190 km/h

Family Sedans & Vans

U

124 mph

200 km/h

H

130 mph

210 km/h

Sport Sedans & Coupes

V

149 mph

240 km/h

Sport Sedans, Coupes & Sports Cars

As you can see from the graphs provided that the tire would not have become unsafe until the customer took their 2007 Lincoln MKZ up to 118 MPH with the T rated tires. Once again we as a dealership value our customers, their safety, and wish to resolve any concerns they may have in an efficient and convenient manner. 

 
Please feel free to contact me with any further questions and or concerns,

****** ** ****** ******* ******** **** *** ********* ********* ******** ***** ************

 

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Following is just one of many articles on the performance rating of a tire ... clearly, the only reason for not accepting the lower rated tires was safety.  I do now have the tires that are required, and as soon as I receive the reimbursement check for the overcharge, I will be satisfied.  Just want to reiterate that the performance rating is not just about speed.

******************************************       **** ***** ******

What is it about your tire that lets your vehicle brake in time when a child darts onto the street, or swerve to miss a deer bolting from a bush? It’s the stability of your tire’s tread, the construction of the carcass, the compound of the rubber. It’s your tire speed rating, or, to be more accurate, your tire’s performance rating.

People refer to that last letter of the tire size on the sidewall of your tires as ‘tire speed rating’—the maximum speed a tire can sustain for a certain period of time without risk of tire failure. But it’s not just about speed. It’s about performance— how your tires get rid of heat and how they brake, corner, grip and swerve just in time.

In fact, your safety depends on the performance rating of your tires, and yet many drivers aren’t aware of the role they play in keeping their rubber on the road. As you get ready to switch to summer tires, and if you’re doing your research or shopping online, you need to know the tire size as well as the tire speed rating recommended by your vehicle manufacturer. One tire size could come in multiple speed ratings.

And with road trips and hot summer asphalt around the corner, it’s even more important to understand how performance rating influences the handling and safety of your vehicle.

What is speed rating or performance rating?

After years of blowouts and accidents caused by drivers flying down Germany’s Autobahn at top speeds, a global tire speed rating system was created to remind drivers of their tires’ limits. In the 1960s, there were only three ratings; now there are 14.

Today, those ratings indicate so much more about how a tire performs. Tires with higher speed ratings are better equipped to get rid of heat; they also offer better cornering, gripping and braking, which is why we think of it as a ‘performance rating.’ Tires that have been downgraded in speed rating flex and squirm under pressure, causing heat-build up and compromising traction and tire life—situations that can lead to blowouts, especially in the heat of summer.

That rating is based on rubber compound as well as tread stability, design and casing construction. Tires with bigger inter-locking tread blocks squirm less than a lot of little tread blocks. Less squirming means more staying on the road.

How does speed rating impact your vehicle’s handling and safety?

Heat build-up

Heat is your tire’s number one enemy. Tires with low speed ratings flex and squirm under pressure, causing heat build-up.

And heat build-up, along with high temperatures—whether you’re on your morning commute or your way to the cottage—can have a big impact on your tire’s performance and durability. You could be risking tire degradation, reduced traction and even blowouts.

Tires with higher performance ratings are better equipped to get rid of heat, in part because they generally have higher quality construction and ply.

Braking

During one of our recent performance rating tests on hard braking in an emergency situation, a lower ‘S’ rated tire driving 100 kilometres per hour was still going almost 25 km/hr when the higher ‘V’ rated tire stopped. The ‘S’ rated tire took 39 metres to stop. The ‘V’ rated tire stopped in 35 metres.

Why? Performance rating has a huge impact on braking. Lower-rated tires will squirm and change shape under hard braking, taking longer to stop in emergency situations.

Cornering grip

It isn’t the size but the quality construction of your tire that’s going to help you take sharp turns safely. If you’re heading up a highway ramp at high speeds and you’re not ready for the tight curve ahead, your vehicle will stay on the road, or not, because of your tire’s grip. Under force, the shape and contact patch of a lower-rated tire will change, reducing your traction.

As well, your vehicle operates safely because of several systems—anti-lock brakes, stability control—that can only work with the traction limits of your vehicle’s tires.

