I am rejecting this response because:I am submitting this response to the business Payless Wheel Drive’s last response to my complaint dated 5/4/ Please add this dialogue to my complaint as I was unable to submit it online before the case was automatically closed[redacted] continues his rhetoric and misrepresentations of the truth He claims to have helped me out with a “bunch of stuff”I would like to know what he is referring to He goes on to say that the BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair) dropped the case because they didn’t find anything The BAR does not simply drop casesTheir job is to investigate the complaint and try to mediate between the opposing parties and come to a resolution The results of the investigation are not a matter of public record and [redacted] would not have known what the investigation revealedThe results are only available by subpoena from the court He rambles on as he tries to protect himself from the well-established liability of failing to provide a customer a written estimate of workNot only was he bound by contract to provide a written estimate, but the Automotive Industrial Standards demand it of him There is zero tolerance in the industry for not providing a customer a written estimate of repairHe goes to say that he was not going to do any work on my vehicle and that is why he did not provide me with a written estimateThat is the weakest of excuse I can imagine Whether he was going to do any work or not he is still obligated to provide a written estimate to his customerThat is the only way a customer would know what work was needed to be done and at what costThere is a repair invoice/order nostating that the shop was to diagnose the damage to vehicle after fully submerging vehicle That work order was dated 04/12/Had he done the diagnoses as stated he would have been able to provide me with the estimate as required by lawHe never did a diagnosis and hence was unable to provide the estimateI don’t know when he decided he was not going to do work that he originally agreed to do for meIf he was not going to do the work as agreed, then he would have an obligation to me to advise me as such so that I could find another shop that was willing to do the work before jeep suffered catastrophic damage When I brought the jeep to his shop he stated he was familiar with the work required to remedy a flooded vehicle and he was willing to do itWhy else would I have jeep towed to his shop and leave it with him to fixIf I wanted to work on my own jeep I would have towed it to my home where I have a double garage and all the tools I neededThat was never my intentionI did not know how to deal with a flooded vehicle and I was totally reliant on [redacted] and his expertiseAny work that I did at his shop was done under his supervision and with his permission That work occurred only because [redacted] stated that the jeep needed to dry out for a couple of weeks before he could do any workI asked if I could help dry out the electrical connections while he waited for the jeep to dry outHe agreed and said I could use his tools as needFinally, the jeep did not seizeA seizure occurs because of overheating due to lack of coolant or oil while the vehicle is runningMy jeep damage was a direct result of water intrusion into the internals of the motor and all the running gearThe motor rusted from the inside because [redacted] did not follow industry standard procedures for dealing with a flooded vehicle This would have been easily accomplished with a little due diligence on his part
We helped him out with a bunch of stuff, he even reported to the Bureau of Automotive and they dropped the case because they didn't find anythingWe tried to talk to him about the work that would need to be done and he just asked if he could work on it himself at our shopWe let him use our tools and some other partsWe did not provide a written estimate because we were not going to perform any work on his vehicleHe is mad that we did not let him know that the jeep could seize
The customer asked us to inspect a bronco for any flaws and to list those flaws on an invoiceThe cost was to be $dollars which was to be a one hour inspectionThe inspection had no verbal or written guarantee and included the followingI drove the vehicle miles at mph and miles
