From: [redacted] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:00 AM To: drteam Subject: complaint response Hi, Here is our response to this complaint. We reject and refute these claims as this complainant has... presented distorted, misleading and incomplete information and has not included highly relevant details about the job undertaken and about the offensive behavior he exhibited. The claim that we were restoring his car is greatly exaggerated . We were not engaged to nor did we restore the complainant’s car. We did perform a series of specific repairs and rebuilding work that the complainant approved. This car is 50+ years old and is in poor condition with considerable rust damage from neglect and the work we did took considerable time and effort to accomplish. The mentioned payment of $15000.00 was not a final payment, nothing on the invoice or e-mails signified such and at no time during the job did the complainant claim such. Our invoices are clear and understandable by our clients with the single exception of this complainant. While the job progressed the car owner never complained about invoices that were e-mailed to him. He paid two partial payments from these invoices and did not dispute any labor or parts charges. The complaint about a “date stamp” is peculiar. We do not use a “date stamp” and at no time did he ask for such a thing. However, our invoices are dated by the software we use to generate invoices. All e-mails have dates as well and the dates are generated by e-mail software. We completed the work on some systems of the car and informed the car owner we were going to soon move on to other owner’s jobs (whose cars were in our shop prior to the complainant’s car) as parts for their cars had arrived and we would return to his job later on. This is our normal manner of working with vintage cars that present unique problems and parts issues. This is the point in time where the business relationship rapidly degenerated as the car owner began a series of insulting and demanding e-mails that effectively ended any desire on our part to continue working for him. I encouraged him to take his car elsewhere but he did not do so and his argumentative e-mails laced with various intimidations and demands continued for months until he finally paid for the work and had his car removed November 7. The claim that the car was returned in pieces is misleading and highly exaggerated. The pieces referred to are parts, namely a tailpipe and carburetors. These parts were not refitted as the behavior of the complainant became untenable and he was not charged for the refitting of these parts. At no time was there any sort of deceptive or fraudulent action on our part. The car owner has his car and parts back in his possession. We informed him that due to his many threats and offensive comments cash was required for final payment to release the car. Instead he purchased cashier’s checks. Since he refused to bring cash we released the car as soon as his cashier’s checks cleared our bank. We will never work for him again and pity anyone that has the misfortune to do so. Regards, [redacted] Sport and Classic Car Company [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that there is no proposed action.
Some factual errors exist in the response as well as no explanation for the addition of the two ~$2,500 each retro active additions to each of the invoices when no actual work had been done.The job was a restoration job and we had agreed the next step was to complete the front end, the necessary parts were already purchased. I was told that the plan was to carry on and finish the project (in email) He decided to stop work and eventually abandon the job. This is a breach of contact.I was careful never to be rude although tempted. He is correct when he said things went sour after he stopped work. I asked after six weeks of no work for a progress update. Mr [redacted] refused to give me any information, even to say that my iob was behind others. His response in his reply to the Revdex.com is the most information that I have ever received from him. I never insisted on how he scheduled the work but I did want to know what his plans were. No response was ever given.The big issue is the invoices. I was on a pay as you go basis. I paid one invoice for the transmission and carbs (4/18/14: $6,452.08) and another for the back end and parts for the front end (6/18/14: $15,810.70). As stated in his letter, he stopped work yet somehow more money was due on both bills both being labor charges I believe (the invoices are not clear or consecutive). I am not aware that companies do not ask for full payment as soon as they can get paid. Either he with held legitimate charges twice which is deceptive or the charges are fraudulent. If I had access to his invoicing software It would probably be able to clear up if the charges are deceptive or fraudulent by the order in which the charges were entered. In either case it's a box. He is right that I did not complain about the work (which is good) or the price but I was not aware of this 'surcharge'. If I had known the price of phase 1 was so expensive I would not have agreed to the latter $15,810 work.He knows by my emails (the last one was blunt eg finish the job or get sued) and from me telling him that I intend to sue him if we can't come to a reasonable solution. Business's cannot withhold charges and then add them in a dispute. The first retroactive payment even had to be skipped when I made the second payment!It is not necessary to like your clients, I don't like some of mine. It is required to be honest which does appear to be the case.
