Bonanza Overhead Door Supply

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: This does not correct my issues at all...response is untruthfulIn 2014, [redacted] was conveniently UNAVAILABLE and I was forced to deal the the sales Manager, [redacted] and [redacted] was condescending and very unhelpful from day oneEvery single time I came in for Express service, they inspected my cabin air filter resulting in a damaged glove boxNO WAY do I want this dealership toi touch my carToo many mistakes MY SOLUTION, I go to another dealership and PREMIER can take care of the repairs to damage / incomplete work that THEY CAUSEDI want both the glove box as well as the mirror working perfectly and PREMIER SUBARU has shown me that they are not capable of doing these repairs correctlyThey can not be trusted to even tell a customer the truthOn day ONE the salesman LIED about the features on the car that I was about to purchase and after these lies came to the surface, their sales manager, [redacted] refused to assist meHow can I trust this dealership ? They lied to me on day one As I stated, I want a trustworthy SUBARU DEALERSHIP to correct these issuesSimple, Premier pays the cost of fixing their errors and it is done and we move on Sincerely, [redacted]

[redacted] stands by it's position, as follows: The vehicle was dropped off with a crack in the windshieldThis is a pre-existing condition, and, [redacted] cannot be held responsible for such a crack or, the continued advancement of a crackA glass crack occurs due to an original event of impact under the customer's control The vehicle was redelivered to the customer a crack in the windshieldThe windshield was not "shattered", which would be the result of an additional impactThe original crack in the windshield apparently continued to grow during it's stay with the dealership The dealership completed the vehicle walk-around, which is noted in the customer's commentary, which acknowledges the crack in the windshield at arrival For more than years, [redacted] has worked to have happy and "more than satisfied clients"The customer is correct - she asked for the owner to become involved and provide a phone callShe refers to "hours later" after he requestThe owner wasn't on property or available for most of the day on FridayIn the late afternoon, the Service Manager met with the owner for the discussion of possible assistance for a clientUnfortunately, the customer, before we could get back to her, posted negative commentary on social mediaThe company called [redacted] on Friday, as wellBefore the [redacted] representative could get back to the customer, she continued to post negative reviewsThe social media policy of the companies is to respond, but, not engage via social media Our client concierge has reached out to the customer via telephone This matter should be closed as there is no question of workmanship, or service quality at handThe vehicle was dropped off with a pre-existing crack in the windshield and, returned with a crack in the windshield [redacted] cannot be held responsible for the crack worsening during the vehicle's duration at the dealership This isn't an example of poor customer serviceThis is an example of a customer attempting to derive payment towards a matter of pre-existing condition [redacted] provided excellent service work quality and, that matter isn't in dispute

Called this gentleman there was a misunderstanding how this was working, Rob B*** (Parts Manager) did have a part in the works that he and Rob discussed, Rob did ask him to return the incorrect part ,which he agreed toRob settled with him to ship out the correct part and he will back out the
dispute, Rob did let him know how this was working but he felt it was taking to long, we spoke for some time today and he agreed the information became unclearThe customer indicated that this matter was satisfactory nowWe want him happy

*** *** has been in touch with us over the last two days. Prior to that time frame, we have not heard any issues from the customer since 07-07-2014. We have advised the customer that he is welcome to bring the car back to us and we will take care of things for him.
With respect to the auto dimming mirror that he refers to in this specific complaint, the mirror was new and comes with the *** Parts Warranty from Subaru of America good for one year from the date of installation. This warranty should provide for the replacement of the mirror - at no charge to him - if there is an issue with the mirror currently in the vehicle. All workmanship of Premier Subaru is guaranteed for months, as well. So, if there is an issue - it will be resolved. *** *** communicated with us and, originally had a service date of August 1, to bring his car in. Subsequent, *** *** cancelled this appointment and indicated that he was buying a vehicle - other than a Subaru. We indicated to *** *** that we were available to continue to look at the vehicle for any problems as well as suggested he stop in and we could identify his issues and attempt to solve them. He has declined all of these overtures. The Oil Change Club card he refers to is, in fact, prepaid service sold as a package so, individual reimbursement of remaining oil changes is not available.We continue to be available for *** ***'s service appointment - to attend to these issues - as well as a personal meeting. Should *** *** not bring his vehicle back, or trades it for another brand, we would not be able to assist him

