Action Mortgages Company Inc

Our business was first contacted by [redacted]) over the phone on or about October 13, 2015 and informed us of a 2006 Chevy Equinox that had a coolant leak for a vehicle that had been sitting for no less than 6 months.  According to my Service Advisor, Robin, [redacted] was very vague...

about his knowledge of the vehicle's problems.  [redacted] would only be certain about the facts that "water was gushing out" of the engine area, and that "he believed it to be a bad water pump." when asked specific questions about the vehicle's condition and its history, he would become agitated and say that the vehicle had been sitting for a long time, that he had been "sick" and would only repeat that "water was gushing out" of the engine area, and that "he believed it to be a bad water pump."[redacted] would not (or perhaps could not) answer questions about the circumstances leading up to his conclusions he kept repeating.  Additionally, and contrary to Complainant's initial statement that "she took her vehicle in to be inspected and also to be repaired due to overheating" is wholly incorrect. Never once, did [redacted] say anything about the vehicle overheating, despite Complainant's claim that "this is the reason she had taken the vehicle in in the first place." Furthermore, [redacted] never once told us to discuss the complaint about the vehicle, or the circumstances leading up to the condition of the vehicle with the Complainant, or anyone else for that matter.On or about October 15, 2015, the vehicle was towed to us without either [redacted] or the Complainant accompanying the vehicle.  Nonetheless, based only on the information provided to us by [redacted], we wrote a work order (No. 36907) and included the complaints provided to us.  (see enclosed invoice.) Based on the information provided to us by [redacted], and after inspecting the vehicle, we found NEITHER the water pump to be bad, no "water gushing form the engine area." as stated by [redacted].  However, we did find a much slighter coolant leak (slighter than "gushing out") originating from the intake manifold, not an "intake valve" as stated in Complainant's Revdex.com complaint.Robin prepared an estimate for the repair of the intake manifold and informed [redacted] of our findings and left it to him whether he wanted us to go forward with any repairs.  At this point, [redacted] neither offered any further information about the circumstances surrounding the condition of the vehicle, nor did he direct us to anyone else that may have such knowledge, i.e. the Complainant.  After no less than 24 hours, [redacted] authorized us to go forward with the repairs to the issues identified and discussed.On a side note, I find it interesting, that the Complainant is willing to make claims in her Complaint letter without offering any documentation that she received  from us.  This would clearly show the complain, what work was performed and what was found. Nonetheless, such information is being offered herein with this response.On or about October 24, 2015, [redacted] was informed the work authorized had been completed.  For the first time, on October 24, when the car was being paid for and picked up by [redacted], the Complainant had contact with this shop by accompanying [redacted].  Again, the Complainant had an opportunity to discuss with us any circumstances surrounding the condition of the car when it had problems prior to bringing same to our shop, but no such topics were reviewed.On or about October 26, [redacted] (NOT the Complainant) called us about an overheating problem he was experiencing.  This is the FIRST time we were hearing of an overheating complaint.  We immediately took in the vehicle and started our diagnostic.  After approximately 3 hours of time we spent on the vehicle (which was not charged to the customer), we did find that the engine had damage, likely a bad head gasket.  We informed [redacted] about our findings, and understandably he was not pleased due to the money he had just spent.  (Which was $930.40 and NOT $935.00 as stated by Complainant). Again, we tried to obtain more information about the initial reason for which the vehicle was brought into us, but [redacted] offered no more than he had before, again becoming agitated about the questions. And again, [redacted] offered no one else with which for us to discuss the circumstances.Additionally, I have no proof of how or where Complainant drove the vehicle after leaving the shop.  Something else could have happened to the vehicle while in their possession that Complainant fails to reveal (much like the original complaint (for the first time) of overheating, [redacted] admitted to having driven the vehicle hot (i.e., driving while the temperature gauge was in the red) (See invoice No. 36915 of October 26) which in and of itself can cause cylinder head damage.Had Complainant provided you the documents we gave [redacted] regarding our work and findings on the vehicle and not try to mislead you and the Revdex.com, she would see there is NO reference to a "cracked cylinder." There is o way to determine a cracked cylinder head, again which cannot be diagnosed without removing the cylinder head form the engine and tested in a very specific way.Complainant then talks about how we gave her "another diagnostic list of problems that were not mentioned the first time." I am unaware to what Complainant refers.  As a part of our service, we offer a complimentary check-out of the vehicle so the customer is aware of other conditions of their vehicle.  Perhaps to this is what Complainant is referring.  Again, had Complainant bothered to offer you your original invoice (of October 24), they were clearly informed of these other issues.  In fact, Robin verbally informed [redacted] of these issues, to which he declined any further service.Finally, Complainant discusses in her complaint letter how she allegedly took the car to "another mechanic and was told that the engine was blown." What is it supposed to mean that the "engine was blown?" No explanation is offered by Complainant about this description.  If it is meant that the cylinder head gasket was blown, that is possible.  However, to use language that infers that the entire engine is bad, shows either the ignorance of the "other mechanic," or Complainant's continued improper recitation of facts.Frankly, I don't even feel I have to respond to Complainant's complaint, not only for the foregoing stated reasons, but additionally, based on the information stated in Complainant's complaint, she misrepresents the following: 1. Who took the vehicle in 2. That the initial complaint was of overheating 3. The price of the bill paid 4. The extent of the damage later found; 5. A further diagnostic list alleged not to have received; 6. Anything said by anyone else, without supporting documents, is unbelievable, or questionable at best; 7. Uses wrong business name; and 8. Uses wrong business address. For all of the foregoing itemized reasons, Complainant paints a picture with incorrect (and potentially fabricated) facts which calls into question the condition of her vehicle, let alone sufficient support to bring a claim with you and the Revdex.com.Notwithstanding my guarded opinion of Complainant's complaint, I WILL offer to apply half of the labor used in the October 24 repairs (i.e.$273.00), toward repairing Complainant's current conditions. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.Sincerely Yours,  Michael W. G[redacted]OWNER

