Toyota Nashua would not refund my deposit

Since someone else said I’m “jumping to conclusions,” which I find interesting because I can only go by the information shared here in the this thread, I will state it this way:
—When I purchased my Prime last month, the dealership required me to give them a credit card deposit of $500 to “hold the car.” The dealership immediately charged my credit card $500 for the deposit.
—Four days later while signing the paperwork, the dealership stated they would refund the $500 back to my credit card. They emailed me a copy of the refund.
—The dealership did in fact communicate to USAA the $500 refund, which was then reflected on my USAA Visa account. But as an example, let’s pretend that the dealership did not communicate the refund to USAA. In that case, I would try to resolve the issue with the dealership, and document the specific actions taken to do so. Let’s further pretend that the dealership refused to resolve the issue. I would then contact USAA, throw the charge in dispute, and provide USAA with the fact that the dealership gave me a receipt for the refund, but never communicated the refund to USAA. I would also provide USAA with the specific actions taken by me to resolve the issue with the dealership. Now, without jumping to any conclusions, and based on the facts in this message alone, there is no doubt in my mind that USAA would either convince the dealership to refund the money, or force them to do so. Bottom line—I would get that money back, and USAA would make it happen. No doubt in my mind.

 

I believe that the "change credit card" light is now illuminated......along with the "change dealer" lamp.
There are plenty of alternatives for both!

Good Luck!

 

What does it show on the copy of the dispute paperwork that the dealer sent you? Part of it would be where Chase describes the problem, what does that part say? Then the dealer apparently submitted a reply, what did they give as their response to Chase?

 

So as I suspected that sounds more like Chase was treating it like a normal disputed charge, which as I have mentioned before the original charge was legitimate. It's not like the normal disputed charge where something appears on your credit card statement from a company that you didn't purchase anything from.You did in fact use your Chase card to place a deposit on a vehicle, so all the dealer had to do when they received the dispute from Chase was simply provide proof that you did in fact agree to the original charge, so then Chase reversed it back.

Sorry if I'm wearing everyone out with this but I just have to keep emphasizing that this is a completely different situation than the normal type of credit card dispute that people seem to be comparing it to. Probably you explained it all to whoever you talked to originally at Chase, however they probably didn't fully understand and submitted it as a regular disputed charge and that's why it got rejected. You should call Chase and read those codes to them and ask them what they mean so that at least you will have some idea what the communication has been between the dealer and Chase , instead of going on what the dealer is telling you about their conversations with Chase.

Now going back to the beginning of the thread there were suggestions that you really need to handle this in person, make an appointment with the finance manager. I think I remember you were going to do that. It may be the only way you even have a chance of getting your money. Go there and bring all of your statements and paperwork with you and tell them they need to issue you a check before you leave.

 

And we will continue, at least from my perspective, to agree to disagree. This is a disputed charge, not a fraudulent charge. Credit card companies absolutely take care of you with a disputed charge when you can prove your case. I’ve never lost when I’ve disputed something via USAA. When I put a deposit down on a car, the dealership is promising a quid pro quo, no different than when I purchase a TV with my credit card. If the company does not deliver me the TV, then I throw the charge in dispute and win (as I recently did). Why? Because the merchant did not deliver me a TV. In this case, the dealership is promising to use the car deposit to offset the price—that’s the definition of a deposit. If the dealership does not include the $500 in the bill of sale, the credit card company must refund the deposit to me, and chargeback the dealership. The dealership must prove to USAA, via an audit trail, what happened to the money—how it was used. I have to prove to USAA that the dealership has my $500 via the credit card charge, and gave me nothing in return. Another example—if I reserve a room at Holiday Inn Express and they charge me a deposit—I then show up and they say, “sorry we are overbooked and we don’t have a room for you,” Holiday Inn does not get to keep the deposit—the quid pro quo is the room in exchange for the fee. Again, no doubt in my mind that USAA would resolve this for me, posthaste. Furthermore, if Holiday Inn charged me the room rate plus the deposit, and refused to include the deposit on the final bill (reducing the bill by the amount of the deposit) then USAA would correct that for them. Holiday Inn does not get to keep the deposit and the full room charge simultaneously. And if the $100 transfer fee was not on the bill of sale, I would get all $500 back. If the dealership didn’t like it, they could sue me. But they wouldn’t, because they know they have no case.

I have a question though—was this done with a credit card, or a debit card?

Anyway—great discussion. At my age this is one of the things that keeps my brain active LOL.

 

I have been in a similar situation with our Mercedes Dealership. Was given a loaner while my smart was being worked on. Got rear ended in said loaner. Paid my $500 deductible as stated on my policy. Mercedes made deal with insurance for $400 deductible instead of $500 deductible (which I already paid to dealership). Dealership said get money back from insurance, insurance said get money back from dealer.

Called dealer and they said nope, Not overpaid. Insurance paperwork shows overpaid by $100. Talked to dealer again and got a “we’re processing it now” promise. 3 months later nothing. Called again and was told “we never said we’d refund since it wasn’t overpaid.” Got the department of automotive repairs involved with all information and almost 7 months later finally got our $100 back.


iPad ?

 

Yes I know and I didn't say that it was a fraudulent charge, I was saying that Chase may have misunderstood that he was claiming it as a fraudulent charge. In the post that you are replying to I suggested to the OP that whoever he talked to at Chase misunderstood his complaint and thought that he was disputing the original charge itself, and not that he didn't receive what he paid for as you worded it. That's what I was trying to find out since he had a copy of the paperwork that the dealer received from Chase, but according to him it's mostly unintelligible codes, so I suggested he contact Chase to ask what those codes mean so that he can be sure that his original complaint was registered correctly.

As an example, basically the reverse of this situation, one time when I had a fraudulent charge on my card, I called the credit card company and explained to them that I never made the purchase and in fact had never even been on the company's website. I then got a letter in the mail from the credit card company confirming my dispute however it was worded all incorrectly as if I had received a product that was not to my satisfaction and they said they would contact the merchant. I called back and talked to someone else and said I think the person that I originally spoke to didn't understand, this was a fraudulent transaction. The lady I talked to said yes they clearly did not understand that because they listed it differently. So that's why I was suggesting the OP call Chase with the copy of the dispute paperwork in hand to make sure that the dispute is registered correctly. He says the dispute was rejected and I suspect that that was why.

 

From your May 15, 2018 post:

I thought that's exactly what you were saying. This is not between the credit card holder and the dealer....this is a problem the credit card company should resolve....I know USAA would!

 

In the second post you quoted I stated "the original deposit charge was not a fraudulent charge"

although I also said at the time that Chase would only be involved if it was a fraudulent charge, which I now have changed my opinion when you caused me to rethink that a deposit can be viewed as a type of purchase.

But I still disagree that it's between the dealer and the bank if the dealer owes a customer a refund. The two parties in the sale are the customer and the dealer. That would be true if the customer had paid the deposit by check, or by debit card, or with five Benjamins. The fact that they paid the deposit with a credit card doesn't change that the two parties in the transaction are the customer and the dealer. The only thing it changes is that in a dispute where the customer says they didn't receive what they paid for, and they have attempted unsuccessfully to resolve the problem with the merchant, by law the customer can request the bank to reverse the charge (technical term is a chargeback). The bank has to reverse the charge, but also inform the merchant of the chargeback and give the merchant an opportunity to refute the chargeback. If the bank accepts the merchants evidence and explanation then the charge is reinstated.

So yes in a chargeback situation the bank becomes involved, but only as a mediator in one sense, actually more like a small claims court judge in another sense. In those examples you wouldn't say it was between the dealer and the mediator, or between the dealer and the judge. It always remains an issue between the dealer and the customer.

With one exception which is what the OP says the dealer is claiming, but I keep ignoring it for now because I tend to not believe it, the OP says the dealer claims that they refunded the $400 and it was deducted from the dealer's bank account, and Chase must have lost the money. That story just sounds fishy. In the unlikely event (in my opinion) that that is what actually happened, then yes it also becomes something between the dealer and Chase. Although if the dealer had mailed the OP a refund check and it got lost in the mail, it wouldn't be between the dealer and the post office, the dealer would have to stop payment on the check and issue another one. In another post it was speculated that the CC machine company dropped the ball and the transaction never went through, which would be the equivalent of the post office losing a check, no money wound up changing hands and the dealer still owes the customer money and they need to run the refund through again. However if the dealer's story is true that the money was extracted from their bank account and lost by Chase, that's a whole different situation and I'm not sure how it gets resoved, but again for me that story isn't passing the smell test.

 

Hear, hear!

 

Get your money back yet?

I don't know exactly what your situation is with Chase, but I know whenever I call Chase with the number on the back of the card it rings straight through to a person. No punching in numbers or anything, it just gets routed to a person. They've already got my details up on the screen based on my cell phone number. And I have basically zero money with them. No savings accounts or chequing accounts, only cards linked to third parties. I always thought if that's how they treat me, they'd be awesome to those with more funds actually with them.

 

I purchased my first Toyota at Nashua Toyota in 1980 (see Avatar) - great experience. The 79 gas shortage was going on and
folks were lining up to buy more fuel efficient Toyotas. The dealers were packing them with all kinds of silly " options - anyone remember Rusty Jones? "(OH wait - nothing has changed )


That was 38 years ago, likely new owners - who knows - but their Yelp ratings are below average - and when you buy a car in NH
it is a major PIA to deal with the registry in MA, whereas when dealing with a MA dealer all is taken care of at the dealership.

I had filled out a True car search at the onset of my search for a new car - only because Consumer Reports (I am a subscriber)
sent me a link recommending their services - what a mistake ! they hooked me up with dealers that ,lets just say, I don't wish to waste
my time with. Shame on you Consumer Reports!

As far as your local news station - ah really - "Customer not given deposit back - details @11! "

The best thing you can do is to look at reviews of dealerships on sites such as Yelp, and stay clear
of the ones that have poor ratings. Not perfect, but very useful.