Revdex.com:
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]. .
Response to AGERO Revdex.com reply12-12-2016 Complaint # [redacted] FALSE statement #1. AGERO simply chose to deny the claim solely based on the misrepresentation of facts by the Tow company and their false statement of “Not ever touching our vehicle”. Which was a completely FALSE and inaccurate statement. During (2) SEPARATE RECORDED TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS, 2 written statement via fax and emails, we had supplied AGERO and their representatives ALL of the facts, confirming such action committed by the Tow truck driver/company regarding the events causing such severe damages to our vehicle. We further supported such statements by providing them dates, times, countless pictures and numerous videos showing that exact driver and tow company’s vehicle in the act of damaging our vehicle on July 12, 2016. It was clear from the initial date of such claim, who was at fault and how the damages were caused. AGERO demonstrated that they actually invested absolutely no time or diligent effort researching our claim thus jumping at opportunity of denying our claim for the purpose of avoiding to to pay for damages caused. 2. FALSE statement #2. After double and triple confirmation with each of the (3) three repair centers where we obtained (3) three separate estimates of repairs for each portion of the required repairs to be made. it has been confirmed that, NO ONE from AGERO or hired by AGERO ever made any sort of contacts or actual visits to these shops in order to support their statement in regards to having the vehicle nor the estimates appraised. Such statements are simply made with NO facts to back them at all. To date AGERO has not informed us of who this company is, which part of the estimates of repair they have appraised and how they actually arrived at this low and unfair attempt at possible settlement. 3. FALSE statement #3. AGERO has never replied to our repeated verbal and written requests regarding the appraising companies information and their detail written findings pertaining the adjusted estimates nor their unreasonable partial payment. Again, due to the size, height and length of the Sprinter damaged, the vehicle has to be transported to (3) three separate facilities in several different cities for final repairs. Prepairs-repairsrepairs-repairslease review the estimates provided. One shop can not perform ALL necessary repairs in order to fix the damages caused. There are 3 separate estimates and to AGERO has deliberately refused and/or failed to provide us verbal nor written notices detailing such findings. We still are not aware of which part of the necessary (3) three estimates of repairs they are partially attempting to pay for or rejecting. 4. False statement #4. No such information was EVER relayed to us verbal or in writing. Again, simply misrepresentation of facts again and again. We understand our rights based on California State laws and subsequently requested supporting documents to review and have not to date received anything supporting their statements. 5. FALSE statement #5. The statement of their unfair partial payment check being cashed is yet another incorrect/inaccurate statement with absolutely NO facts to support it. Since we have not yet cashed that unfair partial payment check. We were explicitly advised not to, since it is an unreasonably low and unfair partial payment. 6. AGERO and employees continue to “shoot from the hip," misrepresent ALL facts, falsify information regarding this case in order to avoid having to reimburse us for the severe damages caused by their Tow Company to our vehicle. 7. I cordially request that Revdex.com and investigators carefully review ALL facts supplied thus far regarding each and every part of our claim, and diligently fact check our statements against each and every false statement made by AGERO and representatives. Furthermore, it is important to mention AGERO’s public records with Revdex.com and other governmental agencies and consumer industry firms show that they have a long history of this type of behavior and an over 92% dissatisfaction with their clients in the past. it is our believe that such record is no accident and it has been earned. We are simply not in the demographics to be mistreated as such. I cordially would like to encourage Revdex.com investigators to throughly process this complaint towards positive and just resolution. We have been unnecessarily wronged in this matter, tremendously inconvenienced with hours of travel for obtaining estimates, even-though we understand accidents do happen, however, their continued misrepresentation of facts, mistreatment of this case and our fully documented/supported claim is absolutely unjust, unreasonable and uncalled for. 8. In conclusion, our request for resolution continues to be the same as initially submitted. AGERO must stop inventing false/inaccurate stories, wrongfully attend to settle this case with unreasonable and low settlement offers and rightfully comply with ALL laws set forth by the state of California by properly taking full responsibility for ALL damages to our vehicle and reimburse 100% of ALL repair charges as submitted. Thank you!
