Complete Collision Center

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 6, 2016/03/03) */ The first contact with the customer regarding this repair was an email from the customer on November 19, The business owner responded with answers to the customer questions including the statement that paint adjacent to the repair area would be blended as necessary, as per the shop's standard procedureThis is no way indicates that we will blend paint on panels not repaired by usThe customer's response indicated that he had two bad experiences with auto repairs in the past The customer's insurance company was contacted and arrangements made for paymentOn December 1, our shop emailed the customer in an attempt to schedule the work to begin on December 8, The customer indicated that the car was out of town having some service and warranty work completed and he would contact us when it was returned The customer made contact with the shop again on January 25, regarding the repairsThe shop made arrangements to begin the repairs on February 8, The customer was given the estimated time needed to repair the vehicle as one to one and a half weeks During the initial inspection of the vehicle upon delivery to the shop for repairs, the shop became aware of multiple substandard previous repairs on the vehicleThe front bumper was attached to the vehicle using sheet rock screwsAlthough not included in the estimate given the customer, we replaced them with the correct fastenersThere were several different areas of the vehicle that had been painted with poor surface preparation, no blending to the adjacent painted areas, and improper color matchAdditionally, we replaced a fog light that had overspray on it from a prior repair at our cost because that damage was not caused by the incident the insurance company was paying to repairAdditionally, we repaired the area of the vehicle as represented on the estimate and obtained a satisfactory paint match to our high standards The customer came to the shop to pick up the vehicle on February 19, 2016, days after the repairs beganHis vehicle was backed into the parking space in front of the building, as are all completed repaired vehicles ready for customer pick upThe other vehicles that he may have observed in the parking lot, which were not backed into their spots, were employee personal vehicles or vehicles not ready for delivery The owner and two shop technicians were available on the day of pick up for a vehicle inspection with the customerIf he had requested a quality inspection with an employee, it certainly would have been accommodatedThe customer spent several minutes in the parking lot inspecting the car before coming into the office to payIf substandard work or additional damage was visible at that time, there was ample opportunity to bring that to our attentionThe customer seemed to be happy with the repair as he paid and left the premises The following day (on a Saturday) , we received an email from the customer indicating that the work we performed on the front bumper of the vehicle (as per the estimate we provided) "looks great" but he noticed a problem with the rear bumper, which we were not contracted to repairHe sent pictures of the rear bumper in a separate emailEven though the mobile phone photos are of poor quality, it is clear the paint on the rear bumper is bubbling and peeling due to poor surface preparation on a prior repair as opposed to a result of damage sustained at our shopAs this email was received on a weekend and office staff does not work weekends, the email was not read until MondayBy Monday afternoon, the customer emailed again with a list of complaints about the vehicle - two claims of damage on parts unrelated to our repair and three complaints about the repair we had completed, which just two days earlier, according to the customer's own admission, "look(ed) great." A response was emailed to the customer indicating that we would be happy to review the repairs performed by our shop and make any corrections as needed to our workWe invited the customer to obtain a second opinion on the cause of the paint peeling on the rear bumper of the car from any shop in the area, as we are confident that any body shop would give the same opinion on the previous substandard paint job on the rear bumperAt some point during this time, his insurance company called and spoke with the shop owner regarding the customer's claims against the shop When the customer brought the vehicle back to the shop for re-inspection, he indicated that he "had an appointment with a lawyer" regarding the vehicleAlthough customer service and our reputation in the industry are of the utmost importance to us, it was obvious that the customer did not wish to discuss his concerns with the work that we performed on the vehicleRather, he was interested in our shop repairing substandard work performed on the vehicle by another party (possibly before he even owned the vehicle) without charge It is our opinion that the customer purchased the vehicle in "used" condition with existing damage and repair work that was sub-parFor nearly three month before the vehicle even arrived at our shop for repair, he was preparing to correct his mistake of purchasing a poorly repaired car by ensuring that his insurance company and our shop would foot the bill to restore the vehicleWhile we take great pride in our work, we refuse to be a party to the deceitful, untruthful, and unethical scheme the customer is executingAgain, we stand behind the work completed in our shop but will not repair another shop's less-than-standard work at our expense

