In no way is Pella shirking responsibility and we will be contacting the homeowner to resolve this issue. We will be reaching out to the homeowner to set up a day where we can have the install manager and technician on site to further evaluate the situation and come to the proper resolution....
Business sent the following response:I am following up on the response of my client with regard to the above-noted file number. In the last few days I was able to get the information I had been seeking.The issue in its simplest terms has been what if any responsibility should be imposed on my client or accepted by it for the alleged interior wall damage discovered by the current owner, the complaining party. To this point my client's consistent response has been that the photos of the damage depict conditions that could not have occurred within the limited time frame during which my client was involved with the property. In other words the extent of the damage indicates the causative defect has been a long-standing one, preceding the time that my client came upon the property to install windows.I have contacted both the prior owner and the head of the team that did the install of my client's product. This also led to obtaining information directly from a laborer who did the install work. The owner who preceded the complaining party in this file owned the property briefly. This was a flip transaction. That owner however confirmed that the building did require extensive roof work in addition to the window installation. He denied knowledge of the condition of the interior walls upon selling the property.Our install people however recalled this project. I have been told that two window openings were covered with plywood. Our people found on starting the job that there was considerable evidence of interior water damage. Accordingly, this information supports my client's position that it is likely this property was purchased by the current owner in a water damaged condition. I have to question whether the buyer undertook to have this property inspected prior to purchase, relied on his own visual inspection, or simply purchased "as is".We must adhere to our position that we are not responsible for this extensive damage. We agreed there was evidence of a caulking issue. This could have been the responsibility of the painting crew. If our install involved poor caulking, which we do not admit, such a minor defect did not contribute to the extensive damage depicted.I thank you for allowing me this extended time to obtain information to respond to the complaint.[redacted], [redacted]
Mrs. [redacted] purchased windows from us on 10/20/15. The windows were purchased with custom color stain and the factory did a poor job of matching the color originally. We had to replace the window and re-stain, which is why is took six weeks, we do apologize for the mistake but...
we did correct it. As far as the window treatments, we install anywhere from 40 to 60 jobs in a given week and window treatments are always brought up during the sales process and in conversations with the project management team before the install for a few different reasons. One, it is the responsibility of the customer to remove and reinstall window treatments, however if they would like for us to do so we will but there is an additional charge. Two, windows come in various sizes, depths, and profiles, so there are times that old window treatments will not fit new windows or will fit differently. As far as Mrs. [redacted]'s windows I know the contract does not state for us to reinstall blinds. The job was completed on 1/16/16 and a certificate of completion was signed. I show that the crew did go back on 1/19 to install the blinds as a good will gesture. I will attach a picture showing the blinds are in fact installed. They do not fit the same as they did on her old windows as the new windows have a different profile. The only way to get blinds to fit the same would be to purchase new ones.
The installation was a pocket replacement window meaning a new window was installed within and old window frame. The new windows were installed and sealed correctly back to the original window frame. A couple of the weeping holes were clogged but those were cleaned out by the technician...
on 7/30. If there was water penetrating around the frame of the window before we installed the replacement windows, a new pocket window will not solve a water infiltration issue around the existing window.It does appear that there may have been some caulk separation in some places on the cosmetic capping (bent aluminum coil that covers the exterior of the old window frame) causing visible voids. The pictures provided show that the house was painted after the windows were installed. If the caulk had not fully cured before painting, any flex in the siding while taping off the windows or leaning against the siding with a ladder could have caused the separation. If the separation was present before the house was painted, we should have been notified by the contractor that Gunton installed for. Regardless, the significant water damaged depicted in the interior wall cavity with the drywall cut out is years, upon years of water damage. Water damage so bad that the exterior sheathing of the house is completely disintegrated and the only thing between the drywall and the outside was the aluminum siding. Water damage so bad that the wood studs appear to be disintegrating as well. This also appears to have been run through the consumers insurance company already and a check has been cut to the consumer to repair the damage. If the consumer is looking to contract us to repair the damage, we are not a general contractor able to provide those services.