Regards,[redacted]
From: [redacted] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:02 AMTo: drteamSubject: RE: Revdex.com of Houston and South Texas- Complaint regarding Your Business #[redacted]
Hi,
Our initial response to this complaint stands.
Regards,
[redacted]
Sport and Classic Car Company
Billions of Car Parts Company
[redacted]
[redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 4:25 PM
To: drteam
Subject: RE: Revdex.com of Houston and South Texas- Complaint regarding Your Business #[redacted]Additional response.
In a further attempt to hopefully bring clarification to the complainant’s evident confusion here is some condensed information.
There are two invoices as the job had many segments.
The working invoice [redacted] with a balance of $15810.70 that we sent to the complainant on 6/25/2014 continued on with labors and parts after 6/25/2014. Working invoices change as work progresses and are added onto as parts arrive, labors are worked out and other discoveries that require owner approvals for additional works are done. A working invoice is not a final invoice. There is $3076.04 for parts and labors that are shown on the final invoice for labors and parts used after 6/25/2014. All works were approved by the complainant. The $3076.04 was not billed on 6/25/2014 as these operations with parts were for the period of 6/26/2014- 7/29/2014. Working invoice [redacted] becomes final invoice [redacted] for this job that had a final total of $18,886.74.
Working invoice [redacted] was an initial estimate of $4208. 04. After disassembly and consultation with the complainant in a string of e-mails we were engaged to perform more extensive labors with additional parts. On April 18, 2014, the complainant paid $6452.08 towards the balance. This payment was not complete payment for all the work represented by this job as all aspects were not finalized or completed. at this payment date. Working invoice [redacted] becomes final invoice [redacted] that had a final total of $9293.05
Some aspects of the work on both invoices proceeded in near proximity timewise.
The two payments made by the complainant were not final payments and no mention or understanding of such was represented by us or taken as such by the complainant during the course of the jobs. [redacted]
From: [redacted]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:00 AM
To: drteam
Subject: complaint response
Hi,
Here is our response to this complaint.
We reject and refute these claims as this complainant has...
presented distorted, misleading and incomplete information and has not included highly relevant details about the job undertaken and about the offensive behavior he exhibited.
The claim that we were restoring his car is greatly exaggerated . We were not engaged to nor did we restore the complainant’s car. We did perform a series of specific repairs and rebuilding work that the complainant approved. This car is 50+ years old and is in poor condition with considerable rust damage from neglect and the work we did took considerable time and effort to accomplish. The mentioned payment of $15000.00 was not a final payment, nothing on the invoice or e-mails signified such and at no time during the job did the complainant claim such.
Our invoices are clear and understandable by our clients with the single exception of this complainant. While the job progressed the car owner never complained about invoices that were e-mailed to him. He paid two partial payments from these invoices and did not dispute any labor or parts charges.
The complaint about a “date stamp” is peculiar. We do not use a “date stamp” and at no time did he ask for such a thing. However, our invoices are dated by the software we use to generate invoices. All e-mails have dates as well and the dates are generated by e-mail software.
We completed the work on some systems of the car and informed the car owner we were going to soon move on to other owner’s jobs (whose cars were in our shop prior to the complainant’s car) as parts for their cars had arrived and we would return to his job later on. This is our normal manner of working with vintage cars that present unique problems and parts issues.
This is the point in time where the business relationship rapidly degenerated as the car owner began a series of insulting and demanding e-mails that effectively ended any desire on our part to continue working for him. I encouraged him to take his car elsewhere but he did not do so and his argumentative e-mails laced with various intimidations and demands continued for months until he finally paid for the work and had his car removed November 7.
The claim that the car was returned in pieces is misleading and highly exaggerated. The pieces referred to are parts, namely a tailpipe and carburetors. These parts were not refitted as the behavior of the complainant became untenable and he was not charged for the refitting of these parts.
At no time was there any sort of deceptive or fraudulent action on our part. The car owner has his car and parts back in his possession. We informed him that due to his many threats and offensive comments cash was required for final payment to release the car. Instead he purchased cashier’s checks. Since he refused to bring cash we released the car as soon as his cashier’s checks cleared our bank. We will never work for him again and pity anyone that has the misfortune to do so.