at mph and did not hear or feel any problems that would be dangerous or should be addressed in the futureWe were to inspect and listen to the components without tearing down or disassemblingBrakes (All brakes had over of pad) no noise and no pullEngine had no strange noises, leaks, or knocksLights to include headlights, directional, and taillights all functionedNo broken glass and windows/doors worked correctlyDashboard illumination and gauges all functioned correctlyHeater and windshield wipers worked correctlySteering alignment to include steering wheel alignment and tracking was with no shake or vibrationTired had no uneven tread, cuts, or cracks that would be considered dangerous or wear into the track barsBoth front axle seals were leaking (could cause bearing failure or pull on brakes if oil to contaminate brake pads)Buyer said his mechanic would handleRight tie rod worn outBuyer said his mechanic would handleSoft brake line which rubbed header (dangerous should be repaired) buyer said his mechanic would handleSmall rear axle leak into brake drumCould cause pull at later dateAgain, the buyer said his mechanic would handleThe gas tank filler neck leaked gasolineThe buyer said his mechanic would handleThe engine valve cover leaked oilThe buyer said his mechanic would handleThe rear u joint was looseBuyer said his mechanic would handleTransfer case had small leakBuyer said his mechanic would handleThe emergency crake did not workBuyer said his mechanic would repairU bolts on rear axle were loose and buyer said his mechanic would tightenTested wheel drive function and the locking hubs and transfer case work correctlyAll flaws were listed on invoice and were told to buyer on the phoneWe were instructed by the buyer not to repair anything as his mechanic deal with the flaws.We tested the vehicle on the gas diagnostic smog machine and it was set up at the lean roll with acceptable carbon monoxides and hydrocarbonsGood for fuel economy not performanceWe did a balance test on the engine which indicated all cylinders were firing equally and we had good compression at idle and rpmsWe did not do any mechanical work on the engineThere were no indications that there was a major flaw in the engine as the buyers mechanic noted three weeks laterWhen the Bronco left our company it had no major engine problems as the buyers mechanic asserted three weeks later.Over three weeks after the vehicle left or shop, I received a call from the buyer of the vehicle wanting a full refund of $I told him that I would get the invoice and consider compensation based on the work done to the vehicleHe only complained about the engine noise and said he wanted the inspection money returned which amounted to $He did not complain about the additional goods and services he obtained which included a complete lube and oil on all components of the drive trainThe additional amount was $It bothered me at the time that his mechanic (and the buyer) accused us of not hearing a terminal noise in the engine and I was not going to make a judgement till I got all the facts.The buyer was insistent that the noise was there in the engine (his mechanic said so) even though he and his mechanic were not our company at the time of inspection over three weeks earlier in CaliforniaThe buyer and his mechanic were in Texas at the time of the inspection.The two mechanics that inspected the vehicle have years of experience; they both have all ASE’s in engine performance/advanced engine performance/electronic systems, ATS automotive training school state tests and are both licensed Smog inspectors.Why delay in response to buyers request? The seller, after repeated phone calls finally returned our calls after weeksWe also investigated the hauler and obtained a witness to the loading of the BroncoResults of what happened:1. The Bronco was picked up the morning of 7/2/15.2. The Bronco was driven daily for days after it left our company by the sellerIt’s a wheel driveWe have no idea what type of use or abuse happened.3. The Bronco was driven on trips to include a trip to Sacramento“miles to Sacramento”4. The Bronco was loaded on transport“degree ramp/2ndgear/slipping clutch/over reviving engine” witness statedThe comment was made that the transporter did not know how to drive a manual transmission Bronco.After the vehicle left our company, we could not control the use and abuse of the vehicle as we were no party to the driving of the vehicle after the inspection, the sale of the vehicle, or the delivery of the vehicleAlso we have no control over the days it was driven in Texas before the buyers mechanic was able to look and listen to the vehicleObviously the year old Bronco suffered an engine failure after it left our companyWe did no mechanical work on the engine, brakes, fuel system or the axles and therefore we are very sorry to inform you that there will be no warranty or refund. Payless Wheel DriveOwner
*** sank his boat and jeep when trying to go fishing. He towed the truck to payless wheel drive and his boat to my home for storage as he was living at a motel. We drained the engine oil, fuel, intake, and cylinders. We dried out the seats and the interior. We dried
the electrical system. AT that point (days) we called *** and told him that he had more problems and gave him an estimate. At this point we had not charged for anything as he was my friend. He said that he could NOT AFFORD IT AND COULD HE WORK ON IT AT NO CHARGE AT MY HOME AND SHOP. FOR 5 WEEKS (ON AND OFF) *** WORKED ON HIS OWN VEHICLE USING MY TOOLS AND SUPPLIES FOR WHICH HE WAS NOT CHARGED. HE COULD NOT GET IT STARTED AND EVENTUALLY SIEZED THE MOTOR. THAT WAS OVER A YEAR AGO . WE ARE STILL STORING HIS VEHILE FOR HIM ON OUR PROPERTY. WE RECIEVED NO COMPENSATION (TAG WAS VOIDED) WHEN *** SAID HE COULD NOT AFFORD FOR US TO REPAIR HIS VEHICLE
