Brown's Auto Sales

AFTER REVIEWING THE INSURANCE DETAIL CONCERNING THE FIRE AT [redacted] WE DECIDED NOT TO COMPLETE THE FINAL ACTION FOR CONTRACTING THE JOB. OUR REASON WERE AS FOLLOWS; 1. IN EARLIER MEETINGS WITH [redacted] I FOUND HIM DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITHIN REFERENCE TO HIM BEING HONEST ABOUT WHAT HE KNEW ABOUT WHAT...

WAS TO BE DONE AS PER INSURANCE WORK REQUIREMENTS; HE TOTALLY CHANGED THE REPAIR DETAILS BY ADDING HIS OWN PERSONAL REMODELING ELEMENTS [ IE 12 ADDITIONAL WINDOW REPLACEMENT S ABOVE THE ORIGINAL FIRE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS—CHANGING THE REPLACEMENT OF SUSPENDED CEILINGS TO FRAMING AND DRYWALL CEILINGS FOR FIRE ROOMS AND ALSO ROOMS NOT INVOLVED IN THE FIRE REPAIRS. THERE WAS A COMPLETE MAJOR ELECTRICAL RENOVATION UPDATE REQUIRED BY BID INSPECTOR THAT WAS NOT PART OF FIRE DAMAGE WHICH WAS CONFINED TO A SMALL SECTION ON THE FRONT OF HOUSE. 2. ASBESTOS; AFTER REALIZING THAT THERE IS ASBESTOS TILES THROUGHT THE THRID FLOOR AND ALSO IN THE ROOFING SHINGLES THAT WOULD ADD TO THE REMEDIAL COSTS NOT STATED IN THE INSURANCE DETAIL AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE NOT A ASBESTOS CERTIFIED REMOVAL CONTRACTOR.-- ALSO LEAD TO OUR DECISSION NOT TO PROCEED WITH THIS PROJECT BECAUSE OF THE UNKNOW ADDITION COSTS FOR US. 3. EVERY TIME WE MET [5 TIMES] THERE WERE ADDITIONAL EXTRA REVISIONSNOT INCLUDED IN FIRE DESIGNATED REPAIRS AND FURTHER REQUESTS BY MR [redacted] TO THROW PRICE LINE ITEMS INTO THE JOB.. 4. I DID NOT RECEIVE THE INSURANCE DETAIL MINUS THE PRICING PAGES UNTIL THE DAY AFTER I SUBMITED MY LATEST PROPOSAL. AFTER REVIEWING THE INSURANCE DETAIL I DECIDED THAT THE PROJECT AND DEALING WITH MR [redacted] WERE NOT IN OUR BEST INTERESTS TO PURSUE. 5. FIND ENCLOSED A COPY OF THE DENIAL LETTER SENT BY REGISTERED MAIL AND REFUSED BY MR. [redacted]. RESPECTFULLY - THOMAS L.  CAO

It seems that we will be unable to resolve this issues as we stand behind our original statement that the damage was there prior to repossession.  All our data entry into our computer system is time stamped and logged.  There is no way this information can be manipulated.  We are not in the business of paying people off just so they won't complain.  If we had done the damage - we would have fixed it immediately.
 
Mr [redacted] states that the lender agrees with him about our company but we have communication with them that tell a completely different story.   If he wants copies of that, he can contact the lender for it.  
 
I agree that things could have been handled differently on both sides of this complaint.  However, he was not shown the pictures that day because of the heated nature of his behavior.  We have a right to determine if it is not a safe situation for our employees.  I have no problem showing the entire account to Mr [redacted] so he can see all the time stamps and all information that has been entered into his account.  However he must agree to conduct himself calmly and we can discuss this professionally.  
 
At this time ,  the best I can offer to him is to go over  all the information so he can see everything.  I am willing to meet him in a public place or at out offices to show him all this and discuss it in a calm and rational manner.  I  will not continue to do the he said /she said accusations  without him seeing all the information and making an informed decision.

