Suntrup Ford Kirkwood

kirkwood responded

Sorry for you working in these conditions. There are no resolutions as another purchase was made. Two things might help future customers: 1. Suntrup should participate in Ford.com website pricing to be competitive with other dealers. It's absence was a glaring red flag--especially with so many ways to purchase vehicles today. 2. Tom Suntrup's email should be available. I would have preferred contacting him rather than this device. It might also help improve his managemnt's behavior. As a professional woman I truly expected compromise, not the bullying voice I received. I would have emailed immediately and hoped to still purchase the vehicle. Do you provide anger management training that includes gender issues? Without those this toxic situation will repeat itself and good staff will depart.

Suntrup Ford Kirkwood responded

Hi Ms. McConnell, Again, I am very sorry for your unhappiness over your experience at our Dealership. I spoke to Kirk Latta and he was quite distressed over your interpretation of his conversation with you. Apparently, there was a massive communication disconnect between you both that (at the time) he was unaware of. Nonetheless, we appreciate your feedback and have taken your suggestions seriously and will apply them accordingly. We appreciate your interest in Suntrup Ford Kirkwood and wish you the best of luck. Thank you, Elizabeth Durdel eCommerce Director Suntrup Ford Kirkwood

Suntrup Ford Kirkwood responded

Hi, I just wanted to drop you a line and let you know I am still working on getting to the core of this issue--unfortunately the individuals I need to speak with have either been consistently out of the office or out of town this week. As soon as I touch base with one of them (I am counting on this afternoon) I will let you know. One thing I should probably go ahead and get from you is your name. I need this to reference your vehicle situation as well as your referral bonus. Thanks, and talk to you again soon!

katrif responded

Hi Elizabeth, First off my name is Kathy not Kath. After purchasing the mustang last year I took it to get inspected. Midas inspected it at 8:27 am 10/15/11 it did not pass due to the ball joint having to much play in it. I was brought out to the garage while the car was on a lift and shown the ball joint and how much it moved around. They asked me if I wanted them to fix it. I told them no because I had just bought the car and was told by the dealer that it was guaranteed to pass a safety inspection and if it didn't they would make it right. I took the car back to Kevin Lupo and showed him the failed safety inspection. I gave him the keys and was told they would take care of it. I was called about 3:00 that afternoon and told the car was ready. When I picked up the car Kevin handed me the keys and told me "we got it all fixed up for you and we even ran a new safety inspection for you free of charge." I don't know what that says to you but to me that means you all fixed the ball joint. When I look at the safety inspection you all printed out the time is 11:33 am 10/15/11. I will be sending a copy of both safety inspections to the State Highway Patrol along with my complaint. You all passed a car 3 hours after it failed the first safety inspection and did nothing to fix the problem. Now trying to get it inspected this year it fails due to the same problem as last year. So I am holding you all liable for this problem. I expect Kirkwood Ford to honor their word. Apparently you all don't know how to do that. Money is an issue for my son who is working, paying for his college, car payment, ins payment and cell phone. He doesn't want my help. I however don't have a money issue.I could of paid cash for the car last year if I wanted to. I have the money to fix the car, hire a lawyer and buy ad space in the newspaper. The point is we should not have to pay a deductible to fix this car when we were told it was fixed last year. Also we were told our deductible is $200.00 not $100.00. Two months after purchasing the vehicle the starter when out we had it towed to you to fix. The car was still under the 3 month 3000 mile guarantee with no deductible showing on my paperwork and we still had to pay $200.00. I chose to let that go because my son needed his car and I didn't have time to argue with you all. If our deductible is only $100.00 then why did we have to pay $200.00? Also when the the car was advertised it said MP3 player. This car has no auxiliary port or usb port so that is false advertisement. Something else I'll be adding to the lawsuit. I will be suiing for the cost of the deductible and the cost to install an auxiliary port which the car was advertised as having but doesn't also the $200 deductible we paid last year as our paperwork shows no deductible amount for the 3 month 3000 mile guarantee. I will be putting ads in the paper letting everyone know Kirkwood Ford does not stand behind their word and they are nothing but a bunch of liars and rude sales people that hang up on you. It's the point of honoring your word and doing what is right. Something that I have always taught my boys. Your word is your bond. I don't appreciate being accused of fabricating (being call a liar) a story when I have the paperwork to back up my story. You might want to talk to Kevin Lupo about fabricating stories and just being a total jackass. Kathy

Suntrup Ford Kirkwood responded

Hi Kathy, When your son purchased his car from us one year ago it had passed its safety without issue. There was absolutely no incident of returning the vehicle to us to have it fixed for that reason. I know you have declared that you have paperwork proving this event did in fact occur, however to declare is one thing and to actually show us this paperwork in person is another. Thus, your claim that we are currently responsible for replacing the vehicle’s ball joints, one year and 15,000 miles later is entirely fabricated. The vehicle’s ball joints were fine a year ago at the time of purchase—that’s why it passed its safety inspection at that time without incident. Your son spoke to Kevin the other day and he understood the situation of how we are not liable for the ball joints—your son stated to Kevin that’s the exact reason he purchased the warranty, to cover the cost of parts due to wear-and-tear—your son also stated in that conversation that it comes down to money and that the problem is he does not have the $100 to pay the warranty’s deductible. Now, your son not having the funds to pay the warranty’s deductible is unfortunate. However, that does not make us liable for what is no longer ours. On that note, accusing us of falsifying a safety inspection is an absurd and desperate attempt to bully us into taking responsibility for your son’s vehicle twelve months after he purchased it from us. Every year, the Missouri State Highway Patrol audits every automotive dealership to ensure (thankfully) all vehicle safety inspections are valid—in which ours always are. Thank you to your son for purchasing his car with us and we wish you and your family a wonderful holiday season.