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]  Due to the fact the vehicle was returned to me unrepaired.  I would like to take legal action against the company.  I would like like [redacted] to also have a chance to respond to the companies allegations.

Business Responded. See attached.

Revdex.com:
I reject the businesses response because the owner is failing to admit to the time frame he has taken to do the repairs to our car and failing to return our vehicle in working condition.[redacted] and I [redacted] are both the...

owners of the vehicle, however [redacted] was the one to take the car to the shop for repair. Mike is not taking responsibility for the lack and poor quality work that he has provided. Mike and his employees are rude and very argumentative with their customers. This business needs to be investigated for providing customers with poor quality work and dishonesty. It is now December 1,2017. He had a deadline for the car to be repaired and returned to us November 30,2017, he has not honored that deadline which proves once again that he is dishonest.His excuse is waiting for parts when in reality I believe he and his employees are clearly incompetent to working on an Audi Q7 engine. I shouldn’t have to call every time he promises the car will be ready and then he prolongs it to buy more time. It is clearly unacceptable for this shop to keep our car 2 months for a second repair that he has been paid for. I believe that he is not confident in his work, poor communication, and rude. He failed to tell you that he refused several times to give me written receipts and a promissory note to have the car repaired by a certain date in which he continued to argue with me as the customer. [redacted] called yesterday 11/30/2017 the day the car was supposed to be completed and he told him it would be today 12/1/17 at 4:30, he called back again today then he tells him it will be done 12/2/2017 (run around once again) I called to speak to Mike to understand what else needed to be done to the vehicle, but the receptionist and Mike refused to speak to me (how professional is that) receptionist blew me off and stated that “mike doesn’t want to speak to me and that I needed to speak to [redacted].He has failed to meet his deadline and even communicate with us about our vehicle. Still very dissatisfied and still awaiting my vehicle from this unprofressonal shop. I also believe that he is listing repairs on the invoice that he really isn’t performing I will have a second mechanic evaluate this when my car is returned but I’m sure because the first time we received our car back the oil change light came on but he  stated that he performed an oil change which was clear that he didn’t .
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined the response would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Regards,
[redacted]