On January 15, 2014, we received an order of repossession from [redacted] requesting that we secure Mr. [redacted]'s 1999 GMC Sierra Pick Up truck as he was in default on his payments and failed to respond to repeated attempts by the credit union to resolve this matter.  We are the third...

repossession company to have this order as the other companys had the order for 6+ months prior to us and were unable to locate it.  We ran this account over 17 times with no luck.  On April 14th, 2014 at 11:30 pm, his license plate was read by our camera car.  The camera car is equipped with 4 License plate recognition readers that scan plates and runs it through a database of all vehicles out for repossession.  If a positive hit is received, the driver of the car is alerted.  Our driver received a hit on Mr. [redacted]s car while scanning plates.  His truck has parked in a different location than any of the addresses we were given by the lender.  After the vin was verified to be the vehicle we had an active repossession order for, a tow truck was called to secure the unit.  The unit was then brought back to our facility in Cicero, In and stored behind a locked fence.   The next day he called our number that was given to his mother on a contact card.  Mr [redacted] was very upset, yelling at our employee that we GPS'd his mothers car which is the only way we could have found him, that we have been running his mother's licenses plates  & we had no right to be in his apartment complex.  We do not have any BMV capability to run licenses plates.  After repeated attempts to explain to him that we do not have the ability to do that and how we actually found his car, our employee gave up and just told him to contact [redacted].  We spoke with [redacted] on Tuesday (they are closed on Mondays) and explained the situation with them.  They had already had a full conversation with Mr. [redacted] at that point in which he was swearing and yelling at them.  The representative from [redacted] advised him of our redemption procedures, hours of operation and the amount that was due at the time of redemption.  Mr. [redacted] arrived at our office on Monday, April 21st.  He was waiting outside so he arrived sometime before 9 am.   He had an attitude when he walked in and it escalated when he was asked for his photo ID.  He stated he would not give it to us because he couldn't be sure we wouldn't steal his personal information.  It was explained to him that it was our procedure to take a photocopy of his driver's license to put with his file - this information is clearly written on our website under redemption procedures.  We take a photocopy so that we have verifiable proof as to who picks up a vehicle or property so that we can't be accused of releasing it to the wrong person in the future.  All of our lenders require that we furnish photo ID with the signed paperwork.  He wanted to see our written "policy" on that.  He was told that he either produces the ID or he does not get his vehicle.  He continued to get more and more agitated and this continued for approximately 30 minutes before another employee was able to convince him to let us copy it.  Mr [redacted] did at one point apologize for his behavior.  After that he was given a release form to sign stating "In sole consideration of the delivery to me of the above described
vehicle and personal property, I agree that I have carefully examined
the above described vehicle  and made sure that there is no damage,
other than any pre-existing damage marked and accounted for on the
vehicle condition report.  I further agree that I have examined all
personal belongings that were left in the above vehicle and that
everything is accounted for and has no damage.  By signing this
Release, I fully understand the above statements and do agree to
Release and Hold Harmless Indiana Recovery Services and [redacted]
and or its Agents from all claims, demands and or actions, which I or
my Representatives do have or may have against Indiana Recovery
Services, [redacted] and/or its Agents or Employees, prior to this
date."  He signed it without any request to see his vehicle nor did he request a copy of what he signed at this time. He states in his complaint that he was denied the ability to see his truck first which was not true.  We allow anyone who asks to inspect their vehicle prior to signing and we give out copies as requested.   He paid the amount due which was agreed to by the credit union and advised his vehicle would be brought up.  There was some confusion on the amount owed because the credit union never said for sure if they would pay the difference between the amount owed and the $275 Mr. [redacted] was willing to pay.  This was all discussed on Friday with the bank and the representative stated she would let us know - which she did not.   When it came time to bring his vehicle to the front, he stated that he would just go in the secured lot and get it himself.  He was advised that due to security and insurance reasons no non essential personnel would be allowed in the lot.  He then stated that he had not driven the vehicle in almost a year and that he would need to go and check the oil and fluids before the vehicle gets moved.  