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,We believe that the customer's request for service was completed.Our records indicate that the customer's vehicle was towed to the dealership as requested on 2/15/2018. Additionally, today, 2/19/2018, we contacted the service department at the customer's preferred...
dealership, Ocean [redacted] of San Juan Capistrano, CA. The service manager confirmed that the customer's vehicle was towed into the service department at 3:15pm on 2/15/2018. He confirms receipt of the vehicle as the same day service was requested.
Revdex.com:
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].
I was told by my case manager that phonographs were not needed. However the dealership is more than willing to work with me to get them. You just need to tell me for sure you need them. I have confirmed with the dealership that the estimate was faxed to my case manager but no response from my case I have made numerous calls that include voice messages to follow up and next steps. Myself and the dealership are more then will to work to a quick resolution but there has been no cooperation from your company. If you need estimate resent please provide a fax number to send. If you need pictures ( this may take a few days to do to get to the dealership to get the under body pics) then please let me know.
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,The customer alleged that the service provider was negligent when his spare tire was mounted. We reviewed the customer's complaint and we are not able to find evidence the service provider was negligent when changing the tire. The wheel should be re-tourqued after a tire...
change and should not exceed 50-100 miles of driving before doing so. The service provider's generally provide this information at the time of service but the maintenance of the vehicle is not within their control. In the intitial complaint the customer advised that he had driven 500 miles after the tire change and was driving 75-80 MPH on the full size temporary spare when the lugs loosened. As a result, we could not find any evidence that the problems the customer experienced were the result of any negligence by the service provider.
Agero provides dispatch towing and roadside assistance services on a private labeled basis to our automotive manufacturers/insurance clients under their warranty services or insurance policies.We are an independent third party supplier of roadside assistance. Agero contracts with independent...
providers of towing and roadside services to perform such services, on an independent contractor basis, on behalf of the client for their customers. Any claims as a result of this third party contractor's service or negligence should be directed to the independent contractor who performed the service. If the customer wishes to pursue a claim with the service provider's insurance company, we will provide the insurance contact information at the customer's request.In this instance we reviewed the customer's allegation that the tow company damaged their vehicle by striking another vehicle in the repair facilities parking lot. No evidence was presented by the repair shop to support this claim, including any information on a second party vehicle with damage on the repair shop lot. The repair shop advised the customer that they discovered damage to the vehicle while it was on their lot and sometime after the tow company had left the premises. The repair shop provided the information to the customer that they believe the tow company must have caused the damage. The tow company reports that the vehicle was not damaged while in their care and the vehicle was in the care and custody of the repair shop when the damage was discovered. The repair shop did not produce a second vehicle to support their claim that the service provide caused the damage to the vehicle. It is very possible that this damage occurred after the vehicle was dropped off at the repair facility which would be in the Care and Custody of the repair facility.
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reached out to the customer to request additional supporting documentation. We are currently awaiting additional information from the customer for review.
Good afternoon, We reviewed the customer's complaint and we will be contacting him by telephone today to advise that we will issue the payment for $143.00 as requested.
Revdex.com:
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].
The same information Agero is once again requesting was already provided. Agero was provided, the completed claim form with photos attached and the estimate of the repair shop. The photos were close up and clear. Agero in turn requested the same information along with a photo of the front, sides, and back of the vehicle. No where near the damaged area.