This transaction involves to Auto Dealers. We wholesaled a used truck to them that they found online. This dealership is located in [redacted]. After they purchased the vehicle it took them several weeks to get us the funds. We obviously were not pleased. After we received the funds the truck...
still remained on our lot. Several days later one of their salespeople called me and said that they were having a hard time finding a shipper and could we help. I secured the company that we use, but they would not ship COD due to the long distance. They asked if we would pay and I said yes just send me a check. That was my mistake. We held the paperwork to ensure that we would get paid the shipping since it was $1600. Their claim that the shipping should have been on the invoice does not make sense as we sold wholesaled the truck as is and in dealer to dealer transactions shipping is always the responsibility of the purchasing dealer. We have since received payment for the shipping so we did [redacted] all the paperwork on 9/15/2015 so the matter has been settled. If you have any questions or if you need more information please let me know. Thanks for your help![redacted]PresidentChampion Chevrolet-Buick-GMC
We are sorry to hear that Mr. [redacted] is not happy with the color of his exterior windows but the color he received is what he ordered. His quote and contract, which was signed by Mr. [redacted] line by line, match and states in detail the installation method, interior/exterior colors, and hardware...
colors. All our product is custom made per home per opening and is reviewed in detail before the order is placed. We have offered to replace the hardware and screens at no cost. We are also willing to have our field supervisor out to review the rot concern and address. I have attached a copy of the signed contract to this response.
Final Consumer Response /[redacted]/
From: [redacted] ([redacted]@gmail.com)
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, XXXX X:XX AM
To: Ashleigh Adams
Subject: Fwd: Revdex.com Complaint Case# 75257722 (Ref#XX-XXXX-XXXXXXXX-X-XXX)
Yes, this has been resolved. Thank you.
Sent from my iPad
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/10/28) */
We did not touch the battery in the customers vehicle. I apologize that it died. It was over five years old, which is the typical lifespan of a battery. She should definitely have it replaced before winter comes.
The altercation Ms. [redacted]...
describes is fraudulent and we cannot entertain it.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/11/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The business has not denied or even responded to the series of facts which I recounted. They haven't bothered to address the numerous details that I have listed. Therefore, the complaint must be conceded to be true. The business has not denied any of the specific points of substance. For instance, they did not deny:
their failure to communicate about the status of the work, or
their extensive delay in doing the work, or
their failure to do the work as promised, or
their failure to use the parts they had promised, or
their attempted refusal to show me the invoice for the parts put on my car, or
their preventing me from retaining my payment check and voiding the transaction and returning another time to deal with it.
All of these components of my complaint must be taken as conceded to be true, since the business has not denied them. In fact, they had failed to respond at all in the 30 days that Revdex.com allowed them, and only barely responded with a minimal 3 line response after Revdex.com sent a second request for a response with additional time provided them.
These complaints which stand unchallenged are clearly not acceptable business practices.
Moreover, the business has admitted that they returned my car to me with a dead battery, although the car was operating fine when I drove it to their shop and left it there for minor body worknothing to do with operational function of the car. Their verbal response to me, of 'what do you expect when a car has been sitting in the garage for two weeks, that this happens frequently when you leave a car for repair', so I shouldn't be surprised that while in their custody they caused my auto battery to go dead, is beneath the dignity of a response.
Finally, without any specification they assert that the "altercation" I described was "fraudulent". They are being completely dishonest. I have a witness to how physically upset and distraught I was by their abusive language to me. In fact, when someone came to rescue me from their facility, he wasn't sure I should drive my car home because I was still shaking so violently and sobbing. I couldn't possibly have made up how they talked to me and how they treated me.
I would swear under oath that every detail that I recounted in my Complaint is completely true. I have described specific words and actions they took, and they have not denied those details or even bothered to respond to them. In addition to all the un-rebutted elements of my Complaint above, their conduct gave me ample reason to be physically afraid.
