The measure of an online auction is how they handle problems/arbitration, especially if an auction employee is the one listing the vehicle for the selling dealer. Well I purchased a vehicle that had no photos nor a written disclosure showing or stating that the vehicle had copious amounts of pet hair throughout the interior. How the person inspecting the vehicle missed it, is beyond me (or maybe it was intentional!?!?!) One can only wonder. Anyways I sent MY PHOTOS showing the real condition of the interior and all I asked for in goodwill/ compensation for their mistake, miss, oversight etc etc, NOT MINE, was a buy fee credit applied to my account. Instead I was told this by Karen Skeel the arbitration manager: “I reviewed the submitted photos and confirm that a thorough interior detail will resolve the dirt and pet hair. Unfortunately, this is not subject to arbitration, therefore, we can’t assist this time.” I wasn’t debating how to resolve it, I was debating the fact that the true condition of the vehicle wasn’t shown or disclosed so buyers could make an informed buying decision. Her reply is akin to telling a buyer who buys a vehicle with an undisclosed cracked windshield that a new windshield will resolve it! Unreal! These online auctions never want to take responsibility for their shortcomings or acknowledge they made a mistake or missed something. If a buyer could see it, find it, hear it, smell it, test it while inspecting the vehicle in person for themselves then it must be in the auction listing. But over and over again when the auctions mess up the only one paying the price is the innocent buyer who is also the only one not able to inspect the vehicle in person. In closing not only did the in my opinion incompetent Karen Skeel not give me a simple buy fee credit, Otolane BANNED me from the auction because I wouldn’t back down. So BUYERS BEWARE at Otolane.
Asaad, I had a similar experience. Following a dispute, my account was restricted, and I felt my concerns were not given fair consideration. Based on my experience, I was disappointed with how the situation was handled and the lack of support provided throughout the process.
I believe auctions should prioritize transparency, consistency, and open communication when resolving dealer concerns. Unfortunately, that was not my experience in this case. I encourage dealers to perform their own due diligence and review feedback from multiple sources when deciding where to do business.
I purchased a vehicle for $500 through Openlane from Gus Brown Hyundai. The vehicle was listed as “as-is” with no mechanical disclosures.
After picking up the vehicle, it overheated within approximately 10 kilometers (6 miles), pegged the temperature gauge, entered limp mode, and left me stranded on the side of the road. After allowing it to cool, I returned it directly to the selling dealer and requested that the sale be cancelled due to the severity of the mechanical issue.
I then opened an arbitration claim with Openlane. My position was that the vehicle had significant engine-related problems that were not disclosed, including no cabin heat, an overheating condition, and a vehicle that could not be reasonably driven without risk of further damage. Had these conditions been disclosed, I would not have purchased the vehicle.
Openlane declined to cancel the sale, citing its policy regarding as-is vehicles. Despite the vehicle overheating almost immediately after leaving the dealership and being returned to the seller’s lot, the arbitration request was denied.
I also raised concerns regarding Ontario’s Motor Vehicle Dealers Act disclosure requirements, specifically provisions relating to material mechanical defects that could reasonably influence a buyer’s purchasing decision.
Based on this experience, I was disappointed with both the handling of the arbitration process and the outcome of the claim. I encourage other dealers to carefully review vehicle disclosures and fully understand the limitations of arbitration protections when purchasing as-is vehicles.
The measure of an online auction is how they handle problems/arbitration, especially if an auction employee is the one listing the vehicle for the selling dealer. Well I purchased a vehicle that had no photos nor a written disclosure showing or stating that the vehicle had copious amounts of pet hair throughout the interior. How the person inspecting the vehicle missed it, is beyond me (or maybe it was intentional!?!?!) One can only wonder. Anyways I sent MY PHOTOS showing the real condition of the interior and all I asked for in goodwill/ compensation for their mistake, miss, oversight etc etc, NOT MINE, was a buy fee credit applied to my account. Instead I was told this by Karen Skeel the arbitration manager: “I reviewed the submitted photos and confirm that a thorough interior detail will resolve the dirt and pet hair. Unfortunately, this is not subject to arbitration, therefore, we can’t assist this time.” I wasn’t debating how to resolve it, I was debating the fact that the true condition of the vehicle wasn’t shown or disclosed so buyers could make an informed buying decision. Her reply is akin to telling a buyer who buys a vehicle with an undisclosed cracked windshield that a new windshield will resolve it! Unreal! These online auctions never want to take responsibility for their shortcomings or acknowledge they made a mistake or missed something. If a buyer could see it, find it, hear it, smell it, test it while inspecting the vehicle in person for themselves then it must be in the auction listing. But over and over again when the auctions mess up the only one paying the price is the innocent buyer who is also the only one not able to inspect the vehicle in person. In closing not only did the in my opinion incompetent Karen Skeel not give me a simple buy fee credit, Otolane BANNED me from the auction because I wouldn’t back down. So BUYERS BEWARE at Otolane.
Asaad, I had a similar experience. Following a dispute, my account was restricted, and I felt my concerns were not given fair consideration. Based on my experience, I was disappointed with how the situation was handled and the lack of support provided throughout the process.
I believe auctions should prioritize transparency, consistency, and open communication when resolving dealer concerns. Unfortunately, that was not my experience in this case. I encourage dealers to perform their own due diligence and review feedback from multiple sources when deciding where to do business.
I purchased a vehicle for $500 through Openlane from Gus Brown Hyundai. The vehicle was listed as “as-is” with no mechanical disclosures.
After picking up the vehicle, it overheated within approximately 10 kilometers (6 miles), pegged the temperature gauge, entered limp mode, and left me stranded on the side of the road. After allowing it to cool, I returned it directly to the selling dealer and requested that the sale be cancelled due to the severity of the mechanical issue.
I then opened an arbitration claim with Openlane. My position was that the vehicle had significant engine-related problems that were not disclosed, including no cabin heat, an overheating condition, and a vehicle that could not be reasonably driven without risk of further damage. Had these conditions been disclosed, I would not have purchased the vehicle.
Openlane declined to cancel the sale, citing its policy regarding as-is vehicles. Despite the vehicle overheating almost immediately after leaving the dealership and being returned to the seller’s lot, the arbitration request was denied.
I also raised concerns regarding Ontario’s Motor Vehicle Dealers Act disclosure requirements, specifically provisions relating to material mechanical defects that could reasonably influence a buyer’s purchasing decision.
Based on this experience, I was disappointed with both the handling of the arbitration process and the outcome of the claim. I encourage other dealers to carefully review vehicle disclosures and fully understand the limitations of arbitration protections when purchasing as-is vehicles.