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reviewed the customer's complaint in detail. Below is our findings related to this complaint.We have reviewed the damage complaint for [redacted], who requested roadside service for his 2006 [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] reports damage to the passenger...
side front bumper and trunk liner as a result of the roadside service. Based on the information provided, we will deny the damage complaint. The reasons behind the decision are: Reason for service – Flat front driver side tire. Date of service – 1/6/18 Date Reported – 1/7/18 * Member states that he does not know what caused the flat tire. * Member states that the first tech came out and he did not have the correct tools for the tire change. * Member states that the first tech checked his trunk to see if his car came with the tool and he ripped the trunk lining. * Member states that the driver left and a second company came and they arrived with a flatbed. * Member states that the driver winched the car up from the front while he sat in the flatbed during the loading, as it was very cold. * Member states that when the driver got back into the flatbed he told him that he broke the bumper due to the chain and the cold weather. * Member states that the car was towed to his home and he did not look at the damage until the following Monday, as he had it towed a second time from his home to the tire shop. * Provider reports that the vehicle was towed using a flatbed and loaded front end facing. Provider reports that the damaged claimed was caused from the pothole that the member hit causing the flat tire. * We are unable to honor the damage complaint. The damage to the bumper is not consistent with a chain rubbing against the bumper. The bumper is broken off in pieces but not in the area where the chain might contact the bumper. There is visible damage high up on the wheel well not consistent with an impact from a chain. The member did not look at the damage until the following Monday after the tow service and the vehicle has been towed a second time prior to securing photos of the damage alleged. .
Good afternoon, Upon reviewing the evidence provided to our company directly by the customer, the key was stuck in the ignition and the vehicle was being towed due to the damage to the front suspension. The service provider was never able to get the key out of the ignition because the reason...
for the tow was a front suspension and as a result the key was stuck in the ignition. Additionally, the date of service was 8/26 and the missing key was reported on 9/13. We do not know what happened to the key between the weeks following the tow and the date it was reported. Due to the gap in time between the time of service to when the missing key was reported, we were not able to find evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the key to go missing. As a result, we cannot hold the tow driver responsible for the missing key.
Good afternoon,The fulfillment house will be sending Ms. [redacted] her membership kit via [redacted] and she will receive it by the end of next week.We have also refunded her $54.95 payment back to her [redacted] card and her membership is free for one year from her activation date of 3/3/2018. Regards
Good afternoon, We reviewed the customer's complaint. We previously investigated the details of the complaint with the customer, the tow company involved as well as with the customer's dealership. Based on the facts and evidence we concluded that there was no evidence that the...
tow company caused the problems with the engine. The dealership provided information that the engine oil was sludge indicating the oil had not been changed. We advised the customer that the damage to the engine is not consistent with a flatbed tow and was a maintenance issue. This information was provided to the customer via email and by telephone after the investigation was completed.
Based on our conversation with the customer yesterday, they were satisfied with the resolution. Unfortunately, there isn't anything more we can do at this time from our end. If they feel as though they want to pursue their complaint, they should pursue the independent service provider directly since they are the ones who made the mistake on the date in question. The customer has this information and if not, we are more than happy to provide it again to them.
Revdex.com:
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].
[The response to the complaint from the business "Agero" is not feasible. Agero states that "The customer did not provide any photos of damages or evidence before the repair work was completed." This is not correct as I sent all needed evidence to the company a month in advance for the repair of my vehicle before I was able to save enough money to pay for the repairs. This was seen in the claim.pdf included in the first submitted complaint. There is not a picture that can display a locked steering column for an automobile as that is an internal part. A mechanic would only be able to photograph the internal part after he took the car apart which bluntly displays the companies implausible request for to a customer to evade accountability. Agero also stated that "The service provider reported no problems with the tow at the time of service." The issue was that I called roadside assistance for a flat tire which was under warranty by discount tire and after Agero's tow truck company left my steering column was locked and the car was immovable. Agero's statement for the current health of their service providers tow truck company is not applicable as the issue was the tow truck employee which further points to lack of procedural duties while handling client assets. Agero also stated that "The customer was advised that photos and an estimate were required in order to make a fair decision." The estimate was sent to the company and the companies damage team was understanding of the inability to provide a locked steering column photo and a photo of my flat tire would not be relevant to the complaint which is the only picture that can display an obvious problem. With the provided documentation sent and multiple phone calls during this ordeal, I still have not received what Agero calls a fair decision nor did I have this issue before calling this company.]
