Carz Inspection

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/07/15) */ RE: Case # [redacted] / [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted] : First of all, as requested previously and to which Revdex.com has not as of yet changed, please change your files to indicate that all future correspondence should be sent to: Carz Inspection, Inc Customer Service Department [redacted] Wanamingo, MN This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated June 23rd, Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writingCarz Inspection, Incis a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted] , Wanamingo, Minnesota that provides web based nationwide automobile inspection services First of all, we would like to point out that Mr [redacted] had previously indicated in conversations on the phone that the inspection report did indeed point out some issues with the vehicle, such as the heated seats not working and bad bushings in the seat, which caused it to rock back and forth, some of which the dealer actually agreed to fix prior to shipment, so the report he was provided with did indeed save him some money and did in fact point out some issuesHe stated on the telephone that all of the windows did work from the driver side power window control, however, not from other individual window switchesNo inspection can be absolutely flawless or perfect, especially when you are dealing with a twelve year old vehicle, with potential electrical or switch issues, which can occur at any timeIt is possible that this may have occurred after the inspection was performedWith regard to the rear blowers, it was stated that they barely work, not that they don't work at allWith regard to the hatch, we would need more details; however, this is usually just an adjustment issueBased upon the facts listed above, we will not be issuing a refund Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inccontained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this casefurthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subdshall apply to the Revdex.com Please change your files to indicate that all future correspondence should be sent to: Carz Inspection, Inc Customer Service Department [redacted] Wanamingo, MN Thank you for your attention to this matter Carz Inspection, Inc ***original document attached

***see attached original documentsRE: Case # [redacted] / [redacted] B***Dear Ms [redacted] :This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated May 9th, Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing Carz Inspection, Inc is a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted] ***, Rochester, Minnesota, that markets web based nationwide automobile inspection services.With regard to the quality of the photographs, we have independent inspectors throughout the United States and some inspectors are not as good at photography as others We do realize that sometimes the photos in reports are not as good as others Due to the large number of inspectors, varying types of cameras and skill levels, there is no easy way to achieve a guaranteed level of consistency, although we do try In this case, the inspector did travel out to site on more than one occasion to attempt to get better pictures and satisfy the customer There were also several other issues that were pointed out, such as scratches and leaks Any notation regarding rust was addressed in the report and should have been self-explanatory A direct quote from the report is as follows: "There are some minor rust/bubbling areas on the vehicle; however, they are not very noticeable Driver side door and headlight area The undercarriage may have some very minor beginnings of some surface rust, if you look real close but nothing major" We were not present at the inspection and cannot substantiate the comments of the owner of the vehicle; however, the inspector most likely engaged the vehicle within the garage It is stated within our Terms of Service that it is at the discretion of the inspector whether they perform a test drive or not and if one is not performed, it does not constitute the basis for a refund In any event, an inspection report was provided to the customer and we have reviewed the pictures in question and while they are certainly not perfect photographs, they are clearly acceptable and provide a level of clarity that would be good enough to make any necessary determinations concerning the vehicle purchase While we try to provide our customers with the best possible reports and customer service, we realize that no inspection can be absolutely flawless or perfect Based upon the facts listed above, we will not be issuing a refund.Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inccontained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com hereby fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case Furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subdshall apply to the Revdex.comThank you for your attention to this matter.Carz Inspection, Inc.Customer Service Department

