All City Towing

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your recent e-mail in connection with the above captioned matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident and have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The Complainant's bike was towed...

on March 3, 20 15 at approximately 10: 10PM at the direction of the [redacted] Police Department. The operator, who was not the Complainant or the registered owner, was arrested at the scene.Following the arrest, the bike was towed to our secure storage facility located in [redacted]. The following day, the bike was claimed by the Complainant. The damage was immediately noticed at the time of release and a claim was filed for same. Our claims investigation revealed the damage being claimed pre-existed our involvement. Our driver's invoice (enclosed) clearly noted the damage as being present at the time her arrived at the scene to tow the bike. Simply put, we did not cause this damage. We do not dispute the existence of the damage; however, we dispute that we caused the damage. The bike was toed in strict compliance with the towing specifications of the bike's manufacturer, Suzuki. We respectfully suggest the Complainant should have a frank discussion with the operator as to this damage because we clearly were not the cause. We trust our response adequately addresses the Complainant's concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Hello. I do not accept their rebuttal. I'm not sure of policies but there is no signature acknowledging anything on their documentation from officer or person operating the motorcycle that night. This is the most recent photo I have showing there was no damage to the right side of bike. And a photo showing there was existing marks on the left side which I am not claiming  Regards,[redacted]

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of March 30th in connection with the above captioned matter. We have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The vehicle was involved in an accident in [redacted]. The [redacted] Police...

Department called us following the accident and requested we tow the vehicle to our secure storage facility located at [redacted] in [redacted]. Once a vehicle is placed in inventory, the registered owner and/or their agent can have the vehicle moved provided the forms required by statute are appropriately completed. A.R.S. 28-4847 allows the release of the vehicle to an insurer or their agent once each element of the statute's requirements has been addressed. This is where the breakdown occurred in this instance.The statutory compliant release was not received by our company until March 31 st . As such, the vehicle was not available for release until that day. Once we received the release, the vehicle was immediately released. The statute noted above was placed into law by lobbyists for the insurance industry. This is not a " towing statute" per se. We provided a release form to the Complainant. Apparently, the Complainant's insurer was not aware o f the statutory requirements in Arizona.While we understand and sympathize with the Complainant's frustration, we believe it is being misdirected. It is never our intent to "delay with every effort" as hi s e-mail suggests rather our intent was to remain fully compliant with the language of the statute in place. We believe this complaint falls outside the purview of the Revdex.com as this is a statutory issue; therefore, we respectfully request it be removed from our file.Thank you for allowing us the ability to appropriately respond to this complaint.

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail received yesterday in connection with the above caption matter. We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's complaint to the Better Business...

Bureau.The Complainant originally made a claim with us back on February 10, 20 15. After examining the circumstances surrounding the claim and the tow, we developed sufficient information to make a determination regarding the matter. In determining our responsibility for payment of the claim, we were guided by information obtained from the claimant and the other parties acquainted with the facts of the loss. Further, we considered the physical evidence and the applicable law. After careful consideration of the facts and the law, we denied the claim in writing on February 12, 2015 and sent the Complainant a written denial. In our denial, we advised the Complainant to provide us with additional information if it was felt our denial was improper. We never received any supplementary information; however, we received an inflammatory e-mail filled with personal attacks along with photos of the areas of damage for which the Complainant feel we are responsible.In the same e-mail from the Complainant, she indicates both the body shop and the secondary towing company who towed the car to the body shop have indicated this is towing damage. In light of this previously unknown information we have requested statements from both entities to support the information in the Complainant's e-mail.This is the type of information which may have an impact on our decision. We await same.
Emotion is a powerful thing. We eliminate emotion and personal attacks when we conduct business as they have no business in business. We make our decisions based on all available facts at the time. If new information is brought to light after a claims decision, we are prepared to provide further consideration - just as the last paragraph of our letter states. We believe this is a responsible business practice. A copy of our original denial letter is enclosed for your review.
We trust our response adequately addresses your concerns. We still await the documents we have requested from the Complainant. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of March 10, 2014 in connect ion with the above captioned matter.

We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's...

claim to the Revdex.com.

The Complainant's vehicle was towed on September 22, 2012 at approximately 4:44PM at the direction of the [redacted] Police Department following an arrest.  The vehicle was taken to our secure storage facility located at [redacted] in Tempe .  The Complainant called us on November 14th and asked what was needed to get the vehicle released and we advised him the vehicle had been placed on a 3- day hold by [redacted] PD. He was advised he needed to contact [redacted] PD for further instructions. On November 21st, the Complainant came in to get property out of the vehicle and left without any issue. On November 26 he came back with a representative of a DUI Interlock Company to install as DUI interlock device.  This is the day the window was noticed to be broken.