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,We have reviewed the recent damage complaint for the customer who requested a roadside service on a 2016 [redacted]. The customer reported damage to the vehicle after the roadside service. The final liability decision is that we were not able to determine that the service...
provider (tow truck) caused the damage presented in the customer's photos.The customer does not note in the above complaint that the vehicle required a tow after a front end collision with an object in the road causing the passenger front tire to go flat. The photos of the vehicle show damages on passenger side and scraping underneath the vehicle. The damage is not consistent with the contact points of a wheel lift tow truck. We are unable to honor the damage complaint because there isn’t any evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the damages in question. Our company is not an insurance company and the service provider is an independent contractor. If the customer believes that the damage was not caused by the original accident we will be glad to provide the him with service providers insurance information for a complete insurance investigation of the alleged damage.
We have reviewed the recent damage complaint for [redacted] who requested roadside service on his 2007 [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] stated the fuseable link box and battery was damaged from the roadside service. The final liability decision is that we are denying the damage...
complaint. The reasons behind the denial decision are listed below: • The customer stated he needed his vehicle jumpstarted because it would not start. The service provider used a portable jump box to jump start the vehicle but was unsuccessful. The customer stated the provider attempted it to jump start it multiple times. The repair facility informed him the fuseable links box and battery was damaged. • The repair facility stated the battery that was in the vehicle was not the correct sized battery and it did not have the proper voltage. • Upon reviewing the information submitted, we are unable to hold the provider liable for the damage to the vehicle. • The provider used a portable jump box to jump start the vehicle. There is no evidence to show the provider jump started the vehicle incorrectly to cause any damage. • The battery that was in the vehicle was the incorrect sized battery and it was not damaged by the service provider. • There isn’t any physical evidence to support that the damage took place during the roadside service. We are unable to honor the damage complaint because there isn’t any evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the damage to the customer’s vehicle.
Good afternoon,We are sorry that the customer is not satisfied with the decision provided. In order to properly assess an allegation of vehicle damage caused by a towing company, we require photos and evidence from the customer. In this case, the customer was not able to provide any...
evidence to support her claim. In fairness to all parties, without such evidence we cannot hold a service provider liable for alleged damages. In this case we had no photos or evidence to present to the tow company. As a result we could not seek payment from the tow company based only on the opinion of the repair shop.
Good afternoon,The replacement of the wheel lock with tax is just over $53.00. The dealership wrote $290 labor charge but does not state what it is for. We are confused if they are charging $290 to replace the lug nut locks or how many hours of labor is needed since the part is only for a lug nut key.
Good afternoon,We believe that we have been able to successfully resolve the customer's complaint. We reviewed the estimate submitted and we were able to speak with the repair shop. Although it was difficult to determine with the photos presented for review, we are satisfied that the...
grill was indeed damaged along with the bumper. We have contacted the customer to advise that the balance requested for the repair of the grill will be sent via check directly to the address we have on file.
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reviewed the customer's complaint and determined the following:* Customer was not present for the service * The customer hit a deer and discovered the damage nine days after the date of service * The Service Provider towed the vehicle with a...
flatbed and loaded it front first * There isn’t any scraping or scratches underneath the front or rear bumper to support any damage happening when the vehicle was loaded or unloaded * The damage to the left front door supports that it occurred when the customer hit a deer. The damage be claimed is in the same area where the customer hit the deer. * Based on the investigation, we are not able to hold the provider liable for the damages.Also, if the customer is claiming that items were stolen from the vehicle, this is a criminal matter and will need to be dealt with by the customers local police department. The customer should also contact the party who had possession of the vehicle at the time of the accident to discuss the allegations further.
Revdex.com:
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]. .