I am rejecting this response because:If we were to try this in a court of law, it would be easy to bring the owner (who has owned this vehicle for years) in and ask what kind of driving he did to ruin the engine in daysI spoke to him as wellHe has a bad back and can no longer take the harsh ride of the bronco- that's why he was selling it Secondly, *** and his years of experience missed a severe brake/safety problemAfter my mechanic looked at it, he suggested that I had been "taken" and asked if the owner and the *** new each otherRegardless of what *** has stated, there are two facts:When I received the bronco, the engine was bad (amongst other issues) and that had been missed by *** and his "experienced" staffHe told me I would receive a re-reimbursement over the phone and I didn't.He can choose not to pay me but I'm going to make sure others don't have the same experience I had.*** ***
I am rejecting this response because:I am submitting this response to the business Payless 4 Wheel Drive’s last response to my complaint dated 5/4/2018. Please add this dialogue to my complaint as I was unable to submit it online before the case was automatically closed.[redacted] continues his rhetoric and misrepresentations of the truth. He claims to have helped me out with a “bunch of stuff”. I would like to know what he is referring to. He goes on to say that the BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair) dropped the case because they didn’t find anything. The BAR does not simply drop cases. Their job is to investigate the complaint and try to mediate between the opposing parties and come to a resolution. The results of the investigation are not a matter of public record and [redacted] would not have known what the investigation revealed. The results are only available by subpoena from the court. He rambles on as he tries to protect himself from the well-established liability of failing to provide a customer a written estimate of work. Not only was he bound by contract to provide a written estimate, but the Automotive Industrial Standards demand it of him. There is zero tolerance in the industry for not providing a customer a written estimate of repair. He goes to say that he was not going to do any work on my vehicle and that is why he did not provide me with a written estimate. That is the weakest of excuse I can imagine. Whether he was going to do any work or not he is still obligated to provide a written estimate to his customer. That is the only way a customer would know what work was needed to be done and at what cost. There is a repair invoice/order no. 110700 stating that the shop was to diagnose the damage to vehicle after fully submerging vehicle. That work order was dated 04/12/2016. Had he done the diagnoses as stated he would have been able to provide me with the estimate as required by law. He never did a diagnosis and hence was unable to provide the estimate. I don’t know when he decided he was not going to do work that he originally agreed to do for me. If he was not going to do the work as agreed, then he would have an obligation to me to advise me as such so that I could find another shop that was willing to do the work before jeep suffered catastrophic damage. When I brought the jeep to his shop he stated he was familiar with the work required to remedy a flooded vehicle and he was willing to do it. Why else would I have jeep towed to his shop and leave it with him to fix. If I wanted to work on my own jeep I would have towed it to my home where I have a double garage and all the tools I needed. That was never my intention. I did not know how to deal with a flooded vehicle and I was totally reliant on [redacted] and his expertise. Any work that I did at his shop was done under his supervision and with his permission. That work occurred only because [redacted] stated that the jeep needed to dry out for a couple of weeks before he could do any work. I asked if I could help dry out the electrical connections while he waited for the jeep to dry out. He agreed and said I could use his tools as need. Finally, the jeep did not seize. A seizure occurs because of overheating due to lack of coolant or oil while the vehicle is running. My jeep damage was a direct result of water intrusion into the internals of the motor and all the running gear. The motor rusted from the inside because [redacted] did not follow industