Andy Mohr Hyundai

The customer has processed replacement RMA's with usThe customer was told they would be upgraded to a *** *** *** * *** *** which is GSM unlockedThe customer's device that we are replacing is a *** *** *** *** *** * *** ** * *** *** All of our
replacements are processed like for like, meaning if we have stock of the customer's original device to replace with we will replace with the same device/modelThe customer was sent a like for like replacementWe will not be providing the customer with a GSM unlocked device as this is not a like for like device and is out of stockWe apologize for any misinformation the customer was provided with and will be following up with the people that provided this informationWe consider this resolved. ***

We have reached out to the customer and will be sending a replacement todayWe consider this resolved

Sent: Friday, April 07, 10:AM Subject: Complaint ID: *** Whom it may concern, This case has been resolvedThe customer was refunded the Premium Fee of $on 4/4/17. Regards, Ashley Motorola Customer Care Executive Customer Relations Department

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint
I feel that my phone has over heated and I' not even sure how Motorola has the ability to conclude that my cell phone didn't over heat since the cell phone is still in my posssessionPlus my phone does have software malfuctionsMy apps are closing outWhen dialing the number the screen will black outIt won't let me access my voice mailMy cell phone wasn't even picking up my phone calls correctly and cuts outI constantly have to shut it off and turn it back onI had explained all thisNow I'm just going into further detail because these glitches started happening when my cell phone started to begin over heating. And I mentioned this all in my verbal complaint when I contacted themThey are not applying the warrenty to me properly since the over heating is covered under the warrenty and was initially what caused the first crackAlso software malfunctuions are covered under the warrenty since my phone was constantly glitching when it started to over heatMotorola isn't making themselves clearI'm not sure if they are asking $plus tax to simply replace the glass and ignore the rest of the cell phone's issue or if they are asking for $plus tax to replace my entire cell phone so I won't have these constant malfunction issuesI've never had such bad customer service with a cell phone companyThis phone cost a few hundred dollars and they won't take any responablity for their own productApple has better warrenty then this company since they are willing to replace a Ipod for less then a $if there is a software malfunction issue after a year purchaseThis phone has a long list of issues and I want a replacment phone for $plus taxNot a temporary bandage with a fixed screenPlus, I'm the one that opened this case with the Revdex.comIt's not fair for Motorola to bend my arm saying if I don't accept their terms I take it or leave itThey aren't even bothering to look for my best interestSo, please if Ashley can't handle this situation then I want to speak with her supervisor or with with someone can have way more knowledge about customer care that will better represent MotorolaIf I didnt got MotocareThat is how Motorola call his insuranceI didnt because I never thought in a millian years I'm going to get a defective phone direntaly from Motorola Company also Motorola advertise days risck freeI purchase this phone less them days
Regards,

Due to the device being out of warranty we can't process a replacement unless the customer is willing to pay the out of warranty feeIf the customer does not wish to do so we consider this resolved

We will reach out to the customer to resolve his issue

From: Executive Customer Escalations *** Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 9:AM To Whom it May Concern, The customer processed an exchange with usWe did not receive back the customers damaged/defective deviceThe customer was charged for not returning
the deviceWe consider this matter resolved. Best Regards, Ashley --

Cracked screens are not covered under the year manufacturer's warranty which can be found at the below linkWe have reviewed the customer's device in our systems to check for overheating and the device never got above degrees celsiusOverheating does not occur unless a device reaches
degrees celcius or higherIf this were to occur the device would immediately shut down and go into cool down modeThe device would then not turn back on until the device reached safe temperatures. The customer has been provided with our replacement options and will be charged a fee for the cracked screen in the amount of $plus taxIf the customer does not wish to proceed with these options we consider this resolved. https://motorola-global-portal.custhelp.com/euf/assets/downloads/MOTOROLA%20MOBI...⇄

Revdex.com:
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.  
[redacted] Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 2:53 PM [redacted] Subject: Re: You have a New Message from Revdex.com Regarding Complaint #[redacted] I don't want any of their statement are truly  honest so  I am not going to accept any charges of  their equipment defected there is an insurance over that phone with  T-Mobile .. What Motorola is doing to me as customer ripping me off for  a defected equipment,they know and they  are not going to do that  me .
Regards,

Revdex.com:
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.  
SO CALL ME...

TONIGHT SO WE CAN TROUBLESHOOT. IT SHOULD NOT TAKE 15 [redacted] DAYS
Regards,

Revdex.com:
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.  
 
The company is now saying that they replace like for like, however this was not mentioned when I first started the process with them. I do still have the chat transcripts which indicate my repair request, and there is no mention of a like for like policy. In addition, the company charged me $100+ shipping, in order to repair/replace my unusable devise. Also, in reading the companies response to my complaint, they now indicate that no replacement is to be made, whereas up until this point their position was to replace the devise when it was again in stock. This proves my point that the company never have any intention to replace my phone, only to drag the process along for as long as possible.  So again I am requesting that my devise be replaced as promised, or reimburse me for the $100+ shipping and for all of my time that they have intentionally wasted, knowing that they were not going to honor our agreement.
Regards,

Our warranty states the below and can be found at: [redacted]What Will [redacted] Do?
If a covered defect or damage arises and a valid warranty claim is received within the applicable Warranty
Period, [redacted], at its sole option, unless otherwise required by applicable law, will either (1) repair, at no
charge, the defect or damage using new, used or reconditioned/refurbished functionally equivalent replacement
parts; or (2) exchange the Product with a replacement Product that is new or which has been
reconditioned/refurbished or otherwise remanufactured from new or used parts and is functionally equivalent to
the original Product; or (3) refund the purchase price of any Products covered by the terms and conditions of
this Limited Warranty.
Products, parts and supporting documentation provided to [redacted] as part of the warranty process, shall
become the property of [redacted], and may not be returned. When a replacement or refund is given, the Product
for which the replacement or refund is provided must be returned to [redacted] and shall become the property of
[redacted]. The customer was sent a like for like replacement device that was delivered on 10/8/15. The customer is currently in possession of this device, the [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] as was his original order he placed with us on 1/27/2014, order number [redacted]. The customer was charged for the replacement device because his 1 year warranty was no longer valid and had expired on 1/27/2015. We will not be upgrading or sending the customer a non Verizon device and consider this resolved. [redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I am resolving this case despite not being satisfied with Motorola's poor customer service.

In the past we received a charge back from this customer. Due to receiving this charge back we will not do any future business with the customer. Therefore, we will be unable to process a replacement for this customer's device.  We consider this resolved.

We are reaching out to the customer.

We understand that the...

customer should not have been charged. However, because the customer processed a charge back we can no longer process credit card transactions for the customer. The customers replacement is in the process of shipping and we should have a tracking number anytime. Once it ships the customer will receive an email with the tracking number.

[A default...

letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.

The customer's RMA was processed in July 2015. The RMA was closed out on July 20, 2015. When an RMA closes the authorization/freeze is released within 7-10 business days. Therefore, the authorization/freeze has been released. The only thing the customer should see on their account is the charge for $25.87 on July 9 and $107.80 on July 20. [email protected]

Customer's device did have physical damage and we will not be waiving this fee. We are currently working on refunding the customer for the remainder of his authorization hold minus the physical damage fee. Once the customer has been refunded we will let him know.

Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 1:50 PM Subject: Claim # [redacted]   To whom it may concern,  We have been going back and forth with this customer regarding a refund that the customer is requesting. We have already made it clear to the customer that we will not be refunding him for what he is requesting.  The customer processed an exchange with us on 5/1/2015, he had physical damage on his device that he was told he would have to pay for. The customer was then charged the authorization hold that was placed on his card for $250 plus tax, this is what the customer was incorrectly charged. The customer was not charged for the physical damage fee.  We processed a refund for the authorization hold.  However, since the customer was never charged the physical damage fee, the charge has been deducted from the authorization hold refund. The customer was refunded $159.00.     The customer also received a $25 discount on the physical damage fee as his device was initially prelogged incorrectly as a [redacted] rather than a 2nd [redacted]. Per Motorola's manufacturer warranty, physical damage is not covered.