I am rejecting this response because: The reality is this I am in California and the Chevrolet 2drBel Air I was interested in purchasing was in the state of Maine I sought the advertised services of Carz Inspection (CI) due to the quality of their exemplar vehicle inspections reports Particularly the photographs in their exemplar vehicle inspection reports which were all extremely clear and of excellent quality I was under the impression that I would receive the same quality of a report, but unfortunately, all I received from them was no response to my many requests (telephonic, email and certified letter) They did not accept the certified letter and it was returned to me Not being able to personally inspect the vehicle makes the vehicle inspection report of significant importance, particularly the photographs Photographs enables the viewer to clearly see things words or check boxes cannot clearly describe The VIN tag and the cowl/body tags each provide valuable information The photograph of the VIN tag of the vehicle I wanted to purchase was out of focus the cowl/body tag was not only out of focus, but the entire tag was not entirely in the photograph The report CI provided me was not in any way close to the quality or clarity they advertise What really is interesting is that CI has a Quality Assurance Program (QAP) that says, "Through our Quality Assurance Program we make sure all inspections meet our standards and surpass your expectations." The QAP says, "As an inspection is uploaded by an inspector and completed, it is sent to our review team Our review team has a list of standards we uphold for every single inspection Our review team will thoroughly go through the report and make changes that need to be made or they will request additional data from the inspector if something was incomplete or not properly explained Once the inspection meets our standards, our review team will make the inspection complete Minutes you the customer will receive your report via email." Judging by the substandard inspection report they provided me, their total disregard to respond to me requests to discuss the report, I really wonder what their standards are, because they definitely neither met nor exceeded my expectations which were influenced by the exemplar inspection reports on their web site I still find it hard to believe that the QAP with its review team would allow an inspection report like mine, with its approximately photos, of which were of good quality and of the were of the engine None of the exemplar inspection reports have any photographs of the quality of my inspection report Although the inspector returned to the site on more than one occasion in an attempt to get better pictures, as of 5-31-16, at 8:am PDT, there were no new photographs added to my inspection report Regarding the test drive of the vehicle, I would agree that it should be at the discretion of the inspector as to whether or not he would test drive a vehicle and that it was not a reason for a refund That never was an issue or reason for a refund I do take issue when an inspector says he drove the vehicle, describes the vehicle's performance, handling characteristics, when according to the owner, the inspector did not drive the vehicle The engine was only started This would explain why all of the photographs of the vehicle in my inspection report are with it in the garage There were no full length photographs (left and right sides) Unlike the exemplars in their web site Regarding CI's description of the quality of the photographs in my inspection report, I emphatically disagree Regardless of how they phrase it or excuses they use, the overwhelming majority of the photos were not of the quality they advertise The photographic clarity in CI's exemplar inspection reports far exceed the quality of those in my inspection report There is no comparison between the undercarriage photographs in my inspection report and those the CI's exemplar inspection reports It's interesting to note that that CI responds to all requests made by the Revdex.com, yet they will not respond to a paying customer who only wants the kind of product they advertised they would provide, but in my case they did not and will not provide me that type of report All I wanted is an inspection report of the type they advertised with their exemplar reports No more no less As I stated in my complaint letter, because of the substandard inspection report provided by CI and their not responding to any of my requests, I was not able to make an informed decision to purchase the vehicle While I was waiting for a response from CI the vehicle was sold They never did get back to me

RE: No Case # Referenced in Letter/ *** ***Dear Ms***:This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated July 22nd, Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing, not via the internet or email Carz
Inspection, Incis a Minnesota based corporation, located at *** *** *** Rochester, Minnesota that provides web based nationwide automobile inspection services. Thank You for your letter dated July 22, Please note that the customer has received a full refund This should resolve this matter.Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inccontained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com hereby fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case Furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Stature 317A.161Subdshall apply to the Revdex.com.Thank you for your attention to this matter.Carz Inspection, Inc.Customer Service Department***original document attached

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/07/15) */
RE: Case # [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
First of all, as requested previously and to which Revdex.com has not as of yet changed, please change your files to indicate that all future correspondence should be sent to:
Carz...

Inspection, Inc.
Customer Service Department
[redacted]
Wanamingo, MN 55983
This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated June 23rd, 2015. Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing. Carz Inspection, Inc. is a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted], Wanamingo, Minnesota that provides web based nationwide automobile inspection services.
First of all, we would like to point out that Mr. [redacted] had previously indicated in conversations on the phone that the inspection report did indeed point out some issues with the vehicle, such as the heated seats not working and bad bushings in the seat, which caused it to rock back and forth, some of which the dealer actually agreed to fix prior to shipment, so the report he was provided with did indeed save him some money and did in fact point out some issues. He stated on the telephone that all of the windows did work from the driver side power window control, however, not from other individual window switches. No inspection can be absolutely flawless or perfect, especially when you are dealing with a twelve year old vehicle, with potential electrical or switch issues, which can occur at any time. It is possible that this may have occurred after the inspection was performed. With regard to the rear blowers, it was stated that they barely work, not that they don't work at all. With regard to the hatch, we would need more details; however, this is usually just an adjustment issue. Based upon the facts listed above, we will not be issuing a refund.
Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inc. contained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case. furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subd.3. shall apply to the Revdex.com.
Please change your files to indicate that all future correspondence should be sent to: Carz Inspection, Inc.
Customer Service Department
[redacted]
Wanamingo, MN 55983
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Carz Inspection, Inc.
[redacted]original document attached.

