Car Parts Discount

Ms [redacted] , I assure you we are not "turning anything around to our benefit" We process about two dozen returns every week, and the majority are finalized with refunds to the buyer But we do not offer refunds for incomplete or unsellable items Unfortunately, we also do not keep them in our warehouse for longer than days Since your return was received almost a month ago, it was disposed of My apologies for the inconvenience

Unfortunately, we cannot grant a refund (full or partial) for any returned part if it cannot either be resold or returned to the manufacturer for credit A full refund would be given if the part was returned in original packaging and included all parts as advertised A 20% re-stocking fee would have been applied if we received the return in good condition with all hardware, however without original packaging At the time Ms [redacted] contacted us to return the part, she made no mention that it was received without hardware and without appropriate packaging And when she was told to include all of that with the return, she did not mention anything was missing The only thing we knew at the time was that her mechanic said that it was not the correct manifold for her engine It is our believe that while it was in the mechanic's possession, the original hardware, gasket, and packaging was lost or misplaced Be that as it may, we still cannot resell this part and neither our supplier or [redacted] will take it back

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: The part, as you can see from the pictures that I sent to the business, and you, is not what they had advertised nor what I agreed to buyThey shipped me what appears to be a used part, not a re-manufactured Cardone partAs I mentioned, I requested a prepaid return shipping label from the company because I felt, and still do, that I shouldn't be charged a fee to return a bad part that the DCP should have reasonably been expected to have examined before it was shipped to meTheir request that I put it in a outer box and insure it is just ludicrous, since attached above is how they shipped it to meOn 12/2/This e-mail was sent: M***,
I believe that we spoke about a prepaid return label for the axle as
it is diffidently not a new Carbone axle as advertised
***
On 12/2/5:PM, M*** ** ***
wrote:
Return
Procedure
When
returning parts, make sure they're packed
the same way you received them. Parts should be in their
original bag or
box, protected and packed inside an outer shipping box. All
shipping
labels or markings must be on the outer boxDo not
apply any labels or
marks to the part packaging
For a
fast and smooth
return, please follow these steps:
Put
the item(s) you wish to return in a new box with ALL of
the manufacturer’s original packing material (box, bag,
labels, etc.) and seal it nicely.Write
your Return Authorization # in
big numbers on the new outer boxDO NOT ALTER THE
MANUFACTURER’S ORIGINAL PACKAGING IN ANY WAY.Ship
to:
CarPartsDiscount
1197-C East Los Angeles Ave#255
Simi Valley, CA,
Don’t
forget to purchase insurance and/or delivery
confirmation to protect
yourself against loss or damage (if you ship with FedEx or
UPS, this is already
included). If we receive a returned item in damaged
condition, or do not
receive your return at all, we will be unable to process the
return until a
claim has been completed
When
our returns department receives your item(s), we will
inspect it for damage,
misuse, and/or defects. As soon as the inspection is
complete, we will
issue your refund. This process may take up to days
--
M*** ** ***
m***@carpartsdiscount.com
###-###-####
###-###-####
Monday-Friday
8am-5pm
Pacific
CarPartsDiscount.com
During the time after I sent this response and when I requested again, I lost my dog, my brother, and my wife, to whom I had been the sole caregiver to for her fight with ovarian cancerIf the part had been labeled as a, "Returned", part I would have never purchased it it the first placeI believe that the company should stand behind the produces they sell and not try to send bad parts to customers and expect the customers to foot the bill for the companies' mistake or carelessness. I expect the the company should pay the return shipping charge for the bad part they sent
Regards,
D*** ***

