A Chimney Sweep

Department of Agriculture, Trade
and Consumer Protection Attn: Stacy ***Subject: Re: File # * *** /Sara ***, mother of Brianna
*** ***Dear Ms***,This letter is in response to a consumer
complaint your office received from MsSara *** on November th ,
2016, relating
to an account for her daughter where the self-pay balance being
billed to the patient/guarantor by the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) was
inaccurateThe following is a summary of my review and conclusion regarding
this complaint.On March 23trd , 2016, Ms, *** called the billing office to update her insurance information on fileMCW sent a claim on March th , to Alliance via UMR to process the date of service of December 8, for services provided by Dr.Connor.On April 9th , 2016, UMR processed the claim resulting in patient responsibility in the amount of $123.52, however, MCW does not have an active contract with this payor, therefore, the full amount of $was billed to Ms***.On July 15th, 2016, a payment in the amount of $did post to the account leaving a remaining balance of $291.49.On October 22nd, the balance of $was referred to the collection agency, State Collection Services Inc., due to non-receipt of payment in full On November 14th , 2016, MCW performed an administrative adjustment in the amount of $to mirror the contractual adjustment rateMCW also closed and returned the account from State Collections ServicesThis did not result in any negative reporting to the credit bureau since the account was referred within the past days.On November 14th , 2016, an itemized statement reflecting a current balance of $was sent to Ms*** as well as a letter indicating that the account has been returned from the collection agency.If you should need additional information or
clarification to the above communication please contact me

I known her for a long timeI did not charge nothing for brakes, plugs strut rotorshe owes meShe had too many code problemShe had no moneyI said you can pay me the rest laterEngine was slipping Recall on dealerI have recall # to go to dealer or have to pay $

Better Business...

Bureau:
I have reviewed the response submitted by the business and have determined that the response does not satisfy or resolve my issues and/or concerns in reference to complaint # [redacted]. Please add your rejection comments below. Regards,
[redacted]
I was surprised to say the least that 123 Mobil responded to this issue 3 months later. I brought my car in for repairs & picked it up in worse condition. I was told it was test driven and was "like new" but 5 minutes down the road it shook worse than before I immediately brought it back & 1 day later was told it was a head gasket that would cost an additional $1400 above the $1000 I had already paid. Obviously the problem was misdiagnosed & the wrong repair done all I ever wanted was for them to stand behind their work & fix the car properly at no additional cost since the error was theirs there was never any mention of a recall the car was recalled in 2012  for fuel pump and power steering which I had repaired on 9/21/12 at the dealership the only other recall was in 2014 for ignition switch which had nothing to to with the problem it was due for inspection and it was suggested that I get a rejection sticker and that would give me 90 days to get a new car perhaps that is why 123 Mobil now responds 90 days later Due to the fact that the car was unsafe to drive I did indeed have to get a new car I have resigned myself to the fact that I have to take this as a loss on my part I am very disappointed in the way 123 Mobil handled the whole episode. From poor customer service to poor workmanship and the lengthy delay in their response to this matter.  I no longer wish to pursue this matter please close your file on this. Thank you. [redacted]