The client brought the vehicle into *** *** with a pre-existing condition being a cracked windshieldThis crack was noted and videotaped via our vehicle inspection systemWhen the customer picked up the vehicle, they indicated that the crack was larger then when they dropped offAs we
indicated to the customer, and, through the client's execution of the repair order, *** *** cannot be responsible for matters of an existing conditionThe crack wasn't caused by a warranty related item, but, was related to an exterior impact, of which we notedFurthermore, as we indicated to the customer, cracks in the windshields tend to growFor our mutual protection, we videotape all vehicles in our service department during their entire tenure at our dealershipWe indicated, to the customer, that it was a pre-existing crack and that we could not be held responsible for the sameAs a courtesy to the customer, our service manager scheduled a meeting with our owner in order to see if some sort of assistance could be provided to the customer - not a requirement - but as a matter of customer satisfaction
The client indicates that she had posted a review on Facebook/*** - we acknowledge thatThis review was posted during the time in which we were considering a policy adjustment for her of some sortGiven the negative comments, we opted not to proceed
The customer also called *** ** *** Customer Service who indicated that the matter was closed as *** *** acted responsibly
This matter should be closed as the customer is blaming *** *** for an acknowledged pre-existing conditionIt isn't reasonable to place blame when damage such as was on the vehicle, existsThe customer executed a repair order and *** completed the service work pursuant to the terms of that repair order
For a very long time, *** *** has been a member in good standing of the Revdex.comWe are a reasonable company with a track record of helping our clientsSince this customer's vehicle was dropped off with a cracked windshield, we cannot be held responsible for the same

Premier Subaru has worked hard in order to satisfy this customer.   The customer executed a full finance menu at the time of delivery which, identified all costs and expenses associated with this vehicle.  In addition, the documents executed by the customer do indicate that...

"vehicles are sold cosmetically as-is".  Obviously, we cannot be held responsible for physical damage once a vehicle is picked up by a customer.   The customer is a former dealership employee - and, her boyfriend currently works at another dealership, and they have made erroneous allegations throughout the process.  Please note:a. The illumination of the check engine light was due to a loose gas cap.  Certainly, our employees filled the tank of the car prior to delivery.  We accepted responsibility and, cleared the code and provided the customer with a set of "all weather mats" valued at more than $50.00 for their inconvenience.b. It was a full two weeks after delivery of the vehicle before the customer brought to our attention the "inside door frame scratches".  No such marks were ever identified on the car during our pre-delivery inspection, new car damage receipt or lot inspections.  The customer called [redacted] Sales Manager - as well as the customer's boyfriend and mother to notify us.  We had a body shop look at the door frame to find damage - which appeared to be an attempted break in into the vehicle.  The vehicle was inspected prior to delivery by the customer and her mother for more than 15 minutes when they picked up the car - and, this was brought to our attention a full two weeks later.  While Premier firmly believes, based on all of the information we had on the vehicle, and, inspections thereto, that this occurred during the customer's ownership of the car - we agreed to have our body shop repair this damage at NO COST to the customer - as a matter of customer good will.The customer was requested to call us, on a Monday, to confirm the body shop appointment.  She never called until that Tuesday afternoon - further complicating the scheduling.  We provided the customer with a loaner vehicle.  Since the customer was unable to get to our dealership to duly execute the required loaner car paperwork - we dropped the loaner car off at her home.There are numerous inaccuracies in the customer's portrayal of the scheduling of this matter.   Repairs to the vehicle were made, at our cost, to the vehicle in spite of the legal documents executed by the customer denoting "vehicles are sold cosmetically as is", and a comprehensive inspection being done by our dealership, the customer and her mother, prior to pick up.   We made a decision to do what we could in an attempt to satisfy the customer.Premier Subaru re-delivered the completed vehicle to the customers home, to ensure maximum convenience to the customer.   The customer looked at the repair work and indicated that it was "all good".   The customer sent an email to [redacted] GSM, at 4:57 on the Saturday after redelivery, indicating that there were further issues with the car - and/or the body work.  She also sent a notation to the dealership - through our normal customer follow up system - that indicated that she, again, wasn't satisfied.We instructed the body shop to contact the customer directly in order to identify and issues and remedy them.   The body shop called the customer several times thereafter to try to speak/discuss the matter with the customer.In the interim, the customer took to email and social media ([redacted]) and made highly disparaging comments regarding the management of Premier Subaru - very personal attacks - and, completely uncalled for.Premier Subaru has worked as best as possible with this customer and, paid for a repair that we firmly believe, the damage occurred within the possession of the customer.  At all times, we attempted to make the process easy for the customer - providing alternative transportation, picking up/dropping off a loaner vehicle, etc.  We welcomed the customer to speak directly with the body shop on any issues associated with the repair that we did - even after they signed off on it.  At this time, the customer remains able to speak with the body shop on the repairs - if there is an issue.   Due to the nature of the customer's social media commentary, we did indicate to the customer that we no longer would want to pursue a business relationship with them upon conclusion of the repairs there ended.

