Pathetic Service

As a result of Nissan SA and Nissan Milnerton misrepresenting their product based on this ad: https://www.autodealer.co.za/used-Infiniti-Q50/2.0-Sedan/Boksburg-Gauteng/ ********** I approached the MIOSA and their finding was shocking because of the following: They wrote an email to Nissan Milnerton requiring clarification. Milnerton Nissan asserted that they had closed the case (new to me) because I had refused the offer. This was untrue as I had never received any communication from Nissan Milnerton telling me or asking me that they would drop the matter. Indeed, they made me an offer of another vehicle and my response was that I would consider it if a couple of questions were answered. My circumspection was born out of an earlier offer where they offered a vehicle, priced at R389,000, for R425,000 to settle my vehicle priced at R319,995. This seemed like a generous offer until it was apparent that they would settle my R320K vehicle and then sell me the more expensive vehicle. My argument then is that if I had an extra R100K, it would have opened up so many options for me and would not have limited myself to Nissan. The MIOSA's findings was to accept the claim by Nissan Milnerton that I had rejected the second offer, which is a false claim. They didn't ask for any evidence from Nissan or myself. The second faulty finding was that, despite me including the advert, the advert was not available to verify the misrepresentation. This was an odd finding since I had included the advert in my response to the claims made by Nissan Milnerton The advert insisted that the vehicle had done 38691km mileage and when the vehicle was received, it had done 43100km. Furthermore, the ad stated that the vehicle had, as a standard feature, a satellite navigation. This was not the case. Lastly, in my communication with the initial Sales Assistant, I was informed that the date of registration of the vehicle was 11 September 2015. This was critical to me as it gave me an extra 3 years of service and 1 year of the warranty. It later transpired that the service period was misrepresented as was the date of registration. Again, the MIOSA didn't seem that concerned with the disparity and no clarification was sought from Nissan Milnerton or myself. As of date, I have not yet received the actual service book of the vehicle (attempts were made to give me a wrong book for a Nissan vehicle rather than Infiniti). I have not received the manual . This means I cannot consult the book in case of errors or in setting up other vehicles of the vehicle. This has been the case since July 28, 2017. The MIOSA did pick up on this and despite the deadline set by Nissan Milnerton not being met, they merely instructed Nissan Milnerton to deliver these, without asking whether they had been delivered on the umpteeth deadline of October 18th, 2017. The one issue that the Ombudsman focused on was a claim I made which was settled ovr 3 weeks later which involved moneys that Nissan Milnerton embezzled from my MFC account. The vehicle was delivered on the 28th of July 2017. 3 days later, despite Absa submitting all the necessary documentations, Nissan Milnerton requested a settlement figure from MFC for my trade-in vehicle. Since my debit order had gone through, the amount owned was R10k less, which made the settlement arrangement out by R10,000 to Nissan Milnerton's advantage. They then settled with Absa (my new bankers) for the new amount (less R10,000) rather than the agreed amount. I discovered this later when I contacted Absa and MFC who confirmed that they settled as owed or paid what was agreed. This meant Nissan Milnerton received the extra funds but failed to communicate such. When I confronted them, they promised the refund within a week. This matter dragged on for over 3 weeks before my money was received. At this point I had already engaged the MIOSA. That they focused on this major but resolved issue was odd because it didn't form part of my complaint or even their questions to Nissan Milnerton. The level of incompetence shown by the MIOSA is shocking, especially since they are supposed to be impartial. Their behaviour exhibited bias towards Nissan. At the very least, they should have verified the claims and had they bothered to read the emails I attached as evidence (or requested same from Nissan Milnerton), they would have understood that their conclusion was not only faulty, but ***********