To say that they acted unprofessionally would be a gross understatement. Their shouting and volatility and personal insults described in detail in my Complaint, as well as implied threats, were something I have never encountered in any business situation. My fear was compounded by the fact that it was the end of the day, no one else was around, I was in an enclosed area not directly accessible to the street, and I was a lone older female isolated in this confrontation with several males. I wouldn't have taken on the significant burden of time to tell this experience in detail if it were not so remarkably upsetting to me.
I was traumatized by the experience, and would hope to spare others from going through that.
This business has not bothered to rebut my Complaint. The Complaint has been shown to be well-founded.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 19, 2015/12/20) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
That Denver Auto Body has twice failed to respond to this complaint in the time that Revdex.com gave to it is indicative of its behavior overall. They don't play by the rules. The language they have used now,continuing insults and sarcasm is all the more revealing of how they treated me, the customer, in their physical dealings with me. I have taken a great deal of time to recite specific facts and statements, which they have not bothered to deny. Instead they disparage me and my vehicle, and give you false information.
This complaint was filed on September 30, 2015 about my disturbing experience with this business on September 29, 2015. The business was told to respond to my detailed multi-faceted complaint by October 22. They chose not to respond. After reminders from Revdex.com, they filed a four sentence response which did not address any specifics.
They did not deny any of the six detailed problems that I again listed in my rebuttal filed on November 8. Once again, the business did not respond to Revdex.com's deadline for response of November 30. Again, Revdex.com gave them a reminder and then they did respond on December 8.
Their response this time suggests they realized they couldn't continue to ignore the complaint, and chose to attack rather than defend their own actions. They still have not denied numerous unprofessional behavior, including insults that crossed the line into abusive language and physical behavior that made me feel physically threatened. I am not going to recite those details again here. I have spelled it out. It is too upsetting to keep reliving this exceptionally unpleasant experience.
Their bizarre opening sentence that
"we are not really sure whether Mrs. [redacted] is an aspiring novelist"
is indicative of their barrage of unprofessional language. However, in person their language to me was verbally abusive, as well as shouted at me. I recited the specifics of that in my complaint already. They have not rebutted that. Their sarcasm in what they have written is revealing of their disrespect. In fact, to say that I was treated with disrespect is a gross understatement. If there had been any other customers there, I doubt they would have been so comfortable bullying and insulting me. Even now in their filing with you, they couldn't resist throwing in unprofessional insults.
They have attempted to mislead you by distraction of disparaging me and my car, with a series of false statements. Yet, they have admitted that they turned my car over to me with a dead battery. My car was not there for any operational mechanical work. There was no problem with my car's battery when I left it in their custody. In fact, earlier in the month, I had been away on vacation for two weeks, while the car sat without being turned on once. It started up immediately on the first turn of the ignition when I returned from that vacation.
Secondly, they try to disparage the value of the car. They have given you a false valuation of my car. Kelly Blue Book establishes the value as more than $1000 higher than what they have stated in their filing. However, their whole point is irrelevant since another driver's insurance assumed complete fault and was paying for the damage. To suggest that my car might be "considered a total loss, and she never would have got the vehicle back" is simply flat out wrong, but intended as a red herring to distract from their misconduct.
Thirdly, they have now introduced a blatantly false assertion that they discovered more damage than what they had initially assessed. That is false. They submitted an initial estimate of $ 2647.94 to repair the car. I have that paperwork. Their final actual bill for the total repair was $ 2065.55. There was no surprise additional damage that they discovered. In fact, they told insurance that their total was $ 2056.55. Moreover, if they had discovered supplemental damage more than was initially reported, they should have informed me. They certainly did not inform me of that. Now, two and a half months after the fact, is the first time they are raising the claim of additional damage that they hadn't realized. It would be highly unethical if they had found additional damage (which they now seem to claim) and failed to tell me, the customer.
It should be noted that I first brought the car in to them in July for evaluation, and that their work starting on September 14, was scheduled many weeks in advance. I had scheduled that to occur a week after my return from vacation. They had the car from September 14 until September 29, for the "five day repair". I called numerous times and was strung along over and over, and told I would get a call if it would not be ready on successive dates that passed by without a call.
