Riding into the company’s sales headquarters…lawmakers who questioned the Diet reveal “Big Motor’s malicious sales practices

Big Motor, a major used car sales company, has been the subject of numerous troubles.

Starting with the May 5 issue of “FRIDAY,” various allegations have been made against the company, including the fact that it had been making fraudulent insurance claims by puncturing the tires of customers’ cars and covering up an accident in which a customer’s car caught fire. In addition, on June 20, “FRIDAY Digital” also reported on “suspicions of sakura (cherry-picking) on a word-of-mouth site,” in which Big Motor employees themselves were constantly posting messages posing as users.

Against this backdrop, on July 5, Big Motor admitted that it had engaged in inappropriate behavior in insurance claims, based on the results of a rigorous investigation by a “special investigation committee” comprised of third-party attorneys and others. The “Special Investigation Committee,” which was established at the end of January of this year, has found that the company has committed misconduct as a corporation.

As we continued our coverage, we also newly learned that Big Motor’s previous wrongdoings had been covered by the Diet. On May 25, after the story appeared in FRIDAY, a member of The Japan Innovation Party, Maki Misaki, asked a question at the 211th session of the House of Representatives Special Committee on Consumer Affairs.

The following is a summary of the specific cases that came up in her question.

(1) When a customer purchased a used car, he felt that the height of the car was lowered, so he confirmed with the sales representative that the car had normal suspension before signing the contract. However, in reality, the vehicle was not stock but had been modified. The customer wanted the normal suspension and appealed to have it returned, but the sales representative reported to his supervisor that “the customer had agreed to the purchase (of the modified suspension).

The shop also lied about replacing tires with high-end ones and used inexpensive ones, making a profit from the difference, and intentionally punctured customers’ tires by putting screws in them and then charging them for the labor.

In addition, the company was found to have intentionally put a screw in a customer’s tire and charged a labor charge for the punctured tire.

After showing three specific examples, Councilor Misaki asked what the Consumer Affairs Agency and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism would do in such cases, and how they would resolve the situation where consumers were “crying themselves to sleep” as a result. Councilor Cape asked, “How do you deal with the situation where consumers are “crying themselves to sleep”? Although Mr. Cape did not name the “major used car dealer,” it is clear from the case alone that it is Big Motor.

However, it is clear from the examples alone that it was Big Motor.

Whether for private use or as a cab, cars are widely used as a means of transportation for the public. However, not everyone who uses a car is familiar with the mechanics of the car. There are cases where people believe the word of the person in charge of maintenance and take their word for it.

I myself do not know much about cars even though I have been a driver for a long time. After all, if I am told by the person in charge of a company or factory that I have entrusted maintenance to that I need to replace, repair, etc., I will trust them. In other words, we have seen cases where the public at large could be harmed, and I took the question with a reminder as to how we can remedy or avoid such cases, so that we do not end up crying ourselves to sleep.

Prior to Senator Misaki’s question, Yoshiharu Asakawa, also a member of The Japan Innovation Party, had asked a question at the “210th Diet Special Committee on Consumer Issues” on November 15, 2011. Mr. Asakawa, who has a detailed understanding of the case (1) that Mr. Misaki asked about, revealed, “I have a friend of mine who is a used car dealer for Big Motor.

The car had a high-performance sports-type suspension, which was not comfortable for my acquaintance to ride in, and the height of the car was so low that it was very difficult to use in normal use. Although my acquaintance is not an expert on cars, he was concerned about the low ride height when he bought the car, so he asked the store about it. The sales representative replied, ‘It has a stock suspension and has not been modified.

After taking delivery of the car, I had it looked at by another maintenance shop and found that it still had a lowered suspension (lowered ride height) sports type. He requested the store to return the suspension to the standard type, but they simply rejected his request, saying, ‘We can’t replace it.