Steering response

One of the biggest differences you’ll see and feel between tires with high and low performance ratings is the quickness of your steering response. You won’t have to turn your wheels as much when you have tire with better traction because they can respond more accurately.

Less tire flex also improves stability, allowing your vehicle to swerve and remain stay on the road. Whether you need to dodge a dog or a fallen suitcase on the freeway, you need lightning fast steering response.

What you need to know about speed rating

It’s critical that your performance rating and load index matches the original equipment specifications recommended by your vehicle manufacturer. You can always go up in performance rating, but you can never downgrade or you’ll compromise the handling and safety of your vehicle.

The only time it’s OK to downgrade your tire speed rating is with your winter tires, where a ‘Q’ rating is acceptable because you’re going to be driving slower and in cooler temperatures.

Learn more in our post Why Your Tires Should Have the Same Speed Rating and read our Tire Speed Rating Tips for Drivers.

When you need new summer tires, have the tire experts at a Kal Tire location near you make sure you’ve got the right size and performance rating.

Video Player
 
 
 
 
 

 

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]

Regards,

****** ********

 

 

11/16/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: In August of 2013, we had purchased a red Chevy Cruze with the RS package at EVS. This particular 2LT came with a back-up camera and the autodim center rear view mirror, items usually found on the LTZ. We were happy with the car this last year and decided to purchase another Chevy Cruze with the same features. We went to EVS Labor Day weekend (saturday) looking to purchase a Blue 2014 Chevy Cruze 2LT with the RS package along with the 2LT driver convenience package. This vehicle had incentives of $3500 that we were told expired that following tuesday. They did not have that car in stock but they could get one there by tuesday afternoon. The car arrived late wednesday and we could pick it up thursday. I test drove the car and it was nice but it was missing the 2LT driver convenience package. I mentioned this when I picked up the car and was told the incentives would expire if I didn't take this particular car at that time. I have since found out the incentives did not end that weekend, the car we accepted lost $7000 in value in a few weeks and could not be traded in for the car we wanted unless we payed several thousand dollars more for a convenience package that was listed at $380 on the window sticker. We are happy with the car we have but could have been happier and treated better. After nearly two months of contacting the sales representive, sales manager, and an email from the general sales manager saying to please contact him but getting no response when we tried, we are getting no where. Due to a miscommunication between the sales rep. and the sales manager, we believe we were convinced into taking the car offered or lose out on the incentives.

Desired Settlement: We would like the car we described, the 2014 Chevy Cruze with the RS package and the 2LT driver convenience package.

Business Response:

Our new car manager, **** *****, spoke directly with Mr. ******* and came to an agreement to install a rear camera in his vehicle.  The parts have been ordered and service is scheduled for November 14th.  We value our relationship with Mr. ******* and believe that this will resolve the matter.

10/16/2014 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I called EVS in November of 2011 and spoke with ***** regarding a 09 Chevy Traverse I was interested in purchasing. He gave me information about the vehicle and I agreed to come down the next day to view it. Upon arrival, we took the car for a test drive, went over some financial information and I agreed to purchase the car. ***** had the finance department draw up all the paperwork and we were taken to see **** (*********) in the finance department to sign papers. While signing the final document to purchase the vehicle, **** noted an area for us to sign stating the vehicle was a manufactures buy back. I inquired as to the nature of the buy back and how that would affect resale of the vehicle and him and ***** both assured me the "defect" was taken care of, the car had passed a rigorous inspection and that GM would not allow them to sell the vehicle if it had not been completely remedied. They stated the "defect" was a minor concern that the previous owner just wasn't happy with, so he traded in the Traverse for a newer model. They also said a "branded" title would not affect resale price of the car. I signed the documents and took the car home. Two days later, the front end of the car started making a loud noise and when I called the dealership, I was told I needed to pay for service myself. They finally agreed to have me bring the car back to the dealership, which was 90 miles from my house and they found the front sway bar was loose. They repaired it "as a courtesy". Last November, my check engine light came on and I took the car to my local dealership and they determined it was the timing chain in the car that was failing. They replaced the timing chain under the 100,000 mile power train warranty. I took the car in recently for a recall repain and had Bergstrom automotive pull the service records on the car and they found that the timing chain had been replaced 2 times prior to my ownership of the vehicle and once since I have owned it. The service tech at Bergstrom stated that a timing chain should not fail, and the fact that it has failed 3 times in less than 100,000 miles is an indication that the original issue that caused teh manufacturer buy back had not been resolved. I have called ****** at Eric Von Schledorn and he assured me he would look in to it and get back to me and has not returned my call. GM has called ****** and he stated that they don't have access to the records that indicate the reason for the buy back. I have pulled a Car Fax vehicle history on the Traverse and discovered that EVS purchased the vehicle at auction (not directly from the previous owner as stated). They failed to disclose the true nature of the buy back and falsely represented the severity of the defect with the car. Also, not disclosing the branded title status to a purchaser before drawing all documentation for purchase shows a lack of honesty. I have had the car appraised and the damage to the value due to the branded title makes it impossible for me to resell the car.