Denver Auto Body has not denied the insulting language they used with me. Nor have they denied that they initially tried to prevent me from seeing or having a copy of the paperwork showing what parts were put onto my car. Nor have they denied refusing to allow me to pay with my credit card as I had expected to do. They forced me to sign over to them the insurance check made out to me to. That seemed peculiar. I would have had consumer rights if I had paid with my credit card.
They have never even pretended to apologize for the way they treated me on September 29, 2015. I would have expected at least some sort of token gesture on their part, to mitigate for their treatment of me. I have never in my life experienced anything like this abuse. They have acknowledged that I was deeply upset and sobbing at the time.
Regardless of their work on my car, and the failed representations they had made to me, they grossly failed to treat me with fairness, much less honor or integrity. Nothing in this business' conduct and handling of my car seems compatible with any kind of concept of an ethical marketplace.
This entire experience has been utterly upsetting for me. Nevertheless, I have filed this complaint in hopes of sparing others my experience. Denver Auto body has had plenty of opportunities to rebut my complaint by this time, and it would be inappropriate to permit them to file anything further at this late date. They chose to try to ignore the complaint, and didn't bother to comply with deadlines given them, and then simply responded by further insults. I will not be subjected to any further insults from them, or further stress of having this dragged out further. I find this very upsetting now to face continual insults.
Revdex.com now has more than adequate facts in this record showing how Denver Auto Body fails to meet Revdex.com's standards.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 21, 2016/01/04) */
What this matter really comes down to are these following facts:
Much of what Ms. [redacted] says has no basis, is untrue, and warrants no further response from us to the Revdex.com. Some of the language used by Ms. [redacted] for example, "I crumpled to the concrete pavement next to the car and was sobbing, and shaking violently", is absolutely out of context, and untrue. We will not entertain this type of false, sympathy seeking statement, when it was intentionally made up to try to get a free replacement battery for her current battery that is at the end of its manufacturer given lifespan.
Ms. [redacted] was not disrespected here, nor verbally abused. If she feels as if it was disrespectful for us to use a recycled tailgate on her 13 year old car, she should contact her insurance company and take the issue up with them. They instructed us to use that gate, as would any other insurance company, for cost saving purposes, and to keep the vehicle from becoming a total loss. This is a fact, and if Ms. [redacted] has any further issues regarding this she should look at the original copy of the estimate which was given to her by her insurance company, and she had in her possession long before she ever brought the car to us. The approved amount to repair her car initially was $2065.55, after the vehicle was taken apart; we found $325.82 worth of additional damage. Ms. [redacted] has a copy of this invoice.
We apologize that the battery was dead on Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle when she came to pick it up. We never touched the battery, and as Ms. [redacted] states, we never did any mechanical work on her vehicle. If she had co
Ms. [redacted] was provided a detailed copy of the work that was done to her car. Parts invoices sent to us by vendors, and addressed to us, not a vehicle owner. The invoice she has lists what parts were used on her vehicle.
We tell every customer when they drop off their vehicle that we will need the insurance check issued to them by the insurance company to pay for their repairs.... At the time the repairs are complete, and they pick up their vehicle. There is also a large sign that hangs in our office that has been there for 15 years that dictates the same thing. It is unfortunate that Ms. [redacted] finds it "peculiar" that she would need to pay for repairs on her vehicle using a check that was issued by her insurance company to pay for her repairs on her vehicle.
We will not be purchasing Ms. [redacted] a replacement battery. Her battery is at the end of it's lifespan, and we have no good will for a vindictive, malicious individual.
Denver Auto Body & Paint has been in business for over 28 years. We have grown to be the largest privately owned collision shop in Colorado. We certainly did not achieve this by being disrespectful, dishonest, or rude to our customers. We believe Ms. [redacted] is making a blatant attempt to tarnish our reputation fabricating a story to make us sound as if we treated her anything less than a valued client. We are not perfect, and definitely make mistakes from time to time. We always strive to make things right, and there are hundreds of people how would attest to this.
