My name is *** ***
and I work for Barron's auto, I'm responding to the complaint *** We are rejecting his response because he is not being truthfulWe have been in business for years we do not wrong people and stand behind our day verbal warranty. When *** *** cam on 29th of February he told me (also other employees witnessed) that he did put the shield (the foil) around the injectors and manifoldWe actually still have the foil (evidence) that was used on the injectors in the officeOn the 21st of March when *** *** and his father-in-law came into the office we tried showing *** *** the foil (evidence) but he deniedThis vehicle was fixed but the customer refused to take the vehicle and stormed out of the building. If you should have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, ** ***
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
I never put heat shielding on the exhaust manifoldThat was present when I bought the vehicleThis I told them when they made the accusation the first time
Regards,
*** ***
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I never once denied putting the thermal tape on the injectors; as can be seen in the original complaint filing I did indeed report this. The heat shielding itself I will continue to deny my involvement in. Running the risk of this arbitration turning into a "He said, She said" argument, I stand firm to my statement that the heat shielding covering the engine block was indeed installed prior to my leasing of the vehicle. I would kindly ask the respondent as well to hold the discussion to the observable facts of cause and effect, rather than relying on arbitrary insinuations of my character or that of my father-in-law's during the aforementioned events. The plain and simple truth is that I felt the vehicle unsafe to drive, given the numerous times the vehicle was admitted for service. The business accuses me of breaking the agreement on the in-house warranty, yet they repeatedly assumed responsibility by readmitting the vehicle for diagnostic testing and repair.
Regards,
[redacted]
( See Attachment)
My name is *** ***
and I work for Barron's auto, I'm responding to the complaint *** We are rejecting his response because he is not being truthfulWe have been in business for years we do not wrong people and stand behind our day verbal warranty. When *** *** cam on 29th of February he told me (also other employees witnessed) that he did put the shield (the foil) around the injectors and manifoldWe actually still have the foil (evidence) that was used on the injectors in the officeOn the 21st of March when *** *** and his father-in-law came into the office we tried showing *** *** the foil (evidence) but he deniedThis vehicle was fixed but the customer refused to take the vehicle and stormed out of the building. If you should have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, ** ***
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
I never put heat shielding on the exhaust manifoldThat was present when I bought the vehicleThis I told them when they made the accusation the first time
Regards,
*** ***
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I never once denied putting the thermal tape on the injectors; as can be seen in the original complaint filing I did indeed report this. The heat shielding itself I will continue to deny my involvement in. Running the risk of this arbitration turning into a "He said, She said" argument, I stand firm to my statement that the heat shielding covering the engine block was indeed installed prior to my leasing of the vehicle. I would kindly ask the respondent as well to hold the discussion to the observable facts of cause and effect, rather than relying on arbitrary insinuations of my character or that of my father-in-law's during the aforementioned events. The plain and simple truth is that I felt the vehicle unsafe to drive, given the numerous times the vehicle was admitted for service. The business accuses me of breaking the agreement on the in-house warranty, yet they repeatedly assumed responsibility by readmitting the vehicle for diagnostic testing and repair.
Regards,
[redacted]