Arnold Clark - £500 difference in price online

[fenster89411]

Hi Guys,

 

I wonder if you could advise. Ill keep it short.

 

Saw a car online , Suzuki Swift 5 dr 1.5GLX , 34000 , Blue. Arnold Clark Branch.

 

Went along to the branch , sales guy was friendly enough did some paper work , 5995 for the car , took the extended two year warranty (395) and 2 year servicing and MOT's (179) and they gave me 1500 for my trade in - something about the figures bothered me as I'd did a rough count on how much I wanted to spend and it seemed higher.

 

I thought I had just made a mistake so gave a 300 deposit and I pick the car up later this week.

 

When I got home I realised what the problem was. The car was advertised for 5455 online.

It IS the same car , they only had one at that garage and after saving some screeshots I refreshed the page and it was marked sold.

 

I feel if I go through with this now I will feel ripped off. I did sign an agreement. Any advice before I call them tomorrow?

 

Fenster.

[scaniaman]

Is there any way that you can cancel your deposit? Cancel cheque, or Visa (credit or debit).

When you say "on line" do you mean the AC website or perhaps Autotrader? Just trying to think of how to prove the lower price was in fact advertised. If Autotrader, they may still have original advert.

Sorry i can't be more helpful.

[Conniff]

Do I read that you got shots of the car with it's price before it was marked 'sold'?

[stuggling]

me and my partner have brought from these in the past, there prices online are always cheaper they told us this after we noticed the car we went for was also cheaper online.

The sales bloke said that because we noticed the online price we can buy it at that price, if you got screenshots of the car at the lower price take it in, and see what happens. Im no professional in this but this is from a personal experience with them

[fenster89411]

Thanks for coming back to me guys.

 

Autotrader:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201023360518228/sort/priceasc/usedcars/colour/blue/model/swift/make/suzuki/page/1/radius/20/postcode/ml69tq?logcode=p

 

AC:

http://www.arnoldclark.com/used-cars/suzuki/swift/options/search_type/used/max_price/6000/variant/1.5%20glx%205%20dr/colour/blue/

 

I got screenshots showing both yesterday - AC suppress the price with the sold sign but I can still see the last digits are not 988 but 488. - I also have a shot of the car on the AC site before the sold sign was added.

 

I called and spoke to the salesman and he looked it up , confirmed and said he would get it sorted for me. I pick the car up Wednesday so will post back with how it goes.

 

I really like this car but I would rather get my deposit back than pay £500 I didnt have to.

 

Davie.

Edited August 22, 2010 by fenster89411

[Conniff]

If you have the time, do checks on other cars and then take a ride around to where it is and see if the price is again different. If so, report them to Trading Standards for mis-description or false advertising as it's obviously a con job.

[Guest arnoldclark]

Fenster, I am sorry that this has happened, this has been a simple yet stupid mistake, which we are investigating behind the scenes. The car had simply been advertised at the wrong price on the screen, the correct price online. However we honoured the lower price and the branch have advised me you are happy with the solution. If you have any other issues, please e-mail me at [email protected] and I will be happy to help.

 

To anyone that has missed my presence lately, I have been having problems accessing the site, so have re-joined, I will as always, be happy to help any AC customers with genuine problems.

 

Kind Regards

 

Alasdair

Arnold Clark Customer Services

[scaniaman]

Ah Hah Mr. Craig, you have returned. Would you be so kind as to inform us what in your mind constitutes a "Genuine" complaint? You failed to respond to my last email, but as we have discovered this is common practice with AC management when they don't want confrontation etc etc, or to be answerable to the aggreived customer.

As you are aware, I have a "Genuine" complaint with your firm which has been allowed to carry on for almost TWO years, despite my best efforts to make settlement.

I was in fact offered "OPTIONS" by your Burns man via his lackie, since he doesen't have the decency to visit me himself. These "options" apart from being totally inadequate, were a blatent insult to me and my family considering what your firm has put us through recently.

Not only do you consistently refuse to send my car to a diesel specialist to investigate the fuelling problem, but the "Special Deal" on another car that Burns offered me was a sheer affront. £1500 more than the same car was offered for away back in April. When I pointed out this price to the Stirling GM, he stated that if other dealers could offer this price then AC should be able to match it. Then I was stonewalled YET AGAIN. During all these months my present car has depreciated, which makes the gap now even greater. To add insult to injury, when Burns offered me the options, he had the audacity to say that I had seven days to consider them. I gave him the same time scale to respond to my counter proposals, which as usual hit the same STONEWALL.

So Mr. Craig, is my complaint "GENUINE" or not?----or have I just highlighted Arnold Clark's total lack of respect for the people who have made him what he is?

There is nothing wrong with money---but the GREED for it is a cardinal sin.

Edited August 25, 2010 by scaniaman

[Conniff]

To anyone that has missed my presence lately, I have been having problems accessing the site,.

 

Kind Regards

 

Alasdair

Arnold Clark Customer Services

 

 

You're only saying that because it was your turn to get the next round in.

[Guest arnoldclark]

Scaniaman, we gave you, via our Mr. Burns a choice of options, all favourable, given that our diagnosis showed there was nothing wrong with your car. You had a time window within which to accept one of these options, you chose not to. Should you wish to continue to bring it up for whatever reason, that is your choice, I will make no further comment.

 

regards

 

Alasdair

[scaniaman]

Mr. Craig, I wish you had read my last post. How often do my advisers and I have to tell you that the diagnostic test you supposedly gave my car is inadequate in order to identify the fuel problem. I have just sent Sukhdeep Bhamra (Citroen uk) a detailed account of the tests necessary to show where the problem lies. Both yourselves and other manufacturers seem to have a GODLY faith in these diagnostic computers, but several of them are not capable of the depth of enquiry it requires to identify certain problems. It also takes highly trained personnel to be able to read and comprehend the proper test results. Why the H--l can't you see and believe that???? Why do you follow this blinkered approach???