As previously explained, This order is WELL beyond our day return policyAny reasons as to why you took so long to return the item are irrelevantThere are policies in place for a reasonWhen placing your order online YOU agreed to those policies Also the item you received is a rebuilt item and was listed as suchWe make NO claims that a rebuilt item will look newWe have already established that this item is not returnable for a refund as you are WAY beyond the days however if you would like to do a warranty exchange on the item we are more than willing to accommodate you in thatSimply ship the item back to us and we will go the extra mile and pay to send the replacement item to you as customer courtesyI would like to note that warranties cover the replacement of the item and do not cover refundsExample: if you buy a new car and something on it breaks you take it to the dealership under warranty and they replace the broken item, they do not refund you for the purchase of the carI hope this clears up and confusionPlease let us know if we can be of any further assistance

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: The part, as you can see from the pictures that I sent to the business, and you, is not what they had advertised nor what I agreed to buyThey shipped me what appears to be a used part, not a re-manufactured Cardone partAs I mentioned, I requested a prepaid return shipping label from the company because I felt, and still do, that I shouldn't be charged a fee to return a bad part that the DCP should have reasonably been expected to have examined before it was shipped to meTheir request that I put it in a outer box and insure it is just ludicrous, since attached above is how they shipped it to meOn 12/2/This e-mail was sent: M***,
I believe that we spoke about a prepaid return label for the axle as
it is diffidently not a new Carbone axle as advertised
***
On 12/2/5:PM, M*** ** ***
wrote:
Return
Procedure
When
returning parts, make sure they're packed
the same way you received them. Parts should be in their
original bag or
box, protected and packed inside an outer shipping box. All
shipping
labels or markings must be on the outer boxDo not
apply any labels or
marks to the part packaging
For a
fast and smooth
return, please follow these steps:
Put
the item(s) you wish to return in a new box with ALL of
the manufacturer’s original packing material (box, bag,
labels, etc.) and seal it nicelyWrite
your Return Authorization # in
big numbers on the new outer boxDO NOT ALTER THE
MANUFACTURER’S ORIGINAL PACKAGING IN ANY WAYShip
to:
CarPartsDiscount
1197-C East Los Angeles Ave#255
Simi Valley, CA,
Don’t
forget to purchase insurance and/or delivery
confirmation to protect
yourself against loss or damage (if you ship with FedEx or
UPS, this is already
included). If we receive a returned item in damaged
condition, or do not
receive your return at all, we will be unable to process the
return until a
claim has been completed
When
our returns department receives your item(s), we will
inspect it for damage,
misuse, and/or defects. As soon as the inspection is
complete, we will
issue your refund. This process may take up to days
--
M*** ** ***
m***@carpartsdiscount.com
###-###-####
###-###-####
Monday-Friday
8am-5pm
Pacific
CarPartsDiscount.com
During the time after I sent this response and when I requested again, I lost my dog, my brother, and my wife, to whom I had been the sole caregiver to for her fight with ovarian cancerIf the part had been labeled as a, "Returned", part I would have never purchased it it the first placeI believe that the company should stand behind the produces they sell and not try to send bad parts to customers and expect the customers to foot the bill for the companies' mistake or carelessness. I expect the the company should pay the return shipping charge for the bad part they sent
Regards,
D*** ***

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: To use your analogy, If I bought a new car and paid for it and the dealer sent a beat up piece of crap car to me, yes I would expect my money back and I wouldn't expect to have to pay for shipping eitherI will forward the pictures to Cardone and have them give a response to your statement about how their axle looks as you ship it outI'm quite sure that they do not want their work to be reflected by the axle you sent me.
Regards,
D*** ***

The customer contacted us regarding the purchased item on 12/2/2015 We approved the return of the item and gave the customer the needed information to return this item. The customer did not send the item in for return at this time. We did not hear back from the customer until 8/7/2016 stating...

that he would still like to return the item for a refund. We informed the customer that we have a 90 day return policy and this is now far beyond the 90 days and that we can not accept the return of this item. The customer agreed to this policy when placing his order online. Please see uploaded picture of return policy that the customer selected that he has read, understood and agreed to.  
We can not accept a  return of this item however if the customer would like he can send the item in for a warranty replacement. Warranty does not cover freight in either direction, if the customer wants a replacement under warranty he will have to ship the item back to us at his expense as well as pay the associated shipping to get the warranty item sent to him.