We immediately commenced an investigation and determined a neighboring business was allowing an employee to "blow things up" in their yard.  This caused debris to scatter and ultimately caused the window to break.  While this was of no fault of our company, the vehicle was in the care, custody and control of our company at the time the damage occurred.  As such , we immediately accepted responsibility for the repair.

The vehicle in question is owned by [redacted], the Complainant 's father. As such, our written letter and claims acknowledgement was sent to him at his address in North [redacted], which was clearly noted on the [redacted] PD report. Our letter to [redacted] dated November 29th was returned to us as undeliverable.  Upon receipt of the returned letter, we confirmed the address and sent a second letter to the same address. This 2nd letter was never returned as undeliverable.   Copies of our letters are enclosed for your review.

The Complainant's claims of never receiving phone calls or written correspondence are unfounded.  He also claims he gave explicit instructions as to the requirement for "[redacted] glass". This is untrue.  I have personally spoken with the Complainant on 3 different occasions since the window was damaged. Any inferences to the contrary are baseless, less than factual and are without merit.

After the damage was discovered, we made arrangements to have a licensed, insured and bonded glass company replace the rear glass while the vehicle was still in our care, custody and control just as our letter of November 29th stated.  We did this to limit the inconvenience to the owner of the vehicle.  The glass was replaced with new, aftermarket glass.  This is the same glass any insurer would have paid to put in the vehicle. It is not "[redacted] glass"; however, it is the same glass that [redacted] buys, absent the "[redacted]" stamp on the glass.  It's made by the same company and is of identical materials and quality.

At some point after the car was claimed, the Complainant expressed his dissatisfaction with the glass repair. He claimed it was not "[redacted] glass" and wanted only "[redacted] glass". He also claimed the window had tint on it and the replacement one did not. He also claimed the rear window defroster was not functioning properly. I personally spoke with the Complainant and advised him that we would absolutely pay for the tint and we would likewise have the window defroster inspected by the glass company who did the initial replacement. He immediately made demands that we pay him $1,300 for "[redacted] glass" and the conversation became highly unproductive from there.

Our offer to have the tint done and the installation inspected by the original installer stands. If the defroster is not working due to an improper replacement or defective glass, the installer should be given the opportunity to correct this condition. Any independent reviewer of the facts would have the same opinion.

We trust our response adequately addresses the Complainant's concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

 

Sincerely,

[redacted]. [redacted]

General Manager

On Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is be satisfactory to me.  We received the refund check in the amount of $5.00 from the business, as well as a polite courtesy call from the owner/manager of the business apologizing for the confusion.

Regards,

January 21,2016 JAN 2 5 2016 

[redacted]Dispute Resolution  ConsultantRevdex.com of Central and N. Arizona 4428 N. 121 Street Phoenix, AZ  85014Complainant:...

[redacted] Revdex.com  Case#: [redacted]ACT Invoice#:  [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of late last evening in connection with the above captioned matter. We have read the Complainant's claim to the Better Busine•ss Bureau and we now wish to provide factual information with respect to this claim.On the date the vehicle was towed , the Complainant's 2008 Chevrolet truck was stopped by the [redacted] Department and the operator was arrested for suspicion of DUI. A breathalyzer reading of .191 was obtained from the driver of the vehicle, which is nearly 2 times the legal limit. Our driver arrived on scene shortly after the [redacted] intervention. He walked around the vehicle and marked any readily visib le damage onhis invoice.  He then proceeded to load the vehicle onto his truck and take it to our securestorage facility in Tempe . A copy of our driver' s invoice is enclosed for your reference.The bodies of our tow trucks are white and the beds of our trucks are red. The area of pre-existing damage on the Complainant's vehicle, which is being claimed as damage caused by All City Towing, clearly doesn't come close to l ining up with the height of our truck 's red bed. This information , coupled with the fact that the [redacted] officer on scene will confirm the damage pre-existed our invol vement , lead s us to no other conclusion. The damage was not caused by All City Towing.This damage clearly pre-exi sted our involvement; therefore, we are unable to provide any compensation for the damage bein g claimed . If the Complainant chooses to file an action in small claims court, we are prepared to defend the claim, call the SPD officer as afavorable witness and file a counter-claim for malicious prosecution.  We trust ourposition on this matter is clear.Thank you for allowing us the ability to appropriately respond to this complaint. Jeffrey D. [redacted] General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of earlier this afternoon in connection with the above caption matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's complaint to the Better Business...