[redacted]see attached original documents. RE: Case # [redacted] B. [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated May 9th, 2016.  Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing.  Carz Inspection, Inc....

is a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted], Rochester, Minnesota, that markets web based nationwide automobile inspection services.With regard to the quality of the photographs, we have independent inspectors throughout the United States and some inspectors are not as good at photography as others.  We do realize that sometimes the photos in reports are not as good as others.  Due to the large number of inspectors, varying types of cameras and skill levels, there is no easy way to achieve a guaranteed level of consistency, although we do try.  In this case, the inspector did travel out to site on more than one occasion to attempt to get better pictures and satisfy the customer.  There were also several other issues that were pointed out, such as scratches and leaks.  Any notation regarding rust was addressed in the report and should have been self-explanatory.  A direct quote from the report is as follows: "There are some minor rust/bubbling areas on the vehicle; however, they are not very noticeable.  Driver side door and headlight area.  The undercarriage may have some very minor beginnings of some surface rust, if you look real close but nothing major".  We were not present at the inspection and cannot substantiate the comments of the owner of the vehicle; however, the inspector most likely engaged the vehicle within the garage.  It is stated within our Terms of Service that it is at the discretion of the inspector whether they perform a test drive or not and if one is not performed, it does not constitute the basis for a refund.  In any event, an inspection report was provided to the customer and we have reviewed the pictures in question and while they are certainly not perfect photographs, they are clearly acceptable and provide a level of clarity that would be good enough to make any necessary determinations concerning the vehicle purchase.  While we try to provide our customers with the best possible reports and customer service, we realize that no inspection can be absolutely flawless or perfect.  Based upon the facts listed above, we will not be issuing a refund.Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inc. contained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com hereby fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case.  Furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subd.3. shall apply to the Revdex.com. Thank you for your attention to this matter.Carz Inspection, Inc.Customer Service Department

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.I have received the refund.Thank you

I am rejecting this response because:
The reality is this.
 I am in California and the 1955 Chevrolet 2dr. Bel Air I was interested
in purchasing was in the state of Maine.  I sought the advertised services
of Carz Inspection (CI) due to the quality of their 9 exemplar vehicle inspections
reports.  Particularly the photographs in their 9 exemplar vehicle
inspection reports which were all extremely clear and of excellent quality.
 I was under the impression that I would receive the same quality of a
report, but unfortunately, all I received from them was no response to my many
requests (telephonic, email and certified letter).  They did not accept
the certified letter and it was returned to me.
Not being able to
personally inspect the vehicle makes the vehicle inspection report of
significant importance, particularly the photographs.  Photographs enables
the viewer to clearly see things words or check boxes cannot clearly describe.
 The VIN tag and the cowl/body tags each provide valuable information.
 The photograph of the VIN tag of the vehicle I wanted to purchase
was out of focus the cowl/body tag was not only out of focus, but the
entire tag was not entirely in the photograph.  The report CI provided me
was not in any way close to the quality or clarity they advertise.  
What really is interesting
is that CI has a Quality Assurance Program (QAP) that says, "Through our
Quality Assurance Program we make sure all inspections meet our standards and
surpass your expectations."  The QAP says, "As an inspection is
uploaded by an inspector and completed, it is sent to our review team.
 Our review team has a list of standards we uphold for every single
inspection.  Our review team will thoroughly go through the report and
make changes that need to be made or they will request additional data from the
inspector if something was incomplete or not properly explained.
 Once the inspection meets our standards, our review team will make the
inspection complete.  Minutes you the
customer will receive your report via email." 
Judging by the
substandard inspection report they provided me, their total disregard to
respond to me requests to discuss the report, I really wonder what their
standards are, because they definitely neither met nor exceeded my expectations
which were influenced by the 9 exemplar inspection reports on their web site.  
I still find it hard to
believe that the QAP with its review team would allow an inspection report like
mine, with its approximately 57 photos, 16 of which were of good quality and 7
of the 16 were of the engine.  None of the
9 exemplar inspection reports have any photographs of the quality of my
inspection report.
Although the inspector
returned to the site on more than one occasion in an attempt to get better
pictures, as of 5-31-16, at 8:00 am PDT, there were no new photographs added to
my inspection report.  
Regarding the test drive
of the vehicle, I would agree that it should be at the discretion of the
inspector as to whether or not he would test drive a vehicle and that it was
not a reason for a refund.  That never was an issue or reason for a
refund.  I do take issue when an inspector says he drove the vehicle,
describes the vehicle's performance, handling characteristics, when according
to the owner, the inspector did not drive the vehicle.  The engine was
only started.  This would explain why all of the photographs of the
vehicle in my inspection report are with it in the garage.  There were no
full length photographs (left and right sides).  Unlike the 9 exemplars in
their web site.  
Regarding CI's
description of the quality of the photographs in my inspection report, I
emphatically disagree.  Regardless of how
they phrase it or excuses they use, the overwhelming majority of the photos
were not of the quality they advertise.  The photographic clarity in CI's
9 exemplar inspection reports far exceed the quality of those in my
inspection report.  There is no comparison between the undercarriage
photographs in my inspection report and those the CI's 9 exemplar inspection
reports.
It's interesting to note
that that CI responds to all requests made by the Revdex.com, yet they will not
respond to a paying customer who only wants the kind of product they advertised
they would provide, but in my case they did not and will not provide me that
type of report.
All I wanted is an
inspection report of the type they advertised with their 9 exemplar reports.
 No more no less.  As I stated in my complaint letter, because of the substandard inspection report provided by CI and their not responding to any of my requests, I was not able to make an informed decision to purchase the vehicle.  While I was waiting for a response from CI the vehicle was sold.  They never did get back to me.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/06/23) */
RE: Case # [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated June 9th, 2015. Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing. Carz...

