C.A.R. Firearms

Dated this 20th day of June, 2017Here are the true facts of this dispute:Mr*** delivered a rifle (Remington Model 760) to C.A.RFirearms (C.A.R.) in November, 2016, requesting that a telescopic sight be mounted and a mag tube sling installed.C.A.Rinstalled the telescopic sight in a proper and workmanlike manner and bore-sighted it to verify that it was properly mountedIt was observed that there were two old screw holes that had previously been drilled into the rifle for use with a different scopeWe did not fill those holes believing that Mr***s had not requested that we do soThe sling was not mounted because the sling Mr***s brought to us was not the proper sling for use with his rifleIt should be noted that Mr***s indicated to me when he brought this rifle in that the barrel, which had been mounted by a different gunsmith, had a defect that he intended to make a claim against the former gunsmith. Months later, Mr***s contacted me to say that he had removed the scope to sell on some internet site, and found that there were marks under the scope rings, and observed the unfilled screw holesHe claimed we had damaged the scope when it was in our shop and implied that we intentionally damaged his scope because, he stated, he found the marks under the scope’s rings (used for mounting the scope)He also claimed that we should have filled the screw holesI requested that he bring the rifle back to me to fill the holes, which we did, again, in a proper and workmanlike mannerWe refused, however, to refund his money as he had demandedIn mid-January, Mr***s brought in to our shop an Auto Ordinance pistolHe said the gun did not work properly and asked me to inspect the gun for defects and to call him to report any defects with an estimate on costs to correct the defectsHe stated that another gunsmith in the Seattle area had done work on the pistol and ever since it did not function properlyOn inspection of this pistol, I found no defects and reported this to Mr***sC.A.Rbilled him $for disassembling the pistol, inspecting all parts and reassembling itIt should be noted that it was reported to me that notwithstanding the fact that I found no defects in the gun, Mr***s requested a refund from the former gunsmith who worked on the pistol of his fees in working on the gun, who, Mr***s reported to me, was paid to himOn March 12, 2017, Mr***s, in an email to the Auto Ordinance factory (I believe), stated: “Took out the Auto Ordnance and put rounds through it without a single issue or jamWhatever Fred [H***} did seemed to fix it.” More recently, Mr***s contacted me demanding that I refund the money I charged him to inspect this pistol, stating that he had found the slide lock loose and working outHe claimed that I should have seen that the slide lock was defective and that I had not earned the fee I chargedI refused to refund this money because I specifically checked the slide lock when I inspected the gun and found it to be in proper and satisfactory conditionNote this demand came months after I had performed my inspection and after he had fired at least the rounds he claimed to have shot through the gun on March 12th.On February 18, 2017, Mr***s brought to my shop another Remington rifle, this time a Model He requested that I disassemble, clean and inspect and check for safety and functionality this rifleThis rifle fires a round that is not popular and we had no ammunition to test the weaponMr***s was to bring us the necessary ammunition for our testing, which he did on March 10, Our fee, which he agreed to pay for the disassembly, inspection and testing came to $75, plus sales tax, a total of $He also left a peep sight to install on this rifle, which we did not install, nor did we charge him for installing the peep sight.Within the past week Mr***s sent to you his complaintHe also sent me an email message on June 18th, stating that he had taken the Rem Model to another area gunsmith and was told that the scope had been mounted off center and that the screw holes used to mount the scope were defective and may not safely hold the scope in place when firedNow Mr*** claimed that since he had found that his rifle was defectively worked on my shop, it was necessary for him to have his other two guns inspected and corrected by other gunsmiths and demanded that I refund all money he had ever paid us to perform work on his firearmsWe naturally declined to do so on the basis that our work had not been defectiveOn June 18th he stated: on June 18th, Mr***s states: “If I don’t hear from you by Thursday you’ll be hearing from my lawyer on FridayIf it has to go far, then I’ll also be posting a review on yelp, as well as writing about this experience on every Washington State gun forum I can find with the topic, “Best and Worst Gunsmiths in Washington State … backed up with evidence of receipts and excerpts from emails from your shop.” Recognizing that a gunsmith’s trade is almost entirely based on maintaining a reputation for skill as a gunsmith, and fairness to my customers, I am concerned that he will post to the internet untrue and fictitious statements about the work I did for him when he brought his firearms to meHis coming back to you is proof to me that he intends to damage my good reputation as a gunsmithI want to state that with the exception of this complaint by Mr***, and one other singlecomplaint over the amount