Bureau.The Complainant called us for towing service back on October 10, 2104. We arrived, preformed the service and at the time we were dropping the car at his house, he was unable to make payment for the services. He had a stack about 4 inches high of $15.00 gift cards and he wanted to sue these as payment.  We unfortunately were unable to process them without swiping the cards; therefore, we could not accept this form of payment.We accept cash and all major credit cards as forms of payment. We believe this is reasonable and 99.9999% of our customers seem to feel the same way. We don't barter, accept gift cards or other forms of interesting trades as payment. The Complainant conveniently omitted the fact that he is not the registered owner of the vehicle in question, that he was quoted a price and that he was provided the accepted forms of payment at the time of his original call on October 10th.Curiously, the Complainant also omitted the fact that he came to our facility on October 11   and caused a disturbance, which resulted in the police being called. An officer from the Chandler Police Department arrived shortly thereafter and took a report. He, too, thought it was curious as to why someone would have a 4 inch stack of $15.00 gift cards on his person. Nevertheless, he advised the Complainant (by way of a phone call to the registered owners of the vehicle) that he would be cited for trespassing if he were to return to our facility.This issue is simple. We performed a service and an acceptable method of payment was not received. We since have received payment for the original tow and the secondary tow to the registered owner's desired location. We consider the matter resolved.We trust our response adequately addresses your concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry. Sincerely,[redacted]General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of Sunday, March 9, 20 15 in connection with the above captioned matter. We actually received 2 e-mails - one at 4:33AM and one at 4:40AM. The have different complaint numbers; however, they are for the same...

Complainant. Please remove one from the record.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident and have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The Complainant's vehicle was towed on January 28, 20 15 at approximately 5:00PM at the direction of the Mesa Police Department.Following the Complainant's arrest, the vehicle was towed to our secure storage facility located in Mesa. On February 10th, some 12 days after the tow, the Complainant arrived to obtain property from the vehicle. He was unable to provide proof of ownership for the vehicle so he was not allowed to remove property. Providing proof of ownership is a contract requirement and not something we have any latitude over.On March 5th, the Complainant claimed the vehicle at our facility and we assume he brought it back to his house. At the time the vehicle was claimed and for the next 4 days, we never heard from the Complainant regarding any of the property that is now being claimed. Our first notice was on March 9th. We cannot be held responsible for items after the vehicle has been released to the registered owner.
We trust our response adequately addresses the Complainant's concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of yesterday's e-mail in connection with the above captioned matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident and have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The Complainant's bike was towed on March 3, 2015 at approximately 10:10PM at the direction of the [redacted]. The operator, who was not the Complainant or the registered owner, was arrested at the scene. We do not dispute the existence of the damage; however, we dispute that we caused the damage. The bike was toed in strict compliance with the towing specifications of the bike's manufacturer, Suzuki. Simply put, we did not cause this damage; however, in the interest of avoiding additional discussion we are willing to make a settlement offer of $100 to resolve this matter. If this is acceptable, we will require a signed release from the Complainant. We look forward to resolving this matter in the near future and we thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.Sincerely, [redacted]General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

Review: I called the business to have my car towed to my house. My car had simply broken down on the freeway.

No Police were involved it was not Impounded. When the Driver arrived with my car.

I handed him payment in full $131.

The problem arose when the business proceeded to verbally call my [redacted] Gift Card account nubmers

in to dispatch. Where they then Manually entered the into there POS system.

As it turns out the [redacted] Cards Have"Electronic Use only" printed on them.

Meaning the must be swiped like 99% of business do through a Magnetic card Reader.

None of this was stated before hand.

What then happened is the Company Refused to give me my car.

The took it to there impound lot to incur charges and possibly own the car

if I never paid.

So as of now I do not have my car. They seem to think it is theres.

I had payment. They have no rights to my car.Desired Settlement: Change their POS policy and terms of payment.