Thank you
In no way is Pella shirking responsibility and we will be contacting the homeowner to resolve this issue. We will be reaching out to the homeowner to set up a day where we can have the install manager and technician on site to further evaluate the situation and come to the proper resolution....
Business sent the following response:I am following up on the response of my client with regard to the above-noted file number. In the last few days I was able to get the information I had been seeking.The issue in its simplest terms has been what if any responsibility should be imposed on my client or accepted by it for the alleged interior wall damage discovered by the current owner, the complaining party. To this point my client's consistent response has been that the photos of the damage depict conditions that could not have occurred within the limited time frame during which my client was involved with the property. In other words the extent of the damage indicates the causative defect has been a long-standing one, preceding the time that my client came upon the property to install windows.I have contacted both the prior owner and the head of the team that did the install of my client's product. This also led to obtaining information directly from a laborer who did the install work. The owner who preceded the complaining party in this file owned the property briefly. This was a flip transaction. That owner however confirmed that the building did require extensive roof work in addition to the window installation. He denied knowledge of the condition of the interior walls upon selling the property.Our install people however recalled this project. I have been told that two window openings were covered with plywood. Our people found on starting the job that there was considerable evidence of interior water damage. Accordingly, this information supports my client's position that it is likely this property was purchased by the current owner in a water damaged condition. I have to question whether the buyer undertook to have this property inspected prior to purchase, relied on his own visual inspection, or simply purchased "as is".We must adhere to our position that we are not responsible for this extensive damage. We agreed there was evidence of a caulking issue. This could have been the responsibility of the painting crew. If our install involved poor caulking, which we do not admit, such a minor defect did not contribute to the extensive damage depicted.I thank you for allowing me this extended time to obtain information to respond to the complaint.[redacted], [redacted]
Mrs. [redacted] purchased windows from us on 10/20/15. The windows were purchased with custom color stain and the factory did a poor job of matching the color originally. We had to replace the window and re-stain, which is why is took six weeks, we do apologize for the mistake but...
we did correct it. As far as the window treatments, we install anywhere from 40 to 60 jobs in a given week and window treatments are always brought up during the sales process and in conversations with the project management team before the install for a few different reasons. One, it is the responsibility of the customer to remove and reinstall window treatments, however if they would like for us to do so we will but there is an additional charge. Two, windows come in various sizes, depths, and profiles, so there are times that old window treatments will not fit new windows or will fit differently. As far as Mrs. [redacted]'s windows I know the contract does not state for us to reinstall blinds. The job was completed on 1/16/16 and a certificate of completion was signed. I show that the crew did go back on 1/19 to install the blinds as a good will gesture. I will attach a picture showing the blinds are in fact installed. They do not fit the same as they did on her old windows as the new windows have a different profile. The only way to get blinds to fit the same would be to purchase new ones.
The installation was a pocket replacement window meaning a new window was installed within and old window frame. The new windows were installed and sealed correctly back to the original window frame. A couple of the weeping holes were clogged but those were cleaned out by the technician...
on 7/30. If there was water penetrating around the frame of the window before we installed the replacement windows, a new pocket window will not solve a water infiltration issue around the existing window.It does appear that there may have been some caulk separation in some places on the cosmetic capping (bent aluminum coil that covers the exterior of the old window frame) causing visible voids. The pictures provided show that the house was painted after the windows were installed. If the caulk had not fully cured before painting, any flex in the siding while taping off the windows or leaning against the siding with a ladder could have caused the separation. If the separation was present before the house was painted, we should have been notified by the contractor that Gunton installed for. Regardless, the significant water damaged depicted in the interior wall cavity with the drywall cut out is years, upon years of water damage. Water damage so bad that the exterior sheathing of the house is completely disintegrated and the only thing between the drywall and the outside was the aluminum siding. Water damage so bad that the wood studs appear to be disintegrating as well. This also appears to have been run through the consumers insurance company already and a check has been cut to the consumer to repair the damage. If the consumer is looking to contract us to repair the damage, we are not a general contractor able to provide those services.
Consumer sent the following third party statement and copy of home inspection to be included with their complaint. See attached.