Desired Settlement: Repurchase of the vehicle at true cost (not salvage value)

Business Response:

We have received the complaint filed by ****** ***** regarding the purchase of a used 2009 Chevrolet Traverse from our dealership.  We acknowledge that the Traverse was purchased from our dealership on November 11, 2011 as stated in the complaint.

 

The complaint suggests that our dealership in some way failed to properly disclose the fact that the Traverse purchased was a second generation manufacturer buyback.  It is our dealership’s strict practice to have our sales consultants fully disclose any and all known material vehicle history prior to finalizing a purchase.  The complaint states that the vehicle was only disclosed as a manufacturer buyback when signing the final document to purchase the vehicle.  For your reference and review I have attached scanned copies of the original State of Wisconsin Motor Vehicle Purchase Contract, the original Wisconsin Buyers Guide, and the original Wisconsin Title & License Plate Application Form MV-11.  As required by Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter Trans 139, all three of the attached documents clearly and specifically disclosed the fact that the vehicle being purchased was a manufacturer buyback.  Although not required, our dealership practice is to additionally list under “Other Conditions of Sale” on the Motor Vehicle Purchase Contract the fact that the vehicle is a Manufacturer Buyback.  As you will see by the attached, both ***** and ****** acknowledge by way of separate signature that they had been informed that the vehicle being purchased was in fact a buyback.

 

The complaint also states that there were mechanical issues that developed with the car after purchase.  The signed Motor Vehicle Purchase Contract clearly states that this vehicle was purchased “AS IS – NO WARRANTY.  Dealer disclaims all warranties including implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.”  Regardless of this disclaimer, the complaint acknowledges that a problem that was discovered after taking delivery was repaired at no cost to them.  One year after purchasing the vehicle another mechanical issue developed that was fully covered under the manufacturer powertrain warranty, again at no cost.

 

The complaint further suggests that our dealership in some way misrepresented the vehicle’s ownership history.  As the attached ****** ******* ******* Reports states, our dealership purchased the Traverse as a first generation manufacturer buyback on July 26, 2010 from an auction in Ohio.  The vehicle was subsequently sold on August 13, 2010 with an odometer reading of 16,870 miles.  The vehicle was driven by this owner until April 28, 2011, at which time it was traded back in to our dealership with 44,101 miles.  The vehicle was offered for sale at our dealership from April 28, 2011 until it was purchased by the *****’s on November 12, 2011.

 

****** ******, ******** ** ***** ********** for our dealership, attempted to contact General Motors to get information on the reason for the vehicle originally being bought back.  Unfortunately General Motors was unable to provide any additional information as to the reason for the buyback. 

 

The vehicle purchased by the *****’s has a title that has been branded by the State of Wisconsin as a Manufacturer Buyback.  The Wisconsin Form MV-11 signed by the *****’s clearly states that the vehicle purchased will require the Title Brand of MFR Buyback (manufacturer buyback).  This specific branding in no way indicates that the vehicle will have a future value equivalent to that of a vehicle with a title branded as “Salvage”.  Our dealership has no way of definitively predicting future values of the vehicles it sells.  However, our experience has shown that vehicles sold with titles branded as Manufacturer Buyback have a nominal devaluation when it comes to resale value.  This statement is further validated by the information provided on the attached Carfax report.  Carfax has independently determined the as of this date the 2009 Traverse purchased from our dealership has a value $1,420 less than the average for similar vehicles based on the information contained in the vehicle history report.  There are a number of factors that make up this diminished value, only one of which is the branded title.

 

In closing, it is the position of our dealership that we went above and beyond when disclosing the history of the 2009 Traverse purchased by the *****’s.   The complaint states that the “damage to the value due to the branded title makes it impossible for me to resell the car”.   Although we have not seen the Traverse since 2011, we firmly believe that this vehicle has value.  We would be more than happy to discuss with the *****’s what that value would be if they would like to provide us information with respect to the vehicles current condition and miles.

 

 

**** ******

******* *******

Eric von Schledorn Auto Group

Business Response:

It continues to be the position of our dealership that the vehicle purchased was properly disclosed pursuant to the requirements set forth in Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter Trans 139. 

 

The fact that the vehicle was properly disclosed as a Manufacturer Buyback prior to the customer’s purchase is not in dispute.

 

Our dealership is again extending an offer to purchase the vehicle outright.  In order to give a value of the vehicle, we must be able to do a physical inspection of it at our dealership.

     

Since this is our fourth offer of the same, if the customer does not respond to this we will consider the matter closed.

Consumer Response:

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Repurchase of the vehicle at the point is not an option. With the help of another dealership, completely unrelated to Eric Vin Schledorn, went above and beyond in customer service to work directly with GM to extend the vehicle's warranty. As such, the vehicle is now under a manufacturers warranty until 170,000 miles, so I am choosing to keep it. 

While the dealership continues to assert its position of proper disclosure of the condition, it still does not acknowledge the unethical and misleading behavior of its sales team leading up to the purchase. There was no mention of the buyback status is preliminary phone calls about the vehicle, nor on the test drive of the vehicle, the sticker indicating it as a buy back was removed before I arrived at the dealership to view the vehicle, and even while signing the final purchase documents, the buy back document was slid into the paperwork with no explanation. When I questioned it, I was told it was a "minor defect" that had been corrected. Nothing in this behavior shows that the dealership had any intentions other than to mislead. When I contacted Ernie Von Schledorn to explore options to extend the warranty, which has proven to be a viable option, they would not return phone calls after multiple attempts to reach them.

The dealership can continue to focus on their proper disclosure, however, I base this compliant on a complete lack of business ethics. This dealership and its employees have none. 

At this point, unless the dealership offers some form of restitution for my time and travel to handle the vehicle issues on my own, resolution of this compliant will not occur. 

Regards,

****** *****

 

 

5/4/2014 Guarantee/Warranty Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I purchased a 2011 suburban that had high miles on it, so I was sold (talked into)buying a quote "bumper to bumper warranty" to have piece of mind for the high mileage on my suburban. I then went to a Chevrolet dealership in ********* ******** and was told this warranty was not bumper to bumper to fix my driver seat and the defrost wire to the rear window. I then called EVS in Saukville and the salesmen said "It's bumper to bumper but only on mechanical issues". This to me is not bumper to bumper and is fraudulently presented as full bumper to bumper coverage. I then called and wanted to cancel this warranty I paid $4271.00 for. I also sent a letter to ********* ************ ********* ******** **** ******* ********** ******** ***** *******. I never had a claim filed on this insurance and didn't realize the fraudulent nature until I tried to use it.BUMPER TO BUMPER IS UNDERSTOOD AS EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN THE BUMPERS.

Desired Settlement: I would like the full amount of my money in the amount of $4271.00 that I paid for this insurance reimbursed to my lien holder as per the contract. Not prorated by this company for selling and profiting from selling fraudulent insurance contracts.

Business Response:

We have reviewed Mr. ****’s request to reimburse the cost associated with a Zurich Vehicle Service Contract purchased from our dealership on November 9, 2013.  We recognize the fact that miscommunication can lead to misunderstandings, and as such apologize for Mr. **** feeling as though he was misled in any way by the employees of our dealership.   When Mr. **** contacted Zurich the process of cancelling the contract and issuing a refund had begun.  Our dealership has received the refund from Zurich and has processed a check in the amount of $4,271.00 representing full reimbursement for the amount paid for the service contract.  Mr. **** understands that the terms of his finance contract require us to submit this reimbursement directly to his lien holder, which is what we have done.  A copy of the check sent to the lien holder is available upon request.

 

Thank you.

12/16/2013 Advertising/Sales Issues | Complaint Details Unavailable