of time in getting a job turned-around and back to our customer, for which a complaint of my shop was posted on Google, neither I nor C.A.Rhave ever before received a complaint from any customerI have been in this business in the Seattle area for 8 years.When Mr*** initially brought up his complaint to me I voluntarily agreed to reduce his bill to me by $Mr*** indicated to me that he accepted this proposalMore recently, with his complaints being renewed all over again, and posted on the Revdex.com website, I emailed him and agreed I would also refund and mail to him immediately another $I obtained that amount of money from my bank in the form of a certified check payable to Mr*** and mailed it to himIt had been my understanding that Mr*** had accepted that settlement, but with this message from you, it appears that I am mistaken.I believe that Mr*** is intentionally and maliciously attempting to extort more money from me when he is not owed anythingI deny that my work was improperly doneI have voluntarily reduced his bill by $and within the past couple of days sent him a cashier’s check in additional amount of $I believe that he is not now and never has in the past been entitled to any refund, but I paid the money to him in order to try to avoid his posting libelous and slanderous statements against me and my shop on the internetI won’t pay him any more money and I will take any and all proper legal proceedings against him to recover any damages I or my shop may sustain by his posting these types of malicious and untrue statements to any other person in any form or medium he might use to libel and slander my business and I.I am sending a copy of this reply directly to Mr*** via internet transmissionThank you for reviewing my side of this horror story.Best personal regards,C.A.RFirearms _______________________Fred H***

The consumer's projects and customer service were not handled in the best wayA full refund is to be issued and fault admittedCorrections will be made do that service such as this will not be repeated

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: I filed my initial complaint to
Revdex.com before I brought the rifle to gunsmith Rick F* to mount the scope to finish the job C.A.R did not completeRick F* called later to tell me all the work done by C.A.R had to be redone on the Rem It suddenly occurred to me every single firearm I brought C.A.R had to then be fixed again by someone else directly after - and of course paid for again - thats a fact and I have the receipts to prove thisThe firearms are the Rem 760, A.O 1911, and the Rem I feel like I was ripped off and want a refund on all the firearms brought to C.A.R
Sincerely,
*** ***

The consumer's projects and customer service were not handled in the best wayA full refund is to be issued and fault admittedCorrections will be made do that service such as this will not be repeated

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I filed my initial complaint to...

Revdex.com before I brought the rifle to gunsmith Rick F[redacted] to mount the scope to finish the job C.A.R did not complete. Rick F[redacted] called later to tell me all the work done by C.A.R had to be redone on the Rem 760. It suddenly occurred to me every single firearm I brought C.A.R had to then be fixed again by someone else directly after - and of course paid for again - thats a fact and I have the receipts to prove this. The firearms are the Rem 760, A.O 1911, and the Rem 141. I feel like I was ripped off and want a refund on all the firearms brought to C.A.R.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Dated this 20th day of June, 2017Here are the true facts of this dispute:Mr. [redacted] delivered a rifle (Remington Model 760) to C.A.R. Firearms (C.A.R.) in November, 2016, requesting that a telescopic sight be mounted and a mag tube sling installed.C.A.R. installed the telescopic sight in a proper and workmanlike manner and bore-sighted it to verify that it was properly mounted. It was observed that there were two old screw holes that had previously been drilled into the rifle for use with a different scope. We did not fill those holes believing that Mr. [redacted]s had not requested that we do so. The sling was not mounted because the sling Mr. [redacted]s brought to us was not the proper sling for use with his rifle. It should be noted that Mr. [redacted]s indicated to me when he brought this rifle in that the barrel, which had been mounted by a different gunsmith, had a defect that he intended to make a claim against the former gunsmith. Months later, Mr. [redacted]s contacted me to say that he had removed the scope to sell on some internet site, and found that there were marks under the scope rings, and observed the unfilled screw holes. He claimed we had damaged the scope when it was in our shop and implied that we intentionally damaged his scope because, he stated, he found the marks under the scope’s rings (used for mounting the scope). He also claimed that we should have filled the screw holes. I requested that he bring the rifle back to me to fill the holes, which we did, again, in a proper and workmanlike manner. We refused, however, to refund his money as he had demandedIn mid-January, Mr. [redacted]s brought in to our shop an Auto Ordinance 1911 pistol. He said the gun did not work properly and asked me to inspect the gun for defects and