Unfortunately, we cannot grant a refund (full or partial) for any returned part if it cannot either be resold or returned to the manufacturer for credit.  A full refund would be given if the part was returned in original packaging and included all parts as advertised.  A 20%...

re-stocking fee would have been applied if we received the return in good condition with all hardware, however without original packaging.  At the time Ms. [redacted] contacted us to return the part, she made no mention that it was received without hardware and without appropriate packaging.  And when she was told to include all of that with the return, she did not mention anything was missing.  The only thing we knew at the time was that her mechanic said that it was not the correct manifold for her engine.  It is our believe that while it was in the mechanic's possession, the original hardware, gasket, and packaging was lost or misplaced.  Be that as it may, we still cannot resell this part and neither our supplier or [redacted] will take it back.

The customer contacted us regarding the purchased item on 12/2/2015 We approved the return of the item and gave the customer the needed information to return this item. The customer did not send the item in for return at this time. We did not hear back from the customer until 8/7/2016 stating that...

he would still like to return the item for a refund. We informed the customer that we have a 90 day return policy and this is now far beyond the 90 days and that we can not accept the return of this item. The customer agreed to this policy when placing his order online. Please see uploaded picture of return policy that the customer selected that he has read, understood and agreed to.  We can not accept a  return of this item however if the customer would like he can send the item in for a warranty replacement. Warranty does not cover freight in either direction, if the customer wants a replacement under warranty he will have to ship the item back to us at his expense as well as pay the associated shipping to get the warranty item sent to him.

Ms. [redacted],
I assure you we are not "turning anything around to our benefit".  We process about two dozen returns every week, and the majority are finalized with refunds to the buyer.  But we do not offer refunds for incomplete or unsellable items.  Unfortunately, we also do not keep them in our warehouse for longer than 14 days.  Since your return was received almost a month ago, it was disposed of.  My apologies for the inconvenience.

Complaint: 10069905
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
[redacted]
It looks like this company is a pro at turning things around to there benefit , so it's obvious they are not going to return my money that's the bottom line so, if they will just return my part to me that I already paid for I 
will be done with them. maybe I can recoup a little of my money selling it on ebay. Thanks Janice Erickson

Review: I ordered a remanufactured brake caliper for my 1962 Austin Healey, model BJ7, that was shipped 6/25/13 and my credit care charged $133.10. The ordered part was made by Raybestos with a part number of FRC3222. The company, however, shipped me Raybestos part RC3222, which does not fit my year car but the next model year, a BJ8. It is physically smaller with different connections. I realized this immediately upon opening the order and contacted CarParts. The person I talked to said that was the only part they had and they weren't very knowledgeable with Austin-Healey parts, which is expected since they stopped making the car in 1965. I asked about a return and could they send me a UPS label so I wouldn't have to spend the $20 to send the part back since it was not the correct part. Whenever I have sent parts back because I have found another alternative, I have always paid for the cost of the return of it was the correct part that I chose not to use. In this case they sent the wrong part. The person said instead of sending me a UPS return label that I should just list the cost on a copy of the invoice and include it in the return and they would include that in the credit. I did this and also included a copy of the UPS slip verifying the cost. The company, however, did not include the shipping costs in my credit. They sent me an email saying a credit had been issued for just the $133.10. I have sent several emails to the company along with copies of the information on the brake caliper they sent showing it is not a fit for my car, but no reply. It is very frustrating to be given a promise from a company that they chose to disregard and then refuse to respond. The credit ($19.16) I am looking for may be small, but it's the principle involved. They sent the wrong part and should stand behind their promise to absorb the return costs.Desired Settlement: I would like a credit on the credit card originally charged for the $19.16 return costs.

Business

Response:

While we are always sympathetic to the customers' concerns, I can say that it is never easy to solve problems like these. Given the age of the car, we cannot verify what calipers are currently on the vehicle nor can we confirm that they are even original equipment. So, we must defer to the manufacturer in this case. According to Raybestos, the FRC3222 is supposed to be correct for Mr. Gollon's application (1962 Austin Healey 3000). I have attached a photo (RAYB_Catalog.jpg) to show that I personally checked their application list, and found the part number to be correct. I have also added an enlarged photo of the same caliper (RAYB_FRC3222.jpg) for better inspection. I believe the customer's claim that we shipped the incorrect part is not true, and have attached a photo of his returned merchandise (FRC3222_return.jpg) to verify that he received and returned the FRC3222 that was ordered. Unfortunately, our return policy does not warrant a refund of any shipping costs since the manufacturer has deemed these to be correct for the given application.

Business

Response:

I sincerely do not mean to sound contentious, but there is nothing to verify the buyer's claim. Neither of the British aftermarket parts retailers make any reference to the caliper to which he is referring. First, Holden does not carry any calipers for the Austin-Healey (http://www.holden.co.uk/cataloguePDFs/cat10/Wheels_Brakes.pdf) - they only carry brake line components, brake shoes, brake pads, and wheel cylinders. Second, Victoria British carries the caliper for the BJ8 (64-68) but it does not look like the Raybestos FRC3222 (please see attached Victoria_search.jpg & VB_vs_RAYB.jpg). Moss Motors also does not detail any differences between FRC3222 and RC3222, nor do they expressly carry either part (please see attached MOSS_search1.jpg & MOSS_search2.jpg). Lastly, and most importantly, FRC3222 and RC3222 are the same caliper... the only difference between the two items is that the RC3222 comes loaded with an organic material pad set (please see attached RAYB_RC3222.jpg) while the FRC3222 does not.

Again, I am sympathetic to the buyer's situation, and wish we had a part that he could use on his vehicle. If we had a BJ7 that we were 100% sure had ALL original components on it, we wouldn't hesitate to test this caliper. However we are going to defer to the manufacturer's catalog in this instance.

Consumer

Response:

Review: 9645670

I am rejecting this response because:

They say there is "nothing" to verify my claim, but that is entirely incorrect. When I opened the box with the caliper I was sent I still had the original one that needed repair. I was not only able to determine the caliper I was sent was clearly smaller, but would not fit my vehicle - which was on jack stands in my garage. Carparts is thousands of miles away and reading from someone's literature which is not as good as having the vehicle in front of me. What better way to determine if a part fits than actually try it on the vehicle, which is what I tried to do.

Why would I send a needed part back unless I could not use it. My car is still not on the road so I need to make other arrangements for the front brakes.

I'm disappointed that they feel no obligation and that I must be wrong and that the part really does fit. I have been working on cars for over 30 years and have quite a bit of automotive knowledge so resta ssured if the part fit I would have installed it.

I'm not sure what the next step is, but I don't see Carparts ever conceeding on this.

Regards,

Review: I recently purchased a set of disc brake rotors for my vehicle on 10/16/2013. At that time the website specified either a 2000 boxster roadster or roadster S model Porsche. I chose the the base model as presented on the website as of that date. I received front brakes that did not fit my vehicle. After speaking with the representative (Russ), I was made to feel I was at fault. After having been at the mechanics and paid my money for his labor without front rotors being I felt pressured to purchase rotors that fit my vehicle from (Russ). He did not explain to me that the new rotors ordered would not be drilled/vented like the first order. I received the second order of rotors in a style not specific to or close in appearance to the first. At this point I had to pay shipping to my address for both and shipping back to this company for the first order. The shipping has cost me over 90.00. On 10/29/2013 I spoke to Russ (Sales Manager) again and was basically bullied into keeping the second set of brakes/rotors because I did not want to pay another $48.00 for shipping on top of the $90.00 plus already spent. Strangely enough after pointing out the discrepancy on the website, specifications for Boxster base 2.7 was more clearly defined. I should not be forced to pay excessive shipping costs and forced to keep a product I do not want.Desired Settlement: I have returned/shipped the first set at my expense $42.00. I would like a full refund of the first set (to include shipping) and a refund of shipping on the second set.