Response to AGERO Revdex.com reply12-12-2016 Complaint # [redacted] FALSE statement #1. AGERO simply chose to deny the claim solely based on the misrepresentation of facts by the Tow company and their false statement of “Not ever touching our vehicle”. Which was a completely FALSE and inaccurate statement. During (2) SEPARATE RECORDED TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS, 2 written statement via fax and emails, we had supplied AGERO and their representatives ALL of the facts, confirming such action committed by the Tow truck driver/company regarding the events causing such severe damages to our vehicle. We further supported such statements by providing them dates, times, countless pictures and numerous videos showing that exact driver and tow company’s vehicle in the act of damaging our vehicle on July 12, 2016. It was clear from the initial date of such claim, who was at fault and how the damages were caused. AGERO demonstrated that they actually invested absolutely no time or diligent effort researching our claim thus jumping at opportunity of denying our claim for the purpose of avoiding to to pay for damages caused. 2. FALSE statement #2. After double and triple confirmation with each of the (3) three repair centers where we obtained (3) three separate estimates of repairs for each portion of the required repairs to be made. it has been confirmed that, NO ONE from AGERO or hired by AGERO ever made any sort of contacts or actual visits to these shops in order to support their statement in regards to having the vehicle nor the estimates appraised. Such statements are simply made with NO facts to back them at all. To date AGERO has not informed us of who this company is, which part of the estimates of repair they have appraised and how they actually arrived at this low and unfair attempt at possible settlement. 3. FALSE statement #3. AGERO has never replied to our repeated verbal and written requests regarding the appraising companies information and their detail written findings pertaining the adjusted estimates nor their unreasonable partial payment. Again, due to the size, height and length of the Sprinter damaged, the vehicle has to be transported to (3) three separate facilities in several different cities for final repairs. Prepairs-repairsrepairs-repairslease review the estimates provided. One shop can not perform ALL necessary repairs in order to fix the damages caused. There are 3 separate estimates and to AGERO has deliberately refused and/or failed to provide us verbal nor written notices detailing such findings. We still are not aware of which part of the necessary (3) three estimates of repairs they are partially attempting to pay for or rejecting. 4. False statement #4. No such information was EVER relayed to us verbal or in writing. Again, simply misrepresentation of facts again and again. We understand our rights based on California State laws and subsequently requested supporting documents to review and have not to date received anything supporting their statements. 5. FALSE statement #5. The statement of their unfair partial payment check being cashed is yet another incorrect/inaccurate statement with absolutely NO facts to support it. Since we have not yet cashed that unfair partial payment check. We were explicitly advised not to, since it is an unreasonably low and unfair partial payment. 6. AGERO and employees continue to “shoot from the hip," misrepresent ALL facts, falsify information regarding this case in order to avoid having to reimburse us for the severe damages caused by their Tow Company to our vehicle. 7. I cordially request that Revdex.com and investigators carefully review ALL facts supplied thus far regarding each and every part of our claim, and diligently fact check our statements against each and every false statement made by AGERO and representatives. Furthermore, it is important to mention AGERO’s public records with Revdex.com and other governmental agencies and consumer industry firms show that they have a long history of this type of behavior and an over 92% dissatisfaction with their clients in the past. it is our believe that such record is no accident and it has been earned. We are simply not in the demographics to be mistreated as such. I cordially would like to encourage Revdex.com investigators to throughly process this complaint towards positive and just resolution. We have been unnecessarily wronged in this matter, tremendously inconvenienced with hours of travel for obtaining estimates, even-though we understand accidents do happen, however, their continued misrepresentation of facts, mistreatment of this case and our fully documented/supported claim is absolutely unjust, unreasonable and uncalled for. 8. In conclusion, our request for resolution continues to be the same as initially submitted. AGERO must stop inventing false/inaccurate stories, wrongfully attend to settle this case with unreasonable and low settlement offers and rightfully comply with ALL laws set forth by the state of California by properly taking full responsibility for ALL damages to our vehicle and reimburse 100% of ALL repair charges as submitted. Thank you!