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of earlier this afternoon in connection with the above caption matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's complaint to the Revdex.com.The Complainant called us for towing service back on October 10, 2104. We arrived, preformed the service and at the time we were dropping the car at his house, he was unable to make payment for the services. He had a stack about 4 inches high of $15.00 gift cards and he wanted to sue these as payment. We unfortunately were unable to process them without swiping the cards; therefore, we could not accept this form of payment.We accept cash and all major credit cards as forms of payment. We believe this is reasonable and 99.9999% of our customers seem to feel the same way. We don't barter, accept gift cards or other forms of interesting trades as payment. The Complainant conveniently omitted the fact that he is not the registered owner of the vehicle in question, that he was quoted a price and that he was provided the accepted forms of payment at the time of his original call on October 10th.Curiously, the Complainant also omitted the fact that he came to our facility on October 11 and caused a disturbance, which resulted in the police being called. An officer from the Chandler Police Department arrived shortly thereafter and took a report. He, too, thought it was curious as to why someone would have a 4 inch stack of $15.00 gift cards on his person. Nevertheless, he advised the Complainant (by way of a phone call to the registered owners of the vehicle) that he would be cited for trespassing if he were to return to our facility.This issue is simple. We performed a service and an acceptable method of payment was not received. We since have received payment for the original tow and the secondary tow to the registered owner's desired location. We consider the matter resolved.We trust our response adequately addresses your concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry. Sincerely,[redacted]General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

Review: There wasn't really a title that all of this falls under, so I just picked a category. I went to a friends condo the other day. The condo is inside of a gated community. My friend who lives there said that the tow sign before the gate is to let anyone coming in know that if they do not have a permit to park there, they would be towed. He then explained that it would be okay to park outside of the gate, which is where I parked my car. As I parker I noticed there where also others cars parked outside of the gate too. My other friend that was also there was told the same thing and parked next to my vehicle. That friend had to leave and went outside to get her car and it was gone, there was a tow truck in the parking lot and he told her he had towed her vehicle away. She asked him not to tow my car too and he proceeded to hook my car up to tow away. He did however, allow my friend to ride in his tow truck to the tow yard. My friend called me from outside and told me what was happening, I asked her to tell the driver that I was right there and that I would move my car, she did and the driver towed my car anyways. I had someone drive me behind the tow truck driver to the yard so I could retrieve my vehicle. When we got there he said he couldn't give me my car and that I had to call another number, I called the number and they asked me for my vin#. I responded with no I don't have that information because it's in my car and the person on the phone responded with a rude sigh. He eventually found my car info and then asked me how much money I was quoted? I asked him why he would ask me that if it was a standard fee and he stumbled before finally just stating to me that it would be $157 or I couldn't get my car back. My car hadn't even been put into his system yet and he wanted $157, that is highway robbery! What the guy on the phone didn't know was that I had called while on my way down to get my car and the lady that answered said it should be under $100. Obviously, this tow company charges you based on how they feel at the time. They refused to let me have my car unless I paid the $157, so my boyfriend gave then our debit card and then we were allowed to leave with my car. The tow truck driver has also given his phone number to my friend while taking her down to the lot to retrieve her car. Really? After taking all her money and mine? All in all the situation didn't have to happen the way it did. I understand everyone has a job to do including tow drivers but my friend was standing there with my car and you took it anyways. You didn't need to do that, I could have moved it somewhere else. There was also no sign on the space I parked in stating you couldn't park there. The tow guy said there was a sign in front of another parked car but I wouldn't have been able to see that from where I was.Desired Settlement: I believe this situation speaks to the character of your employees. This situation didn't have to happen this way and complexes with an area non marked outside of a gated community should be more thorough with signage. I would like a refund.

Business

Response:

We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's complaint to the Revdex.com.The Complainant's vehicle was towed from private property back on December 6, 2014 as it was in violation of the parking rules and regulations of the property. These regulations are clearly spelled out in the lease and/or CC&R documents. Unfortunately, ignorance to the applicable rules is not a valid reason to disregard them.Our drivers are required by city code to drop a vehicle if the registered owner comes out while in the process of a tow. In the instant case, the registered owner was not present; therefore, the vehicle was towed. The signage for the property was compliant with state and city requirements. It was present and visible. As such, the vehicle was towed from the scene in strict compliance with our towing services agreement with the owners and/or managers of the private property. We remain confident this was a lawful tow.We are more concerned with the issue of our driver exchanging phone numbers with the Complainant's friend, other individual involved. Our investigation into this allegation confirmed it actually occurred. As a result, we addressed this inappropriate activity with our employee. Should this issue arise in the future and involve the same employee, they will be immediately terminated.It's interesting that the only portion of the complaint that we believe is valid is something the Complainant requested we NOT address with our employee on several occasions. In separate phone conversations with our Private Property Towing Divisional Manager and other employees who spoke with the Complainant, she indicated she DID NOT want us to mention anything to our employee. If this was as offensive to her as outlined in her complaint, why was she requesting we not address our employee over this inappropriate behavior? It seems a bit disingenuous and regardless of her requests, we addressed the matter with our employee as it represented a serious infraction of our code of conduct.We extend our apologies to the Complainant's friend for our employees' inappropriate behavior and trust our response adequately addresses the concerns contained within the complaint. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I disagree with some of what is in the response from the towing company. I understand and expected that the towing company would respond with city and/or state codes and/or laws. As stated previously, in coming out of the complex, not going into it from the front, I was not able to see any signage for towing outside of the gated resident area because the sign that is posted was covered behind other vehicles. Not all spaces are marked. My space was not marked. I was coming out from inside the complex where it is gated. My friend/co-worker was with the driver and told the driver that I was walking up there and would move my car when they towed it anyways. The reason I asked (only once) to not have the other party that was there contacted was because they are currently employed with me. It has the potential to create many problems within our place of employment. I did not have multiple converasations with this company. I only spoke with their office rep once. She had assured me that she would look into my complaint and get back with me. She did not ever get back with me as to what was being done to resolve the issues. That is when I contacted the Revdex.com. I had to call their office multiple times just to get someone one the phone that would speak with me regarding a complaint. I have yet to receive a return call from this business to let me know what was done to resolve my complaint. There were so many issues that I had not even added to my complaint because it was already so lengthy. In looking at the situation for what it was, I do feel that this company had multiple issues that have not been addressed to me at all either verbally or in writing. Including:-Professionalism-Client response-Doing the right thing-Safety-Questionable price quoting/fee'sI did not previously bring this up however, after reading this companies response and inability to do the right thing, I am going to add this information. I didn't know if it was too much after everything else, but if it bothered me I feel as though I should. My safety was also put at risk that night. I was told by the driver to meet him at the tow company and given the address. When I got there (after hours) there was no one at the building. This building/tow yard is in South Phoenix, in a very bad area of town. I was waiting out front for quite some time before I was able to get a hold of anyone again. There was no way to talk to someone or instructions on where else to go at the building. I finally got a hold of the driver again and was instructed to drive down the next side street and that road would curve around to the back of their tow yard and I could meet there. It was not a secure feeling to be put in that kind of situation at night in south phoenix. It's just one more thing that probably should not have been done that way. As a company, you shouldn't instruct someone to come to your place of business in the dark if no one is going to be there in south phoenix. It's also a very uncomfortable feeling to be told to drive down a side street in the dark and meet someone in the back alley of some buildings. This was an awful night for me.

Regards,[redacted]

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of yesterday morning in connection with the above captioned matter.We have carefully examined the Complainant's response to our dated December 30, 2014. The response seems to add additional complaints to the originals, which were in the original.The vehicle was towed at approximately 9:23PM. The vehicle was released the same evening at 10:09PM. Our storage facility located at [redacted] (not south Phoenix) closes at 8PM. We certainly can' t be expected to keep our facilities open 24/7. Regardless, even if the facility was open, it was dark at this location and every other location in the State at the time the Complainant picked up the car. She certainly could have waited until the morning to claim the vehicle when it would have been light; however, she made the conscious choice to come when she did. We did not make this choice, the Complainant did.We clearly followed the state statutes, local ordinance and the terms and conditions of the towing services contract for the location where the vehicle was towed. The signage was not only compliant, it was also visible. There is no requirement for each spot to have a sign. Any independent reviewer or the facts would quickly determine this was a lawful tow.In the interest of resolving this complaint without the need for protracted discussion, we wish to offer a one-time, courtesy adjustment of $50.00. If this is acceptable to the Complainant, please advise and we will proceed accordingly.We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this secondary inquiry.