Inspection, Inc. is a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted], Wanamingo, Minnesota that provides web based nationwide automobile inspection services.
First of all, according to our internal records, the address that Mr. [redacted] provided to us is [redacted] Yerevan, Armenia 0036, not [redacted], Sarasota, FL 34238 that is indicated in your correspondence. Please note that we provided Mr. [redacted] with a used vehicle inspection report for his review on a 2010 Lexus GX 460. With regard to his complaint concerning the quality of the pictures, we have reviewed the pictures in question and while they are certainly not perfect photographs, they are clearly acceptable and provide a level of clarity that would be good enough to make any necessary determinations concerning the vehicle purchase. With respect to the VIN#, it is clearly the correct VIN# associated with the vehicle as the inspector is required to match and verify the VIN number with the picture and they also have to input the VIN# into the written section of the report. In reference to the broken parts referred to on teh side mirrors,the photographs that were taken by the inspector did not indicate any damage on the day of the inspection. We cannot comment on any pictures provided by the transportation company, as we have no knowledge of the pictures and have not spoken with them directly. furthermore, the inspector did take pictures of and indicate some small dings on other parts of the vehicle. It is not plausible to think that he would note and take pictures of these smaller issues and not note what is alleged to be much more significant issue. Also, this alleged damage may have occurred sometime between the inspection and the time that the transportation company picked up the vehicle and noted the alleged damage. Lastly, his comment regarding our terms of service and acceptance and acknowledgement of the receipt of the report are merely just that and we do not understand the context of his last question. Based upon the facts listed above, we will not be issuing a refund.
Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inc. contained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com hereby fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case. Furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by Revdex.com, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subd.3. shall apply to the Revdex.com.
Please change your files to indicate that all future correspondence should be sent to:
Carz Inspection, Inc.
Customer Service Department
[redacted]
Wanamingo, MN 55983
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Carz Inspection, Inc.
[redacted]original attached.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/06/26) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
In respect to the VIN number, I know that the inspector is required to validate it, however, it was not proofed to me that it was validated. I provided the VIN# at the time of placing the online order for the car inspection. Naturally, the business had the VIN# before even seeing the car.
In respect to the broken side mirrors, there is no photo that would proof they were not broken at the time of the inspection.
The bottom line is that the complaint is about customer satisfaction with the performance of the business and I am certainly not satisfied. The service that I purchased and paid for did not deliver what was promised.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 19, 2015/07/14) */
[redacted]Corresponding document attached.
RE: Case # [redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
First of all, as was indicated in our previous letter, we asked that you change the correspondence information, which you did not, as your prior contact is not accurate. Once again, we ask that you would please direct all correspondence to:
Carz Inspection, Inc.
Customer Service Department
[redacted]
Wanamingo, MN 55983
This letter shall serve as our official response to your letter dated June 26th, 2015, in which you requested that we might readdress a complaint which was responded to previously. Our answer is that we stand by our previous response.
Please note that any and all correspondence regarding this case shall be done in writing. Carz Inspection, Inc. is a Minnesota based corporation, located at [redacted], Wanamingo, Minnesota that provides web based nationwide automobile inspection services.
Please be advised that we have responded to all requests made by the Revdex.com and that any and all information provided by Carz Inspection, Inc. contained herein is deemed to be privileged and confidential in nature and proprietary and that by virtue of the acceptance of this letter and the corresponding documentation contained herein, that the Revdex.com hereby fully acknowledges and accepts any liability that may arise concerning the above referenced manner, based upon its complete and full representation and accurate disclosure of the facts surrounding this case. Furthermore, please be advised that any actions taken by B BB, including but not limited to, any downgrade of current rating with Revdex.com, improper divulgement, dissemination, misrepresentation, inaccurate or incomplete reporting, editing or posting of the facts (either partially or in their entirety) be they materially positive or adverse to Carz Inspection, Inc., that the applicable laws in accordance with Minnesota State Statute 317A.161Subd.3. shall apply to the Revdex.com.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Carz Inspection, Inc.
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 21, 2015/07/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not have anything to add but cannot accept the response from the business. I consider this case as unresolved and it can be closed as such.