Business

Response:

First, I would like to apologize to Ms. [redacted] if my manner made you feel pressured, at fault, or wronged. That is never my intention, as I always try to treat my customers in the same fashion as I would expect to be treated. I believe the catalyst to the creation of this Revdex.com complaint is based more on feelings than facts. However, to more clearly explain the situation, I would need to include those facts that were omitted from Ms. [redacted]'s previous message.

1. The original purchase on 10/16 was for two (item numbers 80855 & 80856) brake rotors for a 2000-2007 Porsche Boxster Roadster or Roadster S with 3.2L or 3.4L engine. It is a higher trim level than the base model Roadster with a more powerful 2.7L engine, so the brake rotors are cross-drilled and they are slightly different in size. The products made available to any customer on our website are displayed dynamically, and their population depends on a form generated by the customer which includes their vehicle's year, make, model, trim, and engine. If she was able to purchase rotors for the 3.2L engine, then it must have been selected in error (try the website to verify).

2. The second purchase on 10/28 was for two (item number 80854 x2) brake rotors for a 2000-2004 Porsche Boxster Base or Roadster model with 2.7L engine. This is the lower trim level than the S model, and it has a smaller engine, so the rotors are not cross-drilled like they are on the S model. After performing this search on our website while I was on the phone with the customer, the first two rotors she purchased were not made available to me... reinforcing my point that during her first search an error was made.

The second set of rotors are identical to the ones that are currently on her car. They are not cross-drilled, and are not supposed to be. Ms. [redacted] should not use the physical characteristics of her first purchase of incorrect parts to inform her expectation of the correct ones. That would be akin to a person who purchases a Blu-Ray version of a certain film that includes bonus scenes and features, only to realize that they need to return it for the DVD version because they don't have a Blu-Ray player, and complaining that the DVD does not come with the same features as the Blu-Ray. They are not identical products, and should not be compared. Additionally, at no point in the conversation do I recall Ms. [redacted] asking for cross-drilled rotors, because if she did I would have informed her that those are a performance upgrade, manufactured by Zimmerman Brakes, for $112 each.

Unfortunately, we cannot be responsible for the return shipping costs. The parts Ms. [redacted] has in her possession are hers to return at her expense. The first order was simply a buying mistake, one which a small percentage of the population always makes. The second order includes the correct brake rotors for her application, and are not supposed to appear the way her others did. It is her decision to either use them or return them, and we are not liable for that.

Review: On October 10, 2013, I ordered two parts from this company, using my Paypal account, from their online website. At the time of the transaction, their website claimed to have had "on hand" quantities of both products (part of why I ordered was it showed a current stock for both items). On October 10, 2013, I received a confirmation e-mail from the company regarding my order. On October 10, 2013, my Paypal account processed the transaction as Complete. On October 14, 2013 I received an email from the company telling me that they were out of stock on one of the items and asked me what I wished to do about the order. When I responded to the email, I inquired about why their system showed an "on hand" quantity but they are out of stock, and received the following responses: "The (items) you ordered are "special order" parts and not parts we keep in stock, that is why the website says "ships within a week". We placed our weekly order with this supplier yesterday and that's when we were informed that they are out of stock on this part." and "The "On hand" quantity is the inventory level our supplier is reporting to us. If we have something in stock, the website says "In Stock" and not "On hand"." My complaint is as follows: 1) The company was paid for a product that their website said they had a current quantity "on hand". 2) If it is "on hand" then it should be product that they currently have possession of, not something that they have to "special order". The terminology for "In Stock" vs "On Hand" is not made clear at all on their website. 3) The company should not have processed a transaction to my account if they did not have the product immediately available for shipping. 4) Informing me 4 days after the initial transaction that they are out of stock, and their supplier is out of stock, is simply ridiculous. This should have been something closer to an immediate turn around of notifying me of the problem.Desired Settlement: If the company does not actually have possession of the product, then they should not advertise an "on hand" for the product. This is very misleading and deceptive. If the part is a special order part, then the "on hand" could say Special Order. If they do not have the product and must special order it, they should inform their customers of this during the check out process that the items must be ordered and the customer is paying for the product in advance.