Review: My truck got towed due to other circumstances . My truck was fine when it was towed I had a passanger with me that will vogue that my truck was fine before towed also my wife. The truck is new to us and I did not do this to my truck I also have the officer on seen to vough it was not dented when it was towed. I submitted a claim and they are saying they did not do this to my truck! I want to see the video of the tow yard the night my truck was towed and the video on tow truck. The employee on duty when I picked up truck even said it was the tow truck did it! Being the dent and RED paint on my white truck just so happens to be the tow truck is red! I will dispute this and if it is not resolved I will be taking this to court!Desired Settlement: 4,000 to fix my new truck

Business

Response:

January 21,2016 JAN 2 5 2016

[redacted]Dispute Resolution ConsultantRevdex.com of Central and N. Arizona 4428 N. 121 Street Phoenix, AZ 85014Complainant: [redacted] Revdex.com Case#: [redacted]ACT Invoice#: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of late last evening in connection with the above captioned matter. We have read the Complainant's claim to the Better Busine•ss Bureau and we now wish to provide factual information with respect to this claim.On the date the vehicle was towed , the Complainant's 2008 Chevrolet truck was stopped by the [redacted] Department and the operator was arrested for suspicion of DUI. A breathalyzer reading of .191 was obtained from the driver of the vehicle, which is nearly 2 times the legal limit. Our driver arrived on scene shortly after the [redacted] intervention. He walked around the vehicle and marked any readily visib le damage onhis invoice. He then proceeded to load the vehicle onto his truck and take it to our securestorage facility in Tempe . A copy of our driver' s invoice is enclosed for your reference.The bodies of our tow trucks are white and the beds of our trucks are red. The area of pre-existing damage on the Complainant's vehicle, which is being claimed as damage caused by All City Towing, clearly doesn't come close to l ining up with the height of our truck 's red bed. This information , coupled with the fact that the [redacted] officer on scene will confirm the damage pre-existed our invol vement , lead s us to no other conclusion. The damage was not caused by All City Towing.This damage clearly pre-exi sted our involvement; therefore, we are unable to provide any compensation for the damage bein g claimed . If the Complainant chooses to file an action in small claims court, we are prepared to defend the claim, call the SPD officer as afavorable witness and file a counter-claim for malicious prosecution. We trust ourposition on this matter is clear.Thank you for allowing us the ability to appropriately respond to this complaint. Jeffrey D. [redacted] General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

Review: On Feb. 6th someone hit my van (that I had just bought from a dealership 7 days prior) while my husband was driving it. Before the tow company arrived my husband inspected every inch of my van before it got towed away so that we could report all damage and the ONLY damage was on the front passenger side which was from the accident. Because it was after 5pm the tow company had to tow it to their tow yard & said we could come get it the next day, which is exactly what we did. The following morning we arrived the the location of All City Towing and signed a release then waited out back while they brought the van out to their "loading zone". As soon as it was brought out we immediately saw the damage to my van and we both knew what it was from. It's very obvious. There was a crack on the underside of the bumper towards the left and missing paint in the same area on the right. This coincides to damage that is caused when being towed incorrectly. I immediately called [redacted] to report the damage and without thinking we left the location & headed home. We were instructed by [redacted] to leave the van there so that it can be towed to the auto body shop. After calling [redacted] I called All City to report damage. [redacted] answered and argued with me for 5 minutes and tried refusing to go out and take pictures before the van was towed away. They wouldn't email or fax us the damage report form and said we had to come back to their location to fill it out. This was an hr away and we were car-less so we were not able to get back to file a report until the 10th. In the meantime, my van was towed to [redacted] and I forewarned them about the damage caused by All City so that the 2nd tow company wasn't blamed for the damage. [redacted] at [redacted] said she's been in the towing business for 20 years & she agrees this was caused by the tow truck drivers negligence. She even provided a statement to [redacted] for me. I also emailed pictures of the damage to other tow companies who also agreed this was caused by incorrect towing. Today, I received notification from All City Towing that they denied responsibility and will not pay for damages.Desired Settlement: I want them to pay to fix the damage to my bumper that THEY caused.

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail received yesterday in connection with the above caption matter. We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. We have also read the Complainant's complaint to the Revdex.com.The Complainant originally made a claim with us back on February 10, 20 15. After examining the circumstances surrounding the claim and the tow, we developed sufficient information to make a determination regarding the matter. In determining our responsibility for payment of the claim, we were guided by information obtained from the claimant and the other parties acquainted with the facts of the loss. Further, we considered the physical evidence and the applicable law. After careful consideration of the facts and the law, we denied the claim in writing on February 12, 2015 and sent the Complainant a written denial. In our denial, we advised the Complainant to provide us with additional information if it was felt our denial was improper. We never received any supplementary information; however, we received an inflammatory e-mail filled with personal attacks along with photos of the areas of damage for which the Complainant feel we are responsible.In the same e-mail from the Complainant, she indicates both the body shop and the secondary towing company who towed the car to the body shop have indicated this is towing damage. In light of this previously unknown information we have requested statements from both entities to support the information in the Complainant's e-mail.This is the type of information which may have an impact on our decision. We await same.