This transaction involves to Auto Dealers. We wholesaled a used truck to them that they found online. This dealership is located in [redacted]. After they purchased the vehicle it took them several weeks to get us the funds. We obviously were not pleased. After we received the funds the truck...
still remained on our lot. Several days later one of their salespeople called me and said that they were having a hard time finding a shipper and could we help. I secured the company that we use, but they would not ship COD due to the long distance. They asked if we would pay and I said yes just send me a check. That was my mistake. We held the paperwork to ensure that we would get paid the shipping since it was $1600. Their claim that the shipping should have been on the invoice does not make sense as we sold wholesaled the truck as is and in dealer to dealer transactions shipping is always the responsibility of the purchasing dealer. We have since received payment for the shipping so we did [redacted] all the paperwork on 9/15/2015 so the matter has been settled. If you have any questions or if you need more information please let me know. Thanks for your help![redacted]PresidentChampion Chevrolet-Buick-GMC
We are sorry to hear that Mr. [redacted] is not happy with the color of his exterior windows but the color he received is what he ordered. His quote and contract, which was signed by Mr. [redacted] line by line, match and states in detail the installation method, interior/exterior colors, and hardware...
colors. All our product is custom made per home per opening and is reviewed in detail before the order is placed. We have offered to replace the hardware and screens at no cost. We are also willing to have our field supervisor out to review the rot concern and address. I have attached a copy of the signed contract to this response.
Final Consumer Response /[redacted]/
From: [redacted] ([redacted]@gmail.com)
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, XXXX X:XX AM
To: Ashleigh Adams
Subject: Fwd: Revdex.com Complaint Case# 75257722 (Ref#XX-XXXX-XXXXXXXX-X-XXX)
Yes, this has been resolved. Thank you.
Sent from my iPad
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/10/28) */
We did not touch the battery in the customers vehicle. I apologize that it died. It was over five years old, which is the typical lifespan of a battery. She should definitely have it replaced before winter comes.
The altercation Ms. [redacted]...
describes is fraudulent and we cannot entertain it.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2015/11/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The business has not denied or even responded to the series of facts which I recounted. They haven't bothered to address the numerous details that I have listed. Therefore, the complaint must be conceded to be true. The business has not denied any of the specific points of substance. For instance, they did not deny:
their failure to communicate about the status of the work, or
their extensive delay in doing the work, or
their failure to do the work as promised, or
their failure to use the parts they had promised, or
their attempted refusal to show me the invoice for the parts put on my car, or
their preventing me from retaining my payment check and voiding the transaction and returning another time to deal with it.
All of these components of my complaint must be taken as conceded to be true, since the business has not denied them. In fact, they had failed to respond at all in the 30 days that Revdex.com allowed them, and only barely responded with a minimal 3 line response after Revdex.com sent a second request for a response with additional time provided them.
These complaints which stand unchallenged are clearly not acceptable business practices.
Moreover, the business has admitted that they returned my car to me with a dead battery, although the car was operating fine when I drove it to their shop and left it there for minor body worknothing to do with operational function of the car. Their verbal response to me, of 'what do you expect when a car has been sitting in the garage for two weeks, that this happens frequently when you leave a car for repair', so I shouldn't be surprised that while in their custody they caused my auto battery to go dead, is beneath the dignity of a response.
Finally, without any specification they assert that the "altercation" I described was "fraudulent". They are being completely dishonest. I have a witness to how physically upset and distraught I was by their abusive language to me. In fact, when someone came to rescue me from their facility, he wasn't sure I should drive my car home because I was still shaking so violently and sobbing. I couldn't possibly have made up how they talked to me and how they treated me.
I would swear under oath that every detail that I recounted in my Complaint is completely true. I have described specific words and actions they took, and they have not denied those details or even bothered to respond to them. In addition to all the un-rebutted elements of my Complaint above, their conduct gave me ample reason to be physically afraid.