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,We believe that the customer's request for service was completed.Our records indicate that the customer's vehicle was towed to the dealership as requested on 2/15/2018. Additionally, today, 2/19/2018, we contacted the service department at the customer's preferred...
dealership, Ocean [redacted] of San Juan Capistrano, CA. The service manager confirmed that the customer's vehicle was towed into the service department at 3:15pm on 2/15/2018. He confirms receipt of the vehicle as the same day service was requested.
Revdex.com:
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].
I was told by my case manager that phonographs were not needed. However the dealership is more than willing to work with me to get them. You just need to tell me for sure you need them. I have confirmed with the dealership that the estimate was faxed to my case manager but no response from my case I have made numerous calls that include voice messages to follow up and next steps. Myself and the dealership are more then will to work to a quick resolution but there has been no cooperation from your company. If you need estimate resent please provide a fax number to send. If you need pictures ( this may take a few days to do to get to the dealership to get the under body pics) then please let me know.
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,The customer alleged that the service provider was negligent when his spare tire was mounted. We reviewed the customer's complaint and we are not able to find evidence the service provider was negligent when changing the tire. The wheel should be re-tourqued after a tire...
change and should not exceed 50-100 miles of driving before doing so. The service provider's generally provide this information at the time of service but the maintenance of the vehicle is not within their control. In the intitial complaint the customer advised that he had driven 500 miles after the tire change and was driving 75-80 MPH on the full size temporary spare when the lugs loosened. As a result, we could not find any evidence that the problems the customer experienced were the result of any negligence by the service provider.
Agero provides dispatch towing and roadside assistance services on a private labeled basis to our automotive manufacturers/insurance clients under their warranty services or insurance policies.We are an independent third party supplier of roadside assistance. Agero contracts with independent...
providers of towing and roadside services to perform such services, on an independent contractor basis, on behalf of the client for their customers. Any claims as a result of this third party contractor's service or negligence should be directed to the independent contractor who performed the service. If the customer wishes to pursue a claim with the service provider's insurance company, we will provide the insurance contact information at the customer's request.In this instance we reviewed the customer's allegation that the tow company damaged their vehicle by striking another vehicle in the repair facilities parking lot. No evidence was presented by the repair shop to support this claim, including any information on a second party vehicle with damage on the repair shop lot. The repair shop advised the customer that they discovered damage to the vehicle while it was on their lot and sometime after the tow company had left the premises. The repair shop provided the information to the customer that they believe the tow company must have caused the damage. The tow company reports that the vehicle was not damaged while in their care and the vehicle was in the care and custody of the repair shop when the damage was discovered. The repair shop did not produce a second vehicle to support their claim that the service provide caused the damage to the vehicle. It is very possible that this damage occurred after the vehicle was dropped off at the repair facility which would be in the Care and Custody of the repair facility.
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reached out to the customer to request additional supporting documentation. We are currently awaiting additional information from the customer for review.
Good afternoon, We reviewed the customer's complaint and we will be contacting him by telephone today to advise that we will issue the payment for $143.00 as requested.
Revdex.com:
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].
The same information Agero is once again requesting was already provided. Agero was provided, the completed claim form with photos attached and the estimate of the repair shop. The photos were close up and clear. Agero in turn requested the same information along with a photo of the front, sides, and back of the vehicle. No where near the damaged area.