to call him to report any defects with an estimate on costs to correct the defects. He stated that another gunsmith in the Seattle area had done work on the pistol and ever since it did not function properly. On inspection of this pistol, I found no defects and reported this to Mr. [redacted]s. C.A.R. billed him $82.13 for disassembling the pistol, inspecting all parts and reassembling it. It should be noted that it was reported to me that notwithstanding the fact that I found no defects in the gun, Mr. [redacted]s requested a refund from the former gunsmith who worked on the pistol of his fees in working on the gun, who, Mr. [redacted]s reported to me, was paid to him. On March 12, 2017, Mr. [redacted]s, in an email to the Auto Ordinance factory (I believe), stated: “Took out the Auto Ordnance 1911 and put 350 rounds through it without a single issue or jam. Whatever Fred [H[redacted]} did seemed to fix it.” More recently, Mr. [redacted]s contacted me demanding that I refund the money I charged him to inspect this pistol, stating that he had found the slide lock loose and working out. He claimed that I should have seen that the slide lock was defective and that I had not earned the fee I charged. I refused to refund this money because I specifically checked the slide lock when I inspected the gun and found it to be in proper and satisfactory condition. Note this demand came months after I had performed my inspection and after he had fired at least the 350 rounds he claimed to have shot through the gun on March 12th.On February 18, 2017, Mr. [redacted]s brought to my shop another Remington rifle, this time a Model 141. He requested that I disassemble, clean and inspect and check for safety and functionality this rifle. This rifle fires a round that is not popular and we had no ammunition to test the weapon. Mr. [redacted]s was to bring us the necessary ammunition for our testing, which he did on March 10, 2017. Our fee, which he agreed to pay for the disassembly, inspection and testing came to $75, plus sales tax, a total of $82.50. He also left a peep sight to install on this rifle, which we did not install, nor did we charge him for installing the peep sight.Within the past week Mr. [redacted]s sent to you his complaint. He also sent me an email message on June 18th, stating that he had taken the Rem Model 760 to another area gunsmith and was told that the scope had been mounted off center and that the screw holes used to mount the scope were defective and may not safely hold the scope in place when fired. Now Mr. [redacted] claimed that since he had found that his rifle was defectively worked on my shop, it was necessary for him to have his other two guns inspected and corrected by other gunsmiths and demanded that I refund all money he had ever paid us to perform work on his firearms. We naturally declined to do so on the basis that our work had not been defective. On June 18th he stated: on June 18th, Mr. [redacted]s states: “If I don’t hear from you by Thursday you’ll be hearing from my lawyer on Friday. If it has to go far, then I’ll also be posting a review on yelp, as well as writing about this experience on every Washington State gun forum I can find with the topic, “Best and Worst Gunsmiths in Washington State … backed up with evidence of receipts and excerpts from emails from your shop. . . .” Recognizing that a gunsmith’s trade is almost entirely based on maintaining a reputation for skill as a gunsmith, and fairness to my customers, I am concerned that he will post to the internet untrue and fictitious statements about the work I did for him when he brought his firearms to me. His coming back to you is proof to me that he intends to damage my good reputation as a gunsmith. I want to state that with the exception of this complaint by Mr. [redacted], and one other singlecomplaint over the amount of time in getting a job turned-around and back to our customer, for which a complaint of my shop was posted on Google, neither I nor C.A.R. have ever before received a complaint from any customer. I have been in this business in the Seattle area for 8 years.When Mr. [redacted] initially brought up his complaint to me I voluntarily agreed to reduce his bill to me by $100. Mr. [redacted] indicated to me that he accepted this proposal. More recently, with his complaints being renewed all over again, and posted on the Revdex.com website, I emailed him and agreed I would also refund and mail to him immediately another $152. I obtained that amount of money from my bank in the form of a certified check payable to Mr. [redacted] and mailed it to him. It had been my understanding that Mr. [redacted] had accepted that settlement, but with this message from you, it appears that I am mistaken.I believe that Mr. [redacted] is intentionally and maliciously attempting to extort more money from me when he is not owed anything. I deny that my work was improperly done. I have voluntarily reduced his bill by $100 and within the past couple of days sent him a cashier’s check in additional amount of $152. I believe that he is not now and never has in the past been entitled to any refund, but I paid the money to him in order to try to avoid his posting libelous and slanderous statements against me and my shop on the internet. I won’t pay him any more money and I will take any and all proper legal proceedings against him to