Crystal Hand Car Wash

This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, with regard to [redacted] complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr [redacted] identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I, myself, have personally inspected Mr [redacted] RAVhood when he brought his vehicle in the following dayThe scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratchTherefore, I have informed Mr [redacted] and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty

To [redacted] This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, with regard to [redacted] complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr [redacted] identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I, myself, have personally inspected Mr [redacted] ’ RAVhood when he brought his vehicle in the following dayThe scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratchTherefore, I have informed Mr [redacted] and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below 1) I DID complain the day that my car was washed and the door did not open The employee who "dried" my car did not speak English and just shrugged it off The employee who came to see the car had no explanation and did not offer any help to me NO ONE AT THE CAR WASH OFFERED TO GET THE MANAGER 2) No - I did not actually WATCH all of the employees at the car wash To suggest that this is expected of a customer is not realistic But my car door worked when they drove it INTO the car wash And the car door would NOT OPEN when the car was driven out of the car wash.3) I could not have known what was wrong with the car door until I took it to the collision shop to be repaired I am NOT an expert and neither is the owner of Crystal Car Wash The manager of the collision shop had NO REASON to lie about what caused the damage to my car door TO HAVE CAUSED A SCENE AT THE TIME OF MY CAR WASH WOULD HAVE MEANT JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS...I WAITED TO FIND OUT WHAT, EXACTLY, HAD CAUSED THE DAMAGE TO MY CAR.4) I waited to have my car door repaired until I could get a day off work and I contacted the manager of Crystal Car Wash on that very day to let him know what had had transpired 5) When I talked to the manager of Crystal Car Wash, he DID NOT want to see the part and he has not ever asked to see the broken part He also DID NOT want to validate my claim by calling the collision shop If he is actually CONCERNED about doing the right thing...he should have called and inquired at the collision shop Regards, [redacted] s

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the? response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.? For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Regards, [redacted] First sara claimed to be the supervisorSecond the scratches are not linear as she states but as if someone used a scrub brush on the hoodWhich I witnessed myself them using it on the hood, and the hood onlyAlso the car was not extremely dirty as she claimsIt was the day after the canyon fire Which caused ash to migrate that farSo days prior there were no scratchesThe reason they claim was not their fault is as the car is brand new not even year oldIt is also a unique color that only toyotas from come in the ravxl and the ravxleThey do not want to admit fault as would cost them alot to fix as it can only be refinished and painted at toyota.? I will be addin photos of the scratches she claims is linear tomorrow.?

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Regards, [redacted] First sara claimed to be the supervisorSecond the scratches are not linear as she states but as if someone used a scrub brush on the hoodWhich I witnessed myself them using it on the hood, and the hood onlyAlso the car was not extremely dirty as she claimsIt was the day after the canyon fire Which caused ash to migrate that farSo days prior there were no scratchesThe reason they claim was not their fault is as the car is brand new not even year oldIt is also a unique color that only toyotas from come in the ravxl and the ravxleThey do not want to admit fault as would cost them alot to fix as it can only be refinished and painted at toyotaI will be addin photos of the scratches she claims is linear tomorrow

July 19, 2015Revdex.com [redacted] Viewridge Ave #220San Diego, CA 92123-1688RE: ID# [redacted] To [redacted] This letter is in response to your correspondence dated July 15, with regard to [redacted] 's complaint about her vehicle door.The car wash position is that we have no way of knowing the problem happened at the carwash as Ms [redacted] states since she has fail to provide concrete evidence her door problemoccurred at the car wash.On July 3, 2015, the day Ms [redacted] claim the problem occurred, my wife, my complete staff,and I was present throughout the dayThere was no complaint from anyone with regard to anydoor problem to any of my staff, my wife, or myself.On July 10, 2015, a week later, Ms [redacted] comes to the car wash and shows broken steel piecesto my supervisorShe states it was broken at the car wash based upon suggestion by a collisionshop.On July 11, 2015, I call Ms [redacted] to verify her claimShe, herself, was unsure how or when thedoor problem occurredShe states that the collision shop speculated that the steelcomponents could have been broken at the car wash; perhaps someone yanked the door open.She stated that she is basing the complaint based upon that speculationI asked if she saw anyof my employees yanked the door openShe said she didn't know and couldn't provide anyevidence that my employees yanked on the door to cause the problem.We take customer complaint seriously and do our utmost to handle customer complaintsAswell, we usually give the customer the benefit of the doubt and try to accommodate them.However, it is difficult for the car wash to take responsibility on this complaint for the followingreasons:1) No longer our responsibilityShe states she got her vehicle washed on July 3, Ifthe door problem occurred at the car wash, she could have alerted my staff, my wife, ormeWe would have investigated the complaint on-siteOn that day, there was nocomplaint from anyone about door problemsOnce a vehicle leaves the car washpremise, we are no longer responsible for the vehicle.Had Ms [redacted] had called us that day to inform us of her problem, we would haveencouraged her to come back and investigated into her claimShe didn't call or leaveany messages informing us that she had problem with her vehiclePlease note, wewere open daily from July to July 9, 2015, and there was no call or message fromanyone regarding any door problemInstead, on July 10, 2015, she shows up and showsmy supervisor broken steel pieces and states we are responsible for $repair cost ...As far as I am concerned, Ms [redacted] 's door problem happened somewhere else and it isnot the responsibility of the car wash.2) No concrete evidenceMs [redacted] has stated to me directly that she did not how orwhen her door problem occurredShe has told me that a collision shop speculated thatproblem "could have" occurred at the car washI asked her directly if she saw any ofmy employees yanked on her door, she states she didn't know and couldn't provide anyclear evidence that my employees caused her door problem.It is difficult to take responsibility on a problem based upon 3'd speculation and withoutany concrete proof.In conclusion, based upon Ms [redacted] 's words and action, I concluded that her door issue waseither pre-existing condition or a problem that occurred outside of the car washTherefore,there is nothing we could offer to assist with her problemThank you.***Crystal Car Wash

