Aeroparking

In response to the claim (ID # I ***) filed by Mr***, it is my understanding the Owner of this company has reached a resolution to this matterWe reached out to Mr*** on May 2nd via phone and a resolution was reachedMr*** should be in contact with you some time soonAttached you'll
find the copies of the documents we have send out to Mr***At this time I would like to share some of my expertise with regards to property (car) damageI have been working in parking for the last yearsDuring this time period I have dealt with multiple claims for damage to vehicles that were both "self & "valet" parked vehiclesSome of these incidents were the result of an attendant not taking the proper safety measures while operating a motor vehicle and others turned out to be fraudulent claimsIn the claims in which we were at fault, the damage to the vehicles was while the vehicle was in motion and it collided with another vehicle and or structureThese incidents resulted in "Dent and Scratches" to the vehicleDuring the investigation process whether we were at fault of not, we collected multiple types of information that were both factual as well as theoretical in order to reach a conclusionWe considered things such as; ALocation of the damage CScratches EPatterns GVehicle Operators BDent damage DDirection of the scratches FPaint transfer residue In this particular case, we failed at properly recording the existing damage to Mr***'s vehicle upon arrival to the lotBut, based on the information available we reached a theoretical conclusion that this was "existing" damage to the vehicleHere are the reasons why we believe this; the video footage did not provide proof that the vehicle was damage by either an employee or another motor vehicle operated by one of our customersThe location, direction and patterns of the scratches with no clear dent damage are indicative that this was not damage by moving contactAdditionally, there is no structural object within the property that could have caused this damageIn conclusion we have chosen to resolve this matter; we have offered a settlement o f$as compensation for the apparent damage to his vehicle, instead of paying an attorney to fight for slander and defamationWe do not admit fault and/or liability for the damageMr*** has agreed to these terms and will comply with our request to remove any negative posting or ratings on web/social media
***SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REDACTED BY Revdex.com***

On April 2, I dropped my Sienna at AeroparkingAnd they told me the lot was full and it needed to be a valet parkingSo they took my key and kept a note of vehicle damage stateWhen I claimed my car on April 8, 2016, I immediately noticed the rear right bumper had very noticeable and deep scratches which were not there beforeThen we immediately notified the service person about itAnd he checked their own record and acknowledged that the scratches were not recorded and were newThe on-duty manager there gave us a paperwork and let us filled it up, and told me they would review the surveillance video, and that if they could not identify somebody who damaged the car, Aeroparking would be responsible for the repairTwo weeks later (April 22, 2016), Aeroparking called me and told me they found my vehicle was moved three times during that time but they could not identify anyone who intentionally damaged my carBut they said maybe the scratches were not just not recorded on the