Regards, [redacted]
Sport and Classic Car Company[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
From: [redacted] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:00 AM To: drteam Subject: complaint response Hi, Here is our response to this complaint. We reject and refute these claims as this complainant has... presented distorted, misleading and incomplete information and has not included highly relevant details about the job undertaken and about the offensive behavior he exhibited. The claim that we were restoring his car is greatly exaggerated . We were not engaged to nor did we restore the complainant’s car. We did perform a series of specific repairs and rebuilding work that the complainant approved. This car is 50+ years old and is in poor condition with considerable rust damage from neglect and the work we did took considerable time and effort to accomplish. The mentioned payment of $15000.00 was not a final payment, nothing on the invoice or e-mails signified such and at no time during the job did the complainant claim such. Our invoices are clear and understandable by our clients with the single exception of this complainant. While the job progressed the car owner never complained about invoices that were e-mailed to him. He paid two partial payments from these invoices and did not dispute any labor or parts charges. The complaint about a “date stamp” is peculiar. We do not use a “date stamp” and at no time did he ask for such a thing. However, our invoices are dated by the software we use to generate invoices. All e-mails have dates as well and the dates are generated by e-mail software. We completed the work on some systems of the car and informed the car owner we were going to soon move on to other owner’s jobs (whose cars were in our shop prior to the complainant’s car) as parts for their cars had arrived and we would return to his job later on. This is our normal manner of working with vintage cars that present unique problems and parts issues. This is the point in time where the business relationship rapidly degenerated as the car owner began a series of insulting and demanding e-mails that effectively ended any desire on our part to continue working for him. I encouraged him to take his car elsewhere but he did not do so and his argumentative e-mails laced with various intimidations and demands continued for months until he finally paid for the work and had his car removed November 7. The claim that the car was returned in pieces is misleading and highly exaggerated. The pieces referred to are parts, namely a tailpipe and carburetors. These parts were not refitted as the behavior of the complainant became untenable and he was not charged for the refitting of these parts. At no time was there any sort of deceptive or fraudulent action on our part. The car owner has his car and parts back in his possession. We informed him that due to his many threats and offensive comments cash was required for final payment to release the car. Instead he purchased cashier’s checks. Since he refused to bring cash we released the car as soon as his cashier’s checks cleared our bank. We will never work for him again and pity anyone that has the misfortune to do so. Regards, [redacted] Sport and Classic Car Company [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that there is no proposed action.
Some factual errors exist in the response as well as no explanation for the addition of the two ~$2,500 each retro active additions to each of the invoices when no actual work had been done.The job was a restoration job and we had agreed the next step was to complete the front end, the necessary parts were already purchased. I was told that the plan was to carry on and finish the project (in email) He decided to stop work and eventually abandon the job. This is a breach of contact.I was careful never to be rude although tempted. He is correct when he said things went sour after he stopped work. I asked after six weeks of no work for a progress update. Mr [redacted] refused to give me any information, even to say that my iob was behind others. His response in his reply to the Revdex.com is the most information that I have ever received from him. I never insisted on how he scheduled the work but I did want to know what his plans were. No response was ever given.The big issue is the invoices. I was on a pay as you go basis. I paid one invoice for the transmission and carbs (4/18/14: $6,452.08) and another for the back end and parts for the front end (6/18/14: $15,810.70). As stated in his letter, he stopped work yet somehow more money was due on both bills both being labor charges I believe (the invoices are not clear or consecutive). I am not aware that companies do not ask for full payment as soon as they can get paid. Either he with held legitimate charges twice which is deceptive or the charges are fraudulent. If I had access to his invoicing software It would probably be able to clear up if the charges are deceptive or fraudulent by the order in which the charges were entered. In either case it's a box. He is right that I did not complain about the work (which is good) or the price but I was not aware of this 'surcharge'. If I had known the price of phase 1 was so expensive I would not have agreed to the latter $15,810 work.He knows by my emails (the last one was blunt eg finish the job or get sued) and from me telling him that I intend to sue him if we can't come to a reasonable solution. Business's cannot withhold charges and then add them in a dispute. The first retroactive payment even had to be skipped when I made the second payment!It is not necessary to like your clients, I don't like some of mine. It is required to be honest which does appear to be the case.