Business

Response:

Simply put, "in stock" means that we have it in our warehouse in Simi Valley, and "on hand" means that our supplier has it in one of their warehouses and is subject to the availability specified in the item's description. In this case, our supplier for the TYC part# 20-5828-80 was reporting a positive quantity at the time of Mr. Joosten's purchase on 10/10, however when we attempted to get the part from them on 10/14 they told us that it was not available. Our site was immediately corrected, and we contacted our customer. This is not an unorthodox practice, and I find no fault in it. To do so would be an indictment of all eCommerce businesses on the web, and would unfairly punish them for the mistakes of inventory systems and fulfillment computers. No offense should be taken, as there was no attempt to mislead.

Mr. Joosten has been given the opportunity to receive a partial refund for the order and still receive the part that we can ship to him, or cancel the entire order and receive a refund. Beyond the distinction between "on hand" and "in stock" specified earlier, I am not sure how to adequately resolve the customer's issue besides what we have already done.

Consumer

Response:

Review: 9764527

I am rejecting this response because:

Review: I purchased an exhaust manifold kit from Car Parts Discount, it was the wrong part, so I sent it back. They contacted me by e-mail and said it was not returned in the original box or packageing, which was a plain cardboard box and a plastic bag, the box was damaged and could not be used to return the part in. So, I sent it in the original plastic bag and another plain cardboard box. Also, they said there was some bolts missing, when I returned it, and, I assured them there was not any bolts with it. I contacted them again and they said, they would give me a refund but, they would take 20 % off for a restocking fee and, that I would have to return the bolts. I reasurred them again, obviously, they did not get put in the box, with the exhaust manifold when they sent it to me because, I did not receive them. I thought of going to buy some of the same bolts at an auto parts store and sending them, to them, so I could get my refund but, that is just not right . So, I contacted them again and asked them if they were going to refund my money and they have not responded. So, I felt it necessary to contact your attorney general as well as the Revdex.com in your state, hoping this issue can be resolved. Thank You, Janice EricksonDesired Settlement: I would like to have the refund for the part, that they have, that I returned to them, not used.

Business

Response:

Unfortunately, we cannot grant a refund (full or partial) for any returned part if it cannot either be resold or returned to the manufacturer for credit. A full refund would be given if the part was returned in original packaging and included all parts as advertised. A 20% re-stocking fee would have been applied if we received the return in good condition with all hardware, however without original packaging. At the time Ms. [redacted] contacted us to return the part, she made no mention that it was received without hardware and without appropriate packaging. And when she was told to include all of that with the return, she did not mention anything was missing. The only thing we knew at the time was that her mechanic said that it was not the correct manifold for her engine. It is our believe that while it was in the mechanic's possession, the original hardware, gasket, and packaging was lost or misplaced. Be that as it may, we still cannot resell this part and neither our supplier or [redacted] will take it back.

Consumer

Response:

Review: 10069905

I am rejecting this response because:

Regards,

It looks like this company is a pro at turning things around to there benefit , so it's obvious they are not going to return my money that's the bottom line so, if they will just return my part to me that I already paid for I

will be done with them. maybe I can recoup a little of my money selling it on ebay. Thanks Janice Erickson

Business

Response:

Ms. [redacted],

I assure you we are not "turning anything around to our benefit". We process about two dozen returns every week, and the majority are finalized with refunds to the buyer. But we do not offer refunds for incomplete or unsellable items. Unfortunately, we also do not keep them in our warehouse for longer than 14 days. Since your return was received almost a month ago, it was disposed of. My apologies for the inconvenience.