[redacted] stands by it's position, as follows:
1. The vehicle was dropped off with a crack in the windshield. This is a pre-existing condition, and, [redacted] cannot be held responsible for such a crack or, the continued advancement of a crack. A glass crack occurs due to an original event of impact under the customer's control.
2. The vehicle was redelivered to the customer a crack in the windshield. The windshield was not "shattered", which would be the result of an additional impact. The original crack in the windshield apparently continued to grow during it's stay with the dealership.
3. The dealership completed the vehicle walk-around, which is noted in the customer's commentary, which acknowledges the crack in the windshield at arrival.
4. For more than 15 years, [redacted] has worked to have happy and "more than satisfied clients". The customer is correct - she asked for the owner to become involved and provide a phone call. She refers to "hours later" after he request. The owner wasn't on property or available for most of the day on Friday. In the late afternoon, the Service Manager met with the owner for the discussion of possible assistance for a client. Unfortunately, the customer, before we could get back to her, posted negative commentary on social media. The company called [redacted] on Friday, as well. Before the [redacted] representative could get back to the customer, she continued to post negative reviews. The social media policy of the companies is to respond, but, not engage via social media.
Our client concierge has reached out to the customer via telephone.
This matter should be closed as there is no question of workmanship, or service quality at hand. The vehicle was dropped off with a pre-existing crack in the windshield and, returned with a crack in the windshield. [redacted] cannot be held responsible for the crack worsening during the vehicle's duration at the dealership.
This isn't an example of poor customer service. This is an example of a customer attempting to derive payment towards a matter of pre-existing condition. [redacted] provided excellent service work quality and, that matter isn't in dispute.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: This does not correct my issues at all...response is untruthful. In 2014, [redacted] was conveniently UNAVAILABLE and I was forced to deal the the sales Manager, [redacted] and [redacted] was condescending and very unhelpful from day one. Every single time I came in for Express service, they inspected my cabin air filter resulting in a damaged glove box. NO WAY do I want this dealership toi touch my car. Too many mistakes.  MY SOLUTION, I go to another dealership and PREMIER can take care of the repairs to damage / incomplete work that THEY CAUSED. I want both the glove box as well as the mirror working perfectly and PREMIER SUBARU has shown me that they are not capable of doing these repairs correctly. They can not be trusted to even tell a customer the truth. On day ONE the salesman LIED about the features on the car that I was about to purchase and after these lies came to the surface, their sales manager, [redacted] refused to assist me. How can I trust this dealership ? They lied to me on day one As I stated, I want a trustworthy SUBARU DEALERSHIP to correct these issues. Simple, Premier pays the cost of fixing their errors and it is done and we move on. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complai[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
MMy past experience is damage to vehicle and or lack of successful repair...I want another authorized dealer to fix issues  ....I lost faith in PremierSubaru  they can not do it so another dealer is in order...premier should reimburse me 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

We conversed with [redacted] this morning and requested that he bring the vehicle back to us and we will look at his vehicle for any issues he may have.We provided him with all of the information and, offered to help him with his repairs.   He declined.  There is nothing further that we can do for this customer without him being willing to return to our dealership.

Customer has been explained regarding coupon on several occasions. Vehicle arrived and service workorder was written up on 06/16/2015 as the vehicle was towed into the dealership. On 06/18/2015, customer called in for an insurance claim and adjustor was to be dispatched. Original estimate was on...

06/20/2015. On 06/22/2015, the job was reviewed with the adjustor and work was authorized.
On July 1, 2015, in the ordinary course of business, Premier sent coupons to all customers indicating that coupon needed to be presented at the time of "write up" and cannot be combined.
Clients vehicle was written up on 06/16/2015 and pre-dated coupon. As a consideration to the customer, a courtesy 10% discount was provided to him on all labor and parts, even though this matter was passed through to his insurance company.
Since the vehicle write up occurred when the work order was opened on 06/16/2015 and, the coupon issued on 07/01/2015 indicated "must be presented at the time of vehicle write up", the coupon is not valid nor applicable. As a courtesy, Premier Subaru provided the customer with a discount of 10% off of parts and labor.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: my issue is with the lack of professionalism, customer care, and customer follow up. I have never denied I had a small crack in my windshield. I am not asking for them to take responsibility for my windshield. I want it on record that their customer service is sub par.1.  If they noticed a crack in my windshield upon doing a 360 degree inspection of the car prior to service, they should have called to notify me and I would have rescheduled the service until after it was repaired the next day.  He posted "it was noted and acknowledged by all parties."  Not all parties, not me. Again, why was I not notified? This is standard practice with much more professional service departments my family has delt with in the past. They were responsible for doing this. 2.  When I paid for the service, NO ONE let me know my windshield was dangerously shattered. They were responsible for doing this.   It was severe enough that shards of glass were on the outside of the windshield. When I brought it to the service manager's attention, he said acted "surprised" and said maybe it happened when the car was washed or when it was sitting in the parking lot after the service.  I was and still am, under the impression they were trying to hide something. 3.  They state in this rebuttal that "we indicated to the customer, and, through the client's execution of the repair order...."  They drew a vague  black line on the windshield on a black picture of a car on the repair order.  I did not see this nor was it brought to my attention until I called the following day. 4.  At the end of my conversation with the service manager in Friday morning, I asked for a call back from the owner. Hours later, I had no response. That is when I posted a negative review regarding their customer service. The owner posted his response back. In the time it took him to do this he could have called me and this situation would not have escalated. 5.  I asked to view this video they have referred to,  in one of his last posts, in response to my asking to view the video, the owner stated "As you continue to unfairly comment about this matter, we needn't pursue it further."  In other words, they are denying a viewing of the video. Again, this is a complaint about poor customer service. So poor that I feel the need to contact the Revdex.com.  Sincerely,
[redacted]