Regards,[redacted]
From: [redacted] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:02 AMTo: drteamSubject: RE: Revdex.com of Houston and South Texas- Complaint regarding Your Business #[redacted]
Hi,
Our initial response to this complaint stands.
Regards,
[redacted]
Sport and Classic Car Company
Billions of Car Parts Company
[redacted]
[redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 4:25 PM
To: drteam
Subject: RE: Revdex.com of Houston and South Texas- Complaint regarding Your Business #[redacted]Additional response.
In a further attempt to hopefully bring clarification to the complainant’s evident confusion here is some condensed information.
There are two invoices as the job had many segments.
The working invoice [redacted] with a balance of $15810.70 that we sent to the complainant on 6/25/2014 continued on with labors and parts after 6/25/2014. Working invoices change as work progresses and are added onto as parts arrive, labors are worked out and other discoveries that require owner approvals for additional works are done. A working invoice is not a final invoice. There is $3076.04 for parts and labors that are shown on the final invoice for labors and parts used after 6/25/2014. All works were approved by the complainant. The $3076.04 was not billed on 6/25/2014 as these operations with parts were for the period of 6/26/2014- 7/29/2014. Working invoice [redacted] becomes final invoice [redacted] for this job that had a final total of $18,886.74.
Working invoice [redacted] was an initial estimate of $4208. 04. After disassembly and consultation with the complainant in a string of e-mails we were engaged to perform more extensive labors with additional parts. On April 18, 2014, the complainant paid $6452.08 towards the balance. This payment was not complete payment for all the work represented by this job as all aspects were not finalized or completed. at this payment date. Working invoice [redacted] becomes final invoice [redacted] that had a final total of $9293.05
Some aspects of the work on both invoices proceeded in near proximity timewise.
The two payments made by the complainant were not final payments and no mention or understanding of such was represented by us or taken as such by the complainant during the course of the jobs. [redacted]
From: [redacted]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:00 AM
To: drteam
Subject: complaint response
Hi,
Here is our response to this complaint.
We reject and refute these claims as this complainant has...
presented distorted, misleading and incomplete information and has not included highly relevant details about the job undertaken and about the offensive behavior he exhibited.
The claim that we were restoring his car is greatly exaggerated . We were not engaged to nor did we restore the complainant’s car. We did perform a series of specific repairs and rebuilding work that the complainant approved. This car is 50+ years old and is in poor condition with considerable rust damage from neglect and the work we did took considerable time and effort to accomplish. The mentioned payment of $15000.00 was not a final payment, nothing on the invoice or e-mails signified such and at no time during the job did the complainant claim such.
Our invoices are clear and understandable by our clients with the single exception of this complainant. While the job progressed the car owner never complained about invoices that were e-mailed to him. He paid two partial payments from these invoices and did not dispute any labor or parts charges.
The complaint about a “date stamp” is peculiar. We do not use a “date stamp” and at no time did he ask for such a thing. However, our invoices are dated by the software we use to generate invoices. All e-mails have dates as well and the dates are generated by e-mail software.
We completed the work on some systems of the car and informed the car owner we were going to soon move on to other owner’s jobs (whose cars were in our shop prior to the complainant’s car) as parts for their cars had arrived and we would return to his job later on. This is our normal manner of working with vintage cars that present unique problems and parts issues.
This is the point in time where the business relationship rapidly degenerated as the car owner began a series of insulting and demanding e-mails that effectively ended any desire on our part to continue working for him. I encouraged him to take his car elsewhere but he did not do so and his argumentative e-mails laced with various intimidations and demands continued for months until he finally paid for the work and had his car removed November 7.
The claim that the car was returned in pieces is misleading and highly exaggerated. The pieces referred to are parts, namely a tailpipe and carburetors. These parts were not refitted as the behavior of the complainant became untenable and he was not charged for the refitting of these parts.
At no time was there any sort of deceptive or fraudulent action on our part. The car owner has his car and parts back in his possession. We informed him that due to his many threats and offensive comments cash was required for final payment to release the car. Instead he purchased cashier’s checks. Since he refused to bring cash we released the car as soon as his cashier’s checks cleared our bank. We will never work for him again and pity anyone that has the misfortune to do so.
Regards, [redacted]
Sport and Classic Car Company[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]