He was then informed that the vehicle would be brought out using a wheel lift tow truck.  He became upset and stated that the vehicle is 4x4 and couldn't be towed.  At this point we explained that a 4x4 vehicle can be safely towed however it was getting simply moved less than a 100 yards at speeds less than 2 MPH and it wouldn't affect the vehicle what so ever.  The vehicle was brought from the rear lot to the front lot without any issues and sat down in the front for Mr. [redacted] to check the fluids.  Within a few moments he came inside and said someone had damaged his door panel of his truck.  We walked out to the truck and observed the handle area on the inside of the door was pulled away from the door.  There was a indented mark from where the tie down strap that was holding the door closed was placed.  This tie down indent was from a long term use of a strap in the same area.  We explained to him that the damage was caused by the strap he attached to hold the door closed prior to the repossession - which he admits in his complaint that he had done.  We only removed the strap to conduct a thorough condition report of the vehicle.  It was never reattached in the case that the vehicle had to be re entered or transported by a transporter.  We advised that we had not removed the strap for initial repossession and that we had pictures of the broken door panel when it was initially brought in.  He argued for a moment and then stated "if  you got pictures that it was broken when it was brought in than I will leave and not say anything else."  He was then told to come inside and look at the pictures.  As he started walking towards the office he starting calling us names and said you guys probably broke it then took pictures.  We advised him that the pictures were sent in a file once the vehicle was on our lot to the credit union as well, and that if it was damaged on our lot then the credit union would not have a pic of the damaged door panel.  He then started calling us a joke and started mother f ing us.  Based on his conduct he was advised to leave.  He stated that he was going to file a report.  He was told that was fine and again asked to leave.  He refused and continued to be belligerent.  He stated that he was going to sue us - at which time we told him he could obtain all pictures and documents from the credit union as they were given copies of all documents.  We were not going to allow Mr. [redacted] into our work area due to his conduct and disposition for the safety of our employees.  At that point he said he's not "f" ing leaving without the police.  So we called the sheriffs department and requested an officer.  The sheriffs department and local police department arrived and spoke with Mr. [redacted].  They then came over and spoke with us.  Based on Mr. [redacted]s conduct the officers advised that they would standby until he left the property.  After approximately 10 minutes of Mr. [redacted] attempting to get his vehicle to run, he was able to leave the property with his vehicle.  I had not since spoke with Mr. [redacted], however it was brought to our attention that he had contacted the credit union and was told that he was no longer a member.  Mr. [redacted] also wanted the credit union to use their legal team to sue us due to the repossession in which they stated they would not do that and stood behind us.
We pride ourselves on being fair and just in a business that is unpopular.  It is important to us to maintain a business that is run with professionalism but at times we are faced with circumstances that makes it difficult.  In over 2 years, we have only had 1 damage complaint which we promptly took care of.   We have no problem taking care of any issues if we caused them, however, Mr. [redacted]s door was broken prior to repossession.  We may have even just helped him out in good faith if he was at least civil - which he was anything but.  We deal with over 200 different people every month and never have had a problem such as this.  Copies are furnished to anyone who requests.  Our business is transparent however, our attorney has advised us to cease communications once an individual begins threatening a lawsuit and refer everything to him.  What is boils down to is that Mr. [redacted] was angry because we found his vehicle that he had been hiding. He was in our office for approximately 2 hours causing a scene making it difficult for us to conduct our daily operations.  Mr. [redacted] was also angry over the fact that we close at 3:30 on Fridays, but our website clearly states our hours - which have not changed since the previous owner started the business in 2008.   We have attached pictures to show the condition of the truck when it was brought to our lot.  We also have the initial condition report and signed release that he signed releasing us of any claims.  I am unable to attach it to this email because it will not allow any more attachments.  Also, security cameras ran the entire time to document this incident.
You can contact me at 317-606-[redacted] with any further questions.  Thank you, [redacted]