Review: Just recently my son who traveled to Phoenix AZ with my car and got into an accident, since then my vehicle was impounded at All City towing, my insurance company has been trying to release the vehicle to estimate the damages, all city towing has been difficult in this process, continue to delay with every effort and with minor excuses in order to amount more storage charges and causing more pain and problems to release the vehicle.Desired Settlement: Refund $400.00 to cover expenses while my son had to wait for results.

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail of March 30th in connection with the above captioned matter. We have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The vehicle was involved in an accident in [redacted]. The [redacted] Police Department called us following the accident and requested we tow the vehicle to our secure storage facility located at [redacted] in [redacted]. Once a vehicle is placed in inventory, the registered owner and/or their agent can have the vehicle moved provided the forms required by statute are appropriately completed. A.R.S. 28-4847 allows the release of the vehicle to an insurer or their agent once each element of the statute's requirements has been addressed. This is where the breakdown occurred in this instance.The statutory compliant release was not received by our company until March 31 st . As such, the vehicle was not available for release until that day. Once we received the release, the vehicle was immediately released. The statute noted above was placed into law by lobbyists for the insurance industry. This is not a " towing statute" per se. We provided a release form to the Complainant. Apparently, the Complainant's insurer was not aware o f the statutory requirements in Arizona.While we understand and sympathize with the Complainant's frustration, we believe it is being misdirected. It is never our intent to "delay with every effort" as hi s e-mail suggests rather our intent was to remain fully compliant with the language of the statute in place. We believe this complaint falls outside the purview of the Revdex.com as this is a statutory issue; therefore, we respectfully request it be removed from our file.Thank you for allowing us the ability to appropriately respond to this complaint.

Review: My 2007 Suzuki Gsxr 750 was towed to their impound yard in [redacted], AZ 3/3/15 and when I picked it up from them less than 24 hrs later the whole right side fairing (fender) was damaged and has a hole where their tow strap broke through the fairing. I notified the representative who pushed out the bike from the back and he took pictures and said to fill out a claim form which we did honest and accurately. A week later I received a letter saying they are denying my claim because the damage was already there and the drivers notes clearly state it. I went to the Police dept to get a copy of the report since it involved impound and the note is not specific nor does it say what side any noticeable damage was on and no pictures or signatures from owner acknowledging damage. There was a couple scuffs and a crack on the left side that was pre-existing but the right side that is now damaged was perfect before the tow. I called the main office and asked for [redacted] who is the General Manager and I only got a voicemail so I left a message. I received no response and called a couple days later and same result. I have called 7 times total and have not got a call back and when I ask to speak to someone that can assist they told me " what do you want me to do about it" and transfer me. Horrible experience and I just want my motorcycle repaired.Desired Settlement: I would like the right side of my motorcycle fairing replaced since their driver damaged it when providing the service.

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of your recent e-mail in connection with the above captioned matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident and have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The Complainant's bike was towed on March 3, 20 15 at approximately 10: 10PM at the direction of the [redacted] Police Department. The operator, who was not the Complainant or the registered owner, was arrested at the scene.Following the arrest, the bike was towed to our secure storage facility located in [redacted]. The following day, the bike was claimed by the Complainant. The damage was immediately noticed at the time of release and a claim was filed for same. Our claims investigation revealed the damage being claimed pre-existed our involvement. Our driver's invoice (enclosed) clearly noted the damage as being present at the time her arrived at the scene to tow the bike. Simply put, we did not cause this damage. We do not dispute the existence of the damage; however, we dispute that we caused the damage. The bike was toed in strict compliance with the towing specifications of the bike's manufacturer, Suzuki. We respectfully suggest the Complainant should have a frank discussion with the operator as to this damage because we clearly were not the cause. We trust our response adequately addresses the Complainant's concerns. We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Hello. I do not accept their rebuttal. I'm not sure of policies but there is no signature acknowledging anything on their documentation from officer or person operating the motorcycle that night. This is the most recent photo I have showing there was no damage to the right side of bike. And a photo showing there was existing marks on the left side which I am not claiming Regards,[redacted]

Business

Response:

This correspondence will confirm receipt and review of yesterday's e-mail in connection with the above captioned matter.We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident and have read the Complainant's claim to the Revdex.com. The Complainant's bike was towed on March 3, 2015 at approximately 10:10PM at the direction of the [redacted]. The operator, who was not the Complainant or the registered owner, was arrested at the scene. We do not dispute the existence of the damage; however, we dispute that we caused the damage. The bike was toed in strict compliance with the towing specifications of the bike's manufacturer, Suzuki. Simply put, we did not cause this damage; however, in the interest of avoiding additional discussion we are willing to make a settlement offer of $100 to resolve this matter. If this is acceptable, we will require a signed release from the Complainant. We look forward to resolving this matter in the near future and we thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.Sincerely, [redacted]General ManagerOn Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

This is a complaint against ACT Towing, specifically the All city towing location on N 20th st, Phx Arizona.

Absolutely abysmal. This tow yard stole over $2,000 worth of property out my vehicle, ripping out my amp and snapping my trunk cardboard. They provided false statements on multiple occasions claiming I had already been to their tow yard and removed the property, then they said my girlfriend was the one who had taken the property after I asked for the proof that I was there. They couldn't prove she was there, and I pointed out that she wasn't my spouse or a registered owner and there would be no way for her to legally be allowed access without a notorized document. It will take them weeks to respond to the claim, then the person who handles it is never present when you call. But as I had no picture evidence they claimed they aren't liable. I have been provided no documentation from them regarding an parties accessing my vehicle. Currently pursuing litigation regarding the falsifying documents and unpermitted access to my vehicle. Avoid them at all costs!!! 0 out of 5 stars. Horrible customer service.

Has anyone else ever had an issue or concern with All City Towing 2031 W. 1st Street Tempe, Az 85281. I recently had my vehicle towed their on 2/1/2014. On 2/6/2014 I tried to retrieve my personal posessions and was not allowed to. When I went to pick up my vehicle in March I noticed that my firearm, and half of my tools were missing. I filed a complaint with [redacted] D. [redacted] on behalf of ACT Towing, LLC. Where I was informed that they must respectfully decline any payment or reimbursement on my firearm. It was in my vehicle when it was towed, and when I went to retrieve my vehicle the firearm and my tools and neither was there.
Customer Reviews for All City Towing - Revdex.com serving Central, Northern and Western Arizona http://www.Revdex.com.org/central-northern-western-arizona/business-reviews/towi...⇄

I am a resident of ([redacted]), [redacted], AZ. My vehicle was released to All City Towing by one of the local police departments. I contacted the All City Towing phone and my call was transferred to [redacted]. What can I say about [redacted]? In a couple of mins we became friends. I needed my car to be towed from All City Towing to [redacted]. He explained the nuts and bolts of towing (since I never had involved in toeing in my lifetime) including only body shop available for this dealership, their phone number, address, person to be contacted, etc, etc. If I have to give a medal to [redacted]s, it is unquestionably "GOLD MEDAL". You made things happen. [redacted], I thank you from bottom of my heart. All City Towing is fortunate to have you as its employee.

Review: they went to tow our vehicle and the driver was new and should of had a supervisor with him. He did thousands of dollars damage to my equipment. I have a police report stating that the tow truck driver was at fault. Can't get anyone to call me back and now I am getting our company attorney involved. They also after damaging my equipment tried to hold my equipment hostage and I still had to pay the wrecker bill. I will be taking serious action against this company. They are shameful!!!!!!!!!!Desired Settlement: 9,000.00

Business

Response:

Dear Ms. Mosley:

This will confirm receipt and review of your e-mail dated March 22, 2014 in connection with the above captioned matter. I apologize for the delay in my response. I was out of the office at the time the complaint was received. Unfortunately, I have been in and out since returning due to an unforeseen circumstance.

We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this incident. The complainant's tractor/trailer was found to be off the roadway at just after 1:00AM back on March 5, 2014. The issue we found on arrival and how it was originally reported were two entirely different scenarios. This was a much more involved recovery that was originally described.

Regardless of the situation or the way it was described to us, our operator caused damage to the trailer of the Complainant. As I was out of the office, the matter was reported to another employee who did not appropriately escalate the matter. The matter has since been reported to our insurer and they will be contacting the claimant (if they have not already done so) shortly.

We thank you for the opportunity to review and respond appropriately to this inquiry.

Sincerely,

[redacted] D. [redacted]

General Manager

On Behalf of ACT Towing, LLC

Consumer

Response:

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. I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.

Regards,

I have spoke with the insurance company but it is no where near resolved once it is you can close the case but not until I receive payment. Thanks [redacted]