Justin Canfield
United States of America#2REBUTTAL Individual responds
Thu, February 18, 2010
In response to the report filed:
First of all, I deeply regret any misunderstanding there may have been and I am sorry for what happened.
We would have loved to have taken the truck in on trade. Unfortunately, there was negative equity in the trade that the bank was unwilling to finance. Just because a bank approves a loan for 25,000 dollars does not mean that they will put their interests in jeopardy because of inadequate collateral. This means that a bank will not finance a vehicle for more than they deem it is worth. Since the trade-in was not worth its payoff, the difference would have had to have been added to the loan. (I did not know the trade value until the customer arrived and it was appraised. My buyer was not willing to payoff the remainder of the loan and I never promised anything of the sort.) The bank was not willing to finance this difference. Without more money down, we were unable to take the truck in on trade.
Because of this, I was forced to tell the couple that we could not take the 2002 Ranger in on trade. I suggested that it was still a good idea to buy the 2006 to re-establish his credit. Of course, this was only if they could afford to keep both vehicles. I gave them an option that they decided not to take. There was no intention to "rip off" anybody. I was simply sharing with the couple the only option I had available to them because of the lender's decision.
I pride myself in being ethical and moral. I have the HIGHEST CUSTOMER SATISFACTION RATE at Mathews Ford. I have been a successful salesperson at Mathews Ford for 15 years and I am successful because I am exetremely honest and up front.
Unfortunately, sometimes there are some situations that are out of my control. But, I will do all I can to make sure a situation like this never happens again or at least explain the situation better.