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2016/03/03) */
The first contact with the customer regarding this repair was an email from the customer on November 19, 2015. The business owner responded with answers to the customer questions including the statement that paint adjacent to the repair area...

would be blended as necessary, as per the shop's standard procedure. This is no way indicates that we will blend paint on panels not repaired by us. The customer's response indicated that he had two bad experiences with auto repairs in the past.
The customer's insurance company was contacted and arrangements made for payment. On December 1, 2015 our shop emailed the customer in an attempt to schedule the work to begin on December 8, 2015. The customer indicated that the car was out of town having some service and warranty work completed and he would contact us when it was returned.
The customer made contact with the shop again on January 25, 2016 regarding the repairs. The shop made arrangements to begin the repairs on February 8, 2016. The customer was given the estimated time needed to repair the vehicle as one to one and a half weeks.
During the initial inspection of the vehicle upon delivery to the shop for repairs, the shop became aware of multiple substandard previous repairs on the vehicle. The front bumper was attached to the vehicle using sheet rock screws. Although not included in the estimate given the customer, we replaced them with the correct fasteners. There were several different areas of the vehicle that had been painted with poor surface preparation, no blending to the adjacent painted areas, and improper color match. Additionally, we replaced a fog light that had overspray on it from a prior repair at our cost because that damage was not caused by the incident the insurance company was paying to repair. Additionally, we repaired the area of the vehicle as represented on the estimate and obtained a satisfactory paint match to our high standards.
The customer came to the shop to pick up the vehicle on February 19, 2016, 11 days after the repairs began. His vehicle was backed into the parking space in front of the building, as are all completed repaired vehicles ready for customer pick up. The other vehicles that he may have observed in the parking lot, which were not backed into their spots, were employee personal vehicles or vehicles not ready for delivery.
The owner and two shop technicians were available on the day of pick up for a vehicle inspection with the customer. If he had requested a quality inspection with an employee, it certainly would have been accommodated. The customer spent several minutes in the parking lot inspecting the car before coming into the office to pay. If substandard work or additional damage was visible at that time, there was ample opportunity to bring that to our attention. The customer seemed to be happy with the repair as he paid and left the premises.
The following day (on a Saturday) , we received an email from the customer indicating that the work we performed on the front bumper of the vehicle (as per the estimate we provided) "looks great" but he noticed a problem with the rear bumper, which we were not contracted to repair. He sent pictures of the rear bumper in a separate email. Even though the mobile phone photos are of poor quality, it is clear the paint on the rear bumper is bubbling and peeling due to poor surface preparation on a prior repair as opposed to a result of damage sustained at our shop. As this email was received on a weekend and office staff does not work weekends, the email was not read until Monday. By Monday afternoon, the customer emailed again with a list of 5 complaints about the vehicle - two claims of damage on parts unrelated to our repair and three complaints about the repair we had completed, which just two days earlier, according to the customer's own admission, "look(ed) great."
A response was emailed to the customer indicating that we would be happy to review the repairs performed by our shop and make any corrections as needed to our work. We invited the customer to obtain a second opinion on the cause of the paint peeling on the rear bumper of the car from any shop in the area, as we are confident that any body shop would give the same opinion on the previous substandard paint job on the rear bumper. At some point during this time, his insurance company called and spoke with the shop owner regarding the customer's claims against the shop.
When the customer brought the vehicle back to the shop for re-inspection, he indicated that he "had an appointment with a lawyer" regarding the vehicle. Although customer service and our reputation in the industry are of the utmost importance to us, it was obvious that the customer did not wish to discuss his concerns with the work that we performed on the vehicle. Rather, he was interested in our shop repairing substandard work performed on the vehicle by another party (possibly before he even owned the vehicle) without charge.
It is our opinion that the customer purchased the vehicle in "used" condition with existing damage and repair work that was sub-par. For nearly three month before the vehicle even arrived at our shop for repair, he was preparing to correct his mistake of purchasing a poorly repaired car by ensuring that his insurance company and our shop would foot the bill to restore the vehicle. While we take great pride in our work, we refuse to be a party to the deceitful, untruthful, and unethical scheme the customer is executing. Again, we stand behind the work completed in our shop but will not repair another shop's less-than-standard work at our expense.