As for the options that Burns offered me being "Favourable" is concerned, yes they were favourable---but only to Arnol d Clark. Furthermore, I notified your GM? that other citoen dealers were offering the 92bhp diesel Picasso at £10,495 away back in March / April but he failed to get back to me, and I was stonewalled as usual on this one. The "Special" deal Burns offered only recently was £11,988 which is only £100 less than your Aberdeen branch currently have these obselete models advertised at on the net. Please Mr. Craig, explain what is favourable about these figures. If you wish to further disgrace your firm, then i am quite happy to post the other options.

Judging by the tone of your last post, I gather that it's your polite way of telling me to Foxtrot with Oscar.

What you lot had better understand is that I have the time and resources at my disposal, to keep adverse publicity on Arnold Clark Automobiles Ltd. going indefinately.

What beggars belief, is that I was prepared to give you £2,500--£3,000 + my car in exchange for the obselete 92bhp Xsara Picasso, 10 plate. This deal would not have cost your company anything, in fact a small profit, but was it Sheer Greed that made you refuse my offer?

It also defies logic and good business acumen, why for the sake of a relatively small sum, your company policy prevents you from treating me properly. Why have a grossly unhappy customer, when had the appropriate action been taken months ago, this disgraceful situation need not have arisn?

What kind of businessmen /women are at the top of AC, that can't comprehend that if I can persuade Only TWO people, not to buy from AC, your loss of (the great God ) profit would be more than settling my complaints???

Come on Alisdair, be seen to do the right thing for once. I may even be discreet about the right settlement!!

 

PS. It has just been brought to my attention, that further pursuit of my complaints may render me open to intimidating threats of a legal nature.

Who would stand to lose most, considering the mass of publicity such threats / action would generate?

Edited August 26, 2010 by scaniaman
Advice Received

[scaniaman]

Scaniaman, we gave you, via our Mr. Burns a choice of options, all favourable, given that our diagnosis showed there was nothing wrong with your car. You had a time window within which to accept one of these options, you chose not to. Should you wish to continue to bring it up for whatever reason, that is your choice, I will make no further comment.)

 

 

Mr. Craig. Reference "There is nothing wrong with your car". You should by now have an email taken from the CIAO website which shows people who bought a Vauxhall from your firm. They too had trouble with their car which your diagnostic computers could not locate. Again, they were told "There is nothing wrong with your car"!!!!

Then there is a motor mechanic who bought a SEAT car. The warranty was about to expire when he had electrical faults. On taking it back to the main dealer it was subjected to a diagnostic test. This showed some faulty components which were ordered up. The car had these new parts fitted and still the faults persisted. Perhaps i should have mentioned earlier that the owner initially went into the garage and asked for a new battery, and was scorned. When the new parts failed to rectify the faults the owner then informed the "Technicians" that he was in fact a mechanic, and a new battery was fitted----faults cured!!! So much for your computer diagnostics.

That was a most inappropriate choice of words in your last sentence, as you will soon find out.

[DeaBea]

[sVIEW][/sVIEW]

 

MR CRAIG!!!!!!!!!

 

You stated that you "will as always, be happy to help any AC customer with genuine problems".

Why is it that you never get back to me or deal direct with me. You shrugg the problem off onto someone else.

When asked to talk to direct, you answer via your customer service team is that it is not company policy to take phone calls.

I have an email trail from you indicating that you was put out by receiving 3 e-mails from me and then asked your customer service team to sort it out. Why was that? The e-mail was intended for you to view and action but yet again, you shrugg the problem off onto someone else.

This problem is not going to go away until it has been dealt with.

[scaniaman]

DB. I make no apologies for repeating myself for the Nth time, but there is no point in pursuing your complaint with the M---h of the Clyde. Email your complaint to Heather Clayton, head of the OFT. Remind her about the new motor traders directive just out in 2010, and say that the matter is now "collective"as the OFT and Trading Standards have had numerious complaints about this firm. Notify your local TS office as well. Only when sufficent complaints are received, will the OFT do anything about them.

[DeaBea]

DB. I make no apologies for repeating myself for the Nth time, but there is no point in pursuing your complaint with the M---h of the Clyde. Email your complaint to Heather Clayton, head of the OFT. Remind her about the new motor traders directive just out in 2010, and say that the matter is now "collective"as the OFT and Trading Standards have had numerious complaints about this firm. Notify your local TS office as well. Only when sufficent complaints are received, will the OFT do anything about them.

 

I have raised this with OFT and an e-mail has been sent to Heather Clayton. I am now awaiting feedback. I have also got

Mazda UK involved and I am expecting feedback today. I have also been in contact with Consumer Direct which I have

received positive feedback from. I have also sent a letter with regards to the "supply of goods & servicing act 1982". Arnold

Clark has chosen to ignore this letter. This only builds on my case as the legal information I have received so far is as long as I have done or I am seen to be trying to resolve this matter, it may look favourable for me

WHEN I DO TAKE LEGAL ACTION. The fact that Arnold Clark wish to ignore my letters and e-mails just indicates that they do not wish to resolve any issue

.

[Conniff]

I hope you do go all the way with this, with or without the assistance of the various bodies.

 

Did you you know that if you can't see someone, they can't see you? or in other words if you bury your head in the sand things disappear.

 

It must be true as that seems to be what AC does and everyone leave it as it is and never follows it through so AC gets away with it again.