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reviewed the customer's complaint in detail. Below is our findings related to this complaint.We have reviewed the damage complaint for [redacted], who requested roadside service for his 2006 [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] reports damage to the passenger...
side front bumper and trunk liner as a result of the roadside service. Based on the information provided, we will deny the damage complaint. The reasons behind the decision are: Reason for service – Flat front driver side tire. Date of service – 1/6/18 Date Reported – 1/7/18 * Member states that he does not know what caused the flat tire. * Member states that the first tech came out and he did not have the correct tools for the tire change. * Member states that the first tech checked his trunk to see if his car came with the tool and he ripped the trunk lining. * Member states that the driver left and a second company came and they arrived with a flatbed. * Member states that the driver winched the car up from the front while he sat in the flatbed during the loading, as it was very cold. * Member states that when the driver got back into the flatbed he told him that he broke the bumper due to the chain and the cold weather. * Member states that the car was towed to his home and he did not look at the damage until the following Monday, as he had it towed a second time from his home to the tire shop. * Provider reports that the vehicle was towed using a flatbed and loaded front end facing. Provider reports that the damaged claimed was caused from the pothole that the member hit causing the flat tire. * We are unable to honor the damage complaint. The damage to the bumper is not consistent with a chain rubbing against the bumper. The bumper is broken off in pieces but not in the area where the chain might contact the bumper. There is visible damage high up on the wheel well not consistent with an impact from a chain. The member did not look at the damage until the following Monday after the tow service and the vehicle has been towed a second time prior to securing photos of the damage alleged. .
Good afternoon, Upon reviewing the evidence provided to our company directly by the customer, the key was stuck in the ignition and the vehicle was being towed due to the damage to the front suspension. The service provider was never able to get the key out of the ignition because the reason...
for the tow was a front suspension and as a result the key was stuck in the ignition. Additionally, the date of service was 8/26 and the missing key was reported on 9/13. We do not know what happened to the key between the weeks following the tow and the date it was reported. Due to the gap in time between the time of service to when the missing key was reported, we were not able to find evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the key to go missing. As a result, we cannot hold the tow driver responsible for the missing key.
Good afternoon,The fulfillment house will be sending Ms. [redacted] her membership kit via [redacted] and she will receive it by the end of next week.We have also refunded her $54.95 payment back to her [redacted] card and her membership is free for one year from her activation date of 3/3/2018. Regards
Good afternoon, We reviewed the customer's complaint. We previously investigated the details of the complaint with the customer, the tow company involved as well as with the customer's dealership. Based on the facts and evidence we concluded that there was no evidence that the...
tow company caused the problems with the engine. The dealership provided information that the engine oil was sludge indicating the oil had not been changed. We advised the customer that the damage to the engine is not consistent with a flatbed tow and was a maintenance issue. This information was provided to the customer via email and by telephone after the investigation was completed.
Based on our conversation with the customer yesterday, they were satisfied with the resolution. Unfortunately, there isn't anything more we can do at this time from our end. If they feel as though they want to pursue their complaint, they should pursue the independent service provider directly since they are the ones who made the mistake on the date in question. The customer has this information and if not, we are more than happy to provide it again to them.
Revdex.com:
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].
[The response to the complaint from the business "Agero" is not feasible. Agero states that "The customer did not provide any photos of damages or evidence before the repair work was completed." This is not correct as I sent all needed evidence to the company a month in advance for the repair of my vehicle before I was able to save enough money to pay for the repairs. This was seen in the claim.pdf included in the first submitted complaint. There is not a picture that can display a locked steering column for an automobile as that is an internal part. A mechanic would only be able to photograph the internal part after he took the car apart which bluntly displays the companies implausible request for to a customer to evade accountability. Agero also stated that "The service provider reported no problems with the tow at the time of service." The issue was that I called roadside assistance for a flat tire which was under warranty by discount tire and after Agero's tow truck company left my steering column was locked and the car was immovable. Agero's statement for the current health of their service providers tow truck company is not applicable as the issue was the tow truck employee which further points to lack of procedural duties while handling client assets. Agero also stated that "The customer was advised that photos and an estimate were required in order to make a fair decision." The estimate was sent to the company and the companies damage team was understanding of the inability to provide a locked steering column photo and a photo of my flat tire would not be relevant to the complaint which is the only picture that can display an obvious problem. With the provided documentation sent and multiple phone calls during this ordeal, I still have not received what Agero calls a fair decision nor did I have this issue before calling this company.]