To *** ***This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, with regard to *** *** complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr*** identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I,
myself, have personally inspected Mr***’ RAVhood when he brought his vehicle in the following dayThe scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratchTherefore, I have informed Mr*** and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty

On 10/11/i took my ravlease into be washedPrior to taking it through the machine they scrubbed it with brushes especially the hoodIt was near closing so they rushed us outWhen we got home we noticed bad scratches that were not the before we took it inWe brought in the next day and the kept going on it could be them the machine would have left scratches everywhereThey refuse to cover the damages done to the hoodStating it was not their machineI agreeIt was the brushes they uaed before

This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, with regard to *** *** complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr*** identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I, myself, have personally inspected Mr*** RAVhood when he brought his vehicle in the following dayThe scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratchTherefore, I have informed Mr*** and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty

August 7, 2015Revdex.com*** ***Viewridge Ave #220San Diego, CA 92123-1688RE: ID# ***To *** ***This letter is in response to your correspondence dated July 29, with regard to ***'s complaint.I will reiterate there were no complaint from anyone on July 3, with regard to any doorissueFurthermore, once a vehicle leaves the car wash property, the car wash is no longerresponsible for the vehicleI cannot help someone who someone who comes back a week laterand states that we caused a problem that we are not aware off.Crystal Car Wash

This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, with regard to *** *** complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr*** identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I, myself, have personally inspected Mr*** RAVhood when he brought his vehicle in the following dayThe scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratchTherefore, I have informed Mr*** and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the? response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.? For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Regards,
*** ***
First sara claimed to be the supervisorSecond the scratches are not linear as she states but as if someone used a scrub brush on the hoodWhich I witnessed myself them using it on the hood, and the hood onlyAlso the car was not extremely dirty as she claimsIt was the day after the canyon fire Which caused ash to migrate that farSo days prior there were no scratchesThe reason they claim was not their fault is as the car is brand new not even year oldIt is also a unique color that only toyotas from come in the ravxl and the ravxleThey do not want to admit fault as would cost them alot to fix as it can only be refinished and painted at toyota.? I will be addin photos of the scratches she claims is linear tomorrow.?

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Regards,
[redacted]
First sara claimed to be the supervisor. Second the scratches are not linear as she states but as if someone used a scrub brush on the hood. Which I witnessed myself them using it on the hood, and the hood only. Also the car was not extremely dirty as she claims. It was the day after the canyon fire 2. Which caused ash to migrate that far. So 2 days prior there were no scratches. The reason they claim was not their fault is as the car is brand new not even 1 year old. It is also a unique color that only 2 toyotas from 2017 come in the rav4 xl and the rav4 xle. They do not want to admit fault as would cost them alot to fix as it can only be refinished and painted at toyota. I will be addin photos of the scratches she claims is linear tomorrow.

To [redacted]This letter is in response to your correspondence dated October 27, 2017 with regard to [redacted] complaint about his Toyota RAV4.The car wash position is that we did not have anything to do with the scratch Mr. [redacted] identified on the hood of his Toyota RAV4.I,...

myself, have personally inspected Mr. [redacted]’ RAV4 hood when he brought his vehicle in the following day. The scratch was linear and showed as if someone put an item, like a box, on the hood and slid it off the hood.My supervisor and I both determined it was not feasible for any of car wash equipment or personnel to have caused such linear scratch. Therefore, I have informed Mr. [redacted] and his wife that the scratch was pre-existing and that he probably did not notice it before since he vehicle was very dirty.

July 19, 2015Revdex.com[redacted]4747 Viewridge Ave #220San Diego, CA 92123-1688RE: ID# [redacted]To [redacted]This letter is in response to your correspondence dated July 15, 2015 with regard to [redacted]'s complaint about her vehicle door.The car wash position is that we have no...

way of knowing the problem happened at the carwash as Ms. [redacted] states since she has fail to provide concrete evidence her door problemoccurred at the car wash.On July 3, 2015, the day Ms. [redacted] claim the problem occurred, my wife, my complete staff,and I was present throughout the day. There was no complaint from anyone with regard to anydoor problem to any of my staff, my wife, or myself.On July 10, 2015, a week later, Ms. [redacted] comes to the car wash and shows broken steel piecesto my supervisor. She states it was broken at the car wash based upon suggestion by a collisionshop.On July 11, 2015, I call Ms. [redacted] to verify her claim. She, herself, was unsure how or when thedoor problem occurred. She states that the collision shop speculated that the steelcomponents could have been broken at the car wash; perhaps someone yanked the door open.She stated that she is basing the complaint based upon that speculation. I asked if she saw anyof my employees yanked the door open. She said she didn't know and couldn't provide anyevidence that my employees yanked on the door to cause the problem.We take customer complaint seriously and do our utmost to handle customer complaints. Aswell, we usually give the customer the benefit of the doubt and try to accommodate them.However, it is difficult for the car wash to take responsibility on this complaint for the followingreasons:1) No longer our responsibility. She states she got her vehicle washed on July 3, 2015. Ifthe door problem occurred at the car wash, she could have alerted my staff, my wife, orme. We would have investigated the complaint on-site. On that day, there was nocomplaint from anyone about door problems. Once a vehicle leaves the car washpremise, we are no longer responsible for the vehicle.Had Ms. [redacted] had called us that day to inform us of her problem, we would haveencouraged her to come back and investigated into her claim. She didn't call or leaveany messages informing us that she had problem with her vehicle. Please note, wewere open daily from July 3 to July 9, 2015, and there was no call or message fromanyone regarding any door problem. Instead, on July 10, 2015, she shows up and showsmy supervisor broken steel pieces and states we are responsible for $150 repair cost ...As far as I am concerned, Ms. [redacted]'s door problem happened somewhere else and it isnot the responsibility of the car wash.2) No concrete evidence. Ms. [redacted] has stated to me directly that she did not how orwhen her door problem occurred. She has told me that a collision shop speculated thatproblem "could have" occurred at the car wash. I asked her directly if she saw any ofmy employees yanked on her door, she states she didn't know and couldn't provide anyclear evidence that my employees caused her door problem.It is difficult to take responsibility on a problem based upon 3'd speculation and withoutany concrete proof.In conclusion, based upon Ms. [redacted]'s words and action, I concluded that her door issue waseither pre-existing condition or a problem that occurred outside of the car wash. Therefore,there is nothing we could offer to assist with her problem. Thank you.[redacted]Crystal Car Wash

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
1) I DID complain the day that my car was washed and the door did not open.  The employee who "dried" my car did not speak English and just shrugged it off.  The employee who came to see the car had no explanation and did not offer any help to me.  NO ONE AT THE CAR WASH OFFERED TO GET THE MANAGER.  2) No - I did not actually WATCH all of the employees at the car wash.  To suggest that this is expected of a customer is not realistic.  But my car door worked when they drove it INTO the car wash.  And the car door would NOT OPEN when the car was driven out of the car wash.3) I could not have known what was wrong with the car door until I took it to the collision shop to be repaired.   I am NOT an expert and neither is the owner of Crystal Car Wash.  The manager of the collision shop had NO REASON to lie about what caused the damage to my car door.  TO HAVE CAUSED A SCENE AT THE TIME OF MY CAR WASH WOULD HAVE MEANT JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS...I WAITED TO FIND OUT WHAT, EXACTLY, HAD CAUSED THE DAMAGE TO MY CAR.4) I waited to have my car door repaired until I could get a day off work and I contacted the manager of Crystal Car Wash on that very day to let him know what had had transpired.  5) When I talked to the manager of Crystal Car Wash, he DID NOT want to see the part and he has not ever asked to see the broken part.  He also DID NOT want to validate my claim by calling the collision shop.  If he is actually CONCERNED about doing the right thing...he should have called and inquired at the collision shop. 
Regards,
[redacted]s

Review: The driver's side door handle was YANKED so hard that my car door would not open with the key from the inside or out. I had the door repaired at a collision shop. According to the manager of the collision shop, the broken part shows that the carwash employee caused the part to snap and break. Cost to repair was $150, without the part - which would have cost $200 more. So my door will not open from the inside.

The owner, [redacted], did not want to see the part and would not call the collision shop to verify my claim. Over the telephone he said this was "normal wear and tear." He took no responsibility at all and would not even consider any type of resolution.Desired Settlement: This damage was caused by an employee at Crystal Car Wash. Presumably, this business is insured for this type of situation. I want to be reimbursed for the cost of repairing my car, which is $150.00. Even so - my car is NOT in the same condition that it was when I took it to the car wash. That would be an ADDITIONAL repair cost for the part - $200.00 - and to replace the part. Crystal Car Wash should, at least, be reasonable and pay the $150.00.

Business

Response:

July 19, 2015Revdex.com[redacted]4747 Viewridge Ave #220San Diego, CA 92123-1688RE: ID# [redacted]To [redacted]This letter is in response to your correspondence dated July 15, 2015 with regard to [redacted]'s complaint about her vehicle door.The car wash position is that we have no way of knowing the problem happened at the carwash as Ms. [redacted] states since she has fail to provide concrete evidence her door problemoccurred at the car wash.On July 3, 2015, the day Ms. [redacted] claim the problem occurred, my wife, my complete staff,and I was present throughout the day. There was no complaint from anyone with regard to anydoor problem to any of my staff, my wife, or myself.On July 10, 2015, a week later, Ms. [redacted] comes to the car wash and shows broken steel piecesto my supervisor. She states it was broken at the car wash based upon suggestion by a collisionshop.On July 11, 2015, I call Ms. [redacted] to verify her claim. She, herself, was unsure how or when thedoor problem occurred. She states that the collision shop speculated that the steelcomponents could have been broken at the car wash; perhaps someone yanked the door open.She stated that she is basing the complaint based upon that speculation. I asked if she saw anyof my employees yanked the door open. She said she didn't know and couldn't provide anyevidence that my employees yanked on the door to cause the problem.We take customer complaint seriously and do our utmost to handle customer complaints. Aswell, we usually give the customer the benefit of the doubt and try to accommodate them.However, it is difficult for the car wash to take responsibility on this complaint for the followingreasons:1) No longer our responsibility. She states she got her vehicle washed on July 3, 2015. Ifthe door problem occurred at the car wash, she could have alerted my staff, my wife, orme. We would have investigated the complaint on-site. On that day, there was nocomplaint from anyone about door problems. Once a vehicle leaves the car washpremise, we are no longer responsible for the vehicle.Had Ms. [redacted] had called us that day to inform us of her problem, we would haveencouraged her to come back and investigated into her claim. She didn't call or leaveany messages informing us that she had problem with her vehicle. Please note, wewere open daily from July 3 to July 9, 2015, and there was no call or message fromanyone regarding any door problem. Instead, on July 10, 2015, she shows up and showsmy supervisor broken steel pieces and states we are responsible for $150 repair cost ...As far as I am concerned, Ms. [redacted]'s door problem happened somewhere else and it isnot the responsibility of the car wash.2) No concrete evidence. Ms. [redacted] has stated to me directly that she did not how orwhen her door problem occurred. She has told me that a collision shop speculated thatproblem "could have" occurred at the car wash. I asked her directly if she saw any ofmy employees yanked on her door, she states she didn't know and couldn't provide anyclear evidence that my employees caused her door problem.It is difficult to take responsibility on a problem based upon 3'd speculation and withoutany concrete proof.In conclusion, based upon Ms. [redacted]'s words and action, I concluded that her door issue waseither pre-existing condition or a problem that occurred outside of the car wash. Therefore,there is nothing we could offer to assist with her problem. Thank you.[redacted]Crystal Car Wash

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

1) I DID complain the day that my car was washed and the door did not open. The employee who "dried" my car did not speak English and just shrugged it off. The employee who came to see the car had no explanation and did not offer any help to me. NO ONE AT THE CAR WASH OFFERED TO GET THE MANAGER. 2) No - I did not actually WATCH all of the employees at the car wash. To suggest that this is expected of a customer is not realistic. But my car door worked when they drove it INTO the car wash. And the car door would NOT OPEN when the car was driven out of the car wash.