recover any damages I or my shop may sustain by his posting these types of malicious and untrue statements to any other person in any form or medium he might use to libel and slander my business and I.I am sending a copy of this reply directly to Mr. [redacted] via internet transmission. Thank you for reviewing my side of this horror story.Best personal regards,C.A.R. Firearms _______________________Fred H[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Mr. H[redacted] makes the claim that “Here are the true facts of this dispute:” Well Mr. H[redacted] either has conveniently forgotten the true facts, or he is flat out lying. I challenge Mr. H[redacted] and his employees to a lie detector on these said ‘facts’. I would be happy to also take a lie detector in regards to his ‘facts’. I challenge Mr. H[redacted] and his employee Chris to a lie detector on who intentionally and maliciously damaged the scope. I challenge Mr. H[redacted] to a lie detector if when I first brought him the Rem 760 rifle that he did not insist on filling old off center scope mount holes with welding to prevent rust on the inside of the receiver – but then he forgot to do it, and due to sloppy business practices it wasn’t recorded on the invoice even though he was right there in the room as the invoice was prepared. They emailed me my invoice and when I got home noticed discrepancies on my invoice so I emailed them and called them in regards to the matter. No response back in over a month in any way shape or form. The reason the scope mounting was refunded was because Mr H[redacted] knows and acknowledges he forgot to fill the holes with welding the first time around - in which Mr. H[redacted] said on the phone he was happy to refund under the circumstances. To be ‘happy to refund’ under the circumstances is accepting responsibility, but now Mr. H[redacted] is denying these facts. Due to extensive sloppy record keeping, C.A.R has a habit of either not putting services recommended by the shop itself, or itemizing things on an invoice and not doing them, and then claims I wasn’t charged. How many times can this happen before you have to wonder if they actually did anything, since several times a peep sight is itemized on my invoices for both rifles, yet it was never done and CAR claims ‘I wasn’t charged’. As a matter of fact, so many of Mr. H[redacted] ‘facts’ about the said firearms are flat out wrong – too many minute details to list in total. In addition, all the firearms Mr. H[redacted] worked then had to be repaired of fixed by someone else. This is why I’m asking for full refund on all services by CAR firearms. I offered to send back CAR any parts that could not be used but they declined. In addition to two rifles, Mr. H[redacted] was supposed to go over and safety check a 1911 pistol that another gunsmith modified without my knowledge. CAR said on my invoice nothing was found to be wrong with the pistol and on my first outing nothing occurred out of the ordinary. Then on my second outing with the pistol, the slide stop was coming out on it own – a potentially very dangerous situation if I hadn’t noticed. I then remembered JPL (the previous gunsmith who modified the pistol that CAR was to safety check) had filed the slide stop for some reason, but apparently Mr. H[redacted] missed this safety issue by not inspecting the pistol’s parts carefully enough. The slide stop has since been replaced with the factory new part and apx 1000 rounds later no issues.  Mr. H[redacted] claims I’m trying to extort money from him, but the fact of the matter is I found out about his additional inadequate work on the 1911 and Rem 760 after he initially refunded me a partial amount and after my initial Revdex.com complaint. I brought the Rem 760 to custom rifle builder Rick F[redacted] to mount the scope using Mr. H[redacted] scope mount holes he drilled. I assumed all was Ok with Mr. H[redacted] work and Rick F[redacted] was going to finish the job and just mount the scope. A couple hours after I dropped of the rifle to Rick F[redacted], he called and left a phone message (which I still have saved on my phone) who said Mr. H[redacted] work on the Rem 760 was inadequate and unsafe for the recoil of the caliber and all work would have to be redone. I have a written statement from Rick F[redacted] as well as his saved direct phone message he left me about this exact matter. Due to my experience with C.A.R and Rick F[redacted], I trust Rick F[redacted]’s opinion any day over Mr. H[redacted] as he was educated at CST in Colorado and has over 30 years experience as a gunsmith. I wonder if Mr. H[redacted] has any accreditation at all, or is only self taught. What took Mr. H[redacted] six months to do incorrectly on the Rem 760, and three months to do nothing on the Rem 141 took Rick F[redacted] two weeks to have it done correctly. Entrusting C.A.R firearms was a big waste of time, and in the end nothing was done correctly. Mr. H[redacted] thinks for me to write a review online in regards to my experience at C.A.R is against the law as ‘libel’. Libel applies to false statements, yet my statements are true and I can prove them all. I challenge Mr. H[redacted] and his employees to a lie detector in regards to his ‘version’ of the truth. The bottom line is Mr. H[redacted] is not big enough to accept responsibility for his own actions.
Sincerely,
[redacted]