Regards,
[redacted]
Good afternoon,We have reviewed the recent damage complaint for the customer who requested a roadside service on a 2016 [redacted]. The customer reported damage to the vehicle after the roadside service. The final liability decision is that we were not able to determine that the service...
provider (tow truck) caused the damage presented in the customer's photos.The customer does not note in the above complaint that the vehicle required a tow after a front end collision with an object in the road causing the passenger front tire to go flat. The photos of the vehicle show damages on passenger side and scraping underneath the vehicle. The damage is not consistent with the contact points of a wheel lift tow truck. We are unable to honor the damage complaint because there isn’t any evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the damages in question. Our company is not an insurance company and the service provider is an independent contractor. If the customer believes that the damage was not caused by the original accident we will be glad to provide the him with service providers insurance information for a complete insurance investigation of the alleged damage.
We have reviewed the recent damage complaint for [redacted] who requested roadside service on his 2007 [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] stated the fuseable link box and battery was damaged from the roadside service. The final liability decision is that we are denying the damage...
complaint. The reasons behind the denial decision are listed below: • The customer stated he needed his vehicle jumpstarted because it would not start. The service provider used a portable jump box to jump start the vehicle but was unsuccessful. The customer stated the provider attempted it to jump start it multiple times. The repair facility informed him the fuseable links box and battery was damaged. • The repair facility stated the battery that was in the vehicle was not the correct sized battery and it did not have the proper voltage. • Upon reviewing the information submitted, we are unable to hold the provider liable for the damage to the vehicle. • The provider used a portable jump box to jump start the vehicle. There is no evidence to show the provider jump started the vehicle incorrectly to cause any damage. • The battery that was in the vehicle was the incorrect sized battery and it was not damaged by the service provider. • There isn’t any physical evidence to support that the damage took place during the roadside service. We are unable to honor the damage complaint because there isn’t any evidence that the service provider did anything negligent to cause the damage to the customer’s vehicle.
Good afternoon,We are sorry that the customer is not satisfied with the decision provided. In order to properly assess an allegation of vehicle damage caused by a towing company, we require photos and evidence from the customer. In this case, the customer was not able to provide any...
evidence to support her claim. In fairness to all parties, without such evidence we cannot hold a service provider liable for alleged damages. In this case we had no photos or evidence to present to the tow company. As a result we could not seek payment from the tow company based only on the opinion of the repair shop.
Good afternoon,The replacement of the wheel lock with tax is just over $53.00. The dealership wrote $290 labor charge but does not state what it is for. We are confused if they are charging $290 to replace the lug nut locks or how many hours of labor is needed since the part is only for a lug nut key.
Good afternoon,We believe that we have been able to successfully resolve the customer's complaint. We reviewed the estimate submitted and we were able to speak with the repair shop. Although it was difficult to determine with the photos presented for review, we are satisfied that the...
grill was indeed damaged along with the bumper. We have contacted the customer to advise that the balance requested for the repair of the grill will be sent via check directly to the address we have on file.
Good afternoon,Please be advised that we have reviewed the customer's complaint and determined the following:* Customer was not present for the service * The customer hit a deer and discovered the damage nine days after the date of service * The Service Provider towed the vehicle with a...
flatbed and loaded it front first * There isn’t any scraping or scratches underneath the front or rear bumper to support any damage happening when the vehicle was loaded or unloaded * The damage to the left front door supports that it occurred when the customer hit a deer. The damage be claimed is in the same area where the customer hit the deer. * Based on the investigation, we are not able to hold the provider liable for the damages.Also, if the customer is claiming that items were stolen from the vehicle, this is a criminal matter and will need to be dealt with by the customers local police department. The customer should also contact the party who had possession of the vehicle at the time of the accident to discuss the allegations further.