To say that they acted unprofessionally would be a gross understatement. Their shouting and volatility and personal insults described in detail in my Complaint, as well as implied threats, were something I have never encountered in any business situation. My fear was compounded by the fact that it was the end of the day, no one else was around, I was in an enclosed area not directly accessible to the street, and I was a lone older female isolated in this confrontation with several males. I wouldn't have taken on the significant burden of time to tell this experience in detail if it were not so remarkably upsetting to me.
I was traumatized by the experience, and would hope to spare others from going through that.
This business has not bothered to rebut my Complaint. The Complaint has been shown to be well-founded.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 19, 2015/12/20) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
That Denver Auto Body has twice failed to respond to this complaint in the time that Revdex.com gave to it is indicative of its behavior overall. They don't play by the rules. The language they have used now,continuing insults and sarcasm is all the more revealing of how they treated me, the customer, in their physical dealings with me. I have taken a great deal of time to recite specific facts and statements, which they have not bothered to deny. Instead they disparage me and my vehicle, and give you false information.
This complaint was filed on September 30, 2015 about my disturbing experience with this business on September 29, 2015. The business was told to respond to my detailed multi-faceted complaint by October 22. They chose not to respond. After reminders from Revdex.com, they filed a four sentence response which did not address any specifics.
They did not deny any of the six detailed problems that I again listed in my rebuttal filed on November 8. Once again, the business did not respond to Revdex.com's deadline for response of November 30. Again, Revdex.com gave them a reminder and then they did respond on December 8.
Their response this time suggests they realized they couldn't continue to ignore the complaint, and chose to attack rather than defend their own actions. They still have not denied numerous unprofessional behavior, including insults that crossed the line into abusive language and physical behavior that made me feel physically threatened. I am not going to recite those details again here. I have spelled it out. It is too upsetting to keep reliving this exceptionally unpleasant experience.
Their bizarre opening sentence that
"we are not really sure whether Mrs. [redacted] is an aspiring novelist"
is indicative of their barrage of unprofessional language. However, in person their language to me was verbally abusive, as well as shouted at me. I recited the specifics of that in my complaint already. They have not rebutted that. Their sarcasm in what they have written is revealing of their disrespect. In fact, to say that I was treated with disrespect is a gross understatement. If there had been any other customers there, I doubt they would have been so comfortable bullying and insulting me. Even now in their filing with you, they couldn't resist throwing in unprofessional insults.
They have attempted to mislead you by distraction of disparaging me and my car, with a series of false statements. Yet, they have admitted that they turned my car over to me with a dead battery. My car was not there for any operational mechanical work. There was no problem with my car's battery when I left it in their custody. In fact, earlier in the month, I had been away on vacation for two weeks, while the car sat without being turned on once. It started up immediately on the first turn of the ignition when I returned from that vacation.
Secondly, they try to disparage the value of the car. They have given you a false valuation of my car. Kelly Blue Book establishes the value as more than $1000 higher than what they have stated in their filing. However, their whole point is irrelevant since another driver's insurance assumed complete fault and was paying for the damage. To suggest that my car might be "considered a total loss, and she never would have got the vehicle back" is simply flat out wrong, but intended as a red herring to distract from their misconduct.
Thirdly, they have now introduced a blatantly false assertion that they discovered more damage than what they had initially assessed. That is false. They submitted an initial estimate of $ 2647.94 to repair the car. I have that paperwork. Their final actual bill for the total repair was $ 2065.55. There was no surprise additional damage that they discovered. In fact, they told insurance that their total was $ 2056.55. Moreover, if they had discovered supplemental damage more than was initially reported, they should have informed me. They certainly did not inform me of that. Now, two and a half months after the fact, is the first time they are raising the claim of additional damage that they hadn't realized. It would be highly unethical if they had found additional damage (which they now seem to claim) and failed to tell me, the customer.
It should be noted that I first brought the car in to them in July for evaluation, and that their work starting on September 14, was scheduled many weeks in advance. I had scheduled that to occur a week after my return from vacation. They had the car from September 14 until September 29, for the "five day repair". I called numerous times and was strung along over and over, and told I would get a call if it would not be ready on successive dates that passed by without a call.
Denver Auto Body has not denied the insulting language they used with me. Nor have they denied that they initially tried to prevent me from seeing or having a copy of the paperwork showing what parts were put onto my car. Nor have they denied refusing to allow me to pay with my credit card as I had expected to do. They forced me to sign over to them the insurance check made out to me to. That seemed peculiar. I would have had consumer rights if I had paid with my credit card.
They have never even pretended to apologize for the way they treated me on September 29, 2015. I would have expected at least some sort of token gesture on their part, to mitigate for their treatment of me. I have never in my life experienced anything like this abuse. They have acknowledged that I was deeply upset and sobbing at the time.
Regardless of their work on my car, and the failed representations they had made to me, they grossly failed to treat me with fairness, much less honor or integrity. Nothing in this business' conduct and handling of my car seems compatible with any kind of concept of an ethical marketplace.
This entire experience has been utterly upsetting for me. Nevertheless, I have filed this complaint in hopes of sparing others my experience. Denver Auto body has had plenty of opportunities to rebut my complaint by this time, and it would be inappropriate to permit them to file anything further at this late date. They chose to try to ignore the complaint, and didn't bother to comply with deadlines given them, and then simply responded by further insults. I will not be subjected to any further insults from them, or further stress of having this dragged out further. I find this very upsetting now to face continual insults.
Revdex.com now has more than adequate facts in this record showing how Denver Auto Body fails to meet Revdex.com's standards.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 21, 2016/01/04) */
What this matter really comes down to are these following facts:
Much of what Ms. [redacted] says has no basis, is untrue, and warrants no further response from us to the Revdex.com. Some of the language used by Ms. [redacted] for example, "I crumpled to the concrete pavement next to the car and was sobbing, and shaking violently", is absolutely out of context, and untrue. We will not entertain this type of false, sympathy seeking statement, when it was intentionally made up to try to get a free replacement battery for her current battery that is at the end of its manufacturer given lifespan.
Ms. [redacted] was not disrespected here, nor verbally abused. If she feels as if it was disrespectful for us to use a recycled tailgate on her 13 year old car, she should contact her insurance company and take the issue up with them. They instructed us to use that gate, as would any other insurance company, for cost saving purposes, and to keep the vehicle from becoming a total loss. This is a fact, and if Ms. [redacted] has any further issues regarding this she should look at the original copy of the estimate which was given to her by her insurance company, and she had in her possession long before she ever brought the car to us. The approved amount to repair her car initially was $2065.55, after the vehicle was taken apart; we found $325.82 worth of additional damage. Ms. [redacted] has a copy of this invoice.
We apologize that the battery was dead on Ms. [redacted]'s vehicle when she came to pick it up. We never touched the battery, and as Ms. [redacted] states, we never did any mechanical work on her vehicle. If she had co
Ms. [redacted] was provided a detailed copy of the work that was done to her car. Parts invoices sent to us by vendors, and addressed to us, not a vehicle owner. The invoice she has lists what parts were used on her vehicle.
We tell every customer when they drop off their vehicle that we will need the insurance check issued to them by the insurance company to pay for their repairs.... At the time the repairs are complete, and they pick up their vehicle. There is also a large sign that hangs in our office that has been there for 15 years that dictates the same thing. It is unfortunate that Ms. [redacted] finds it "peculiar" that she would need to pay for repairs on her vehicle using a check that was issued by her insurance company to pay for her repairs on her vehicle.
We will not be purchasing Ms. [redacted] a replacement battery. Her battery is at the end of it's lifespan, and we have no good will for a vindictive, malicious individual.
Denver Auto Body & Paint has been in business for over 28 years. We have grown to be the largest privately owned collision shop in Colorado. We certainly did not achieve this by being disrespectful, dishonest, or rude to our customers. We believe Ms. [redacted] is making a blatant attempt to tarnish our reputation fabricating a story to make us sound as if we treated her anything less than a valued client. We are not perfect, and definitely make mistakes from time to time. We always strive to make things right, and there are hundreds of people how would attest to this.
Thank you