On November 24th, 2007 I visited Bob Dance Dodge in Longwood, Florida with an ad published in that mornings Orlando Sentinel.
There were several vehicle I was interested in. I was greeted by a salesperson and asked to see any and all of the advertised vehicles. I was told all three had already been sold.
After an hour of looking at other similiar vehicles and being told I could not buy any of them for the same price as the sale vehicle. I went bsck out on their lot and found a 2006 Dodge Durango that was the identical stock number indicated in the newspaper ad. The price was advertised at $17,900 and included a $7000 factory rebate.
I agreed to purchase this vehicle. The sales manager then came out and said my price would be $19,700 after applicable rebates. I inquired as to why my price was $1800 higher than the ad and was told I did not qualify for several additional rebates. I asked the manager how he knew I did not qualify as he had not asked any qualifying questions. He then specified there was a $300 rebate if ine had an occupational licence--I explained that I had several as I own several businesses. He then lowered my price to $19400.00. I was told the other rebates were $500 if I had my auto insurance thru Farm Bureau and $1000 if I was turnin in a Chrysler lease vehicle and was leasing another.
I did not agree with his explanation of the sales price but since the vehicle was the only one, the sale was only for one day, and the sale was subjec to prior sale I went ahead with the purchase.
After complaining to the sales manager several more times later in the day I asked for proof of the rebates I was not eligible for I was told I could look them up on the internet. I did and according to the dodge website the $500 Farm Bureau rebate ended on 09/30/06 and the 2006 Durango is not eleigible for the Chrysler Lease Loyalty rebate. Regardless of whether the rebates are valid or not the ad clearly states that the $17900 price includes $7000 in factory rebates. I received $7300 in factory rebates and my price was still $1500 higher than the ad states it should be.
Additionally I was charged a dealer fee of $698 which while indicated in the small print at the bottom of the advertisement is not allowed according to Florida statute which requires the sale price advertised to include all required fees F.S 320.27(9)(b)3.
The dealer tried every trick in the book not to honor my price and tried to refund my money in order not to honor the sales price. I have possession of the vehicle, a bill of sales, and the original advertisement to prove my case.
Finally the vehicle was on the lot and did not have the Monroney sticker show MSRP and features of the vehicle as required by federal law. This sticker was requested by me and this request was told to the saleman, the sales manager, and the General Manager of the dealership to no avail.
My vehicle was supposed to be given to me detailed and was a brand new vehicle. The vehicle was not detailed (cobwebs in the engine compartment, balloon string attached to radio antenna, and rear windshield wiper, inside and out generally dirty) The owners manual and warranty papers typically in the glove box were not there and apparently not available.
I was treated very poorly for trying to assert my rights, I was insulted by the General Manager and told he did not want my business. I am pleased with the vehicle but want a refund of the illegal overcharge, a refund of theillegal dealer fees added, I want my Maroney sticker, and all manuals that are to come with the vehicle. Addiitonally since it has been made clear that I am not welcome at the dealership I wish additional funds to have the vehicle professionally detailed at another dealership or facility.
Bob Dance is guilty of multiple ilegal acts and need s to be punished by the state. There are additional detail of further improprieties I will give to any interested party.
Glen
Longwood, Florida
U.S.A.
Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Dodge AutoClick here to read The *EDitorial: The Marketing Rebate Rip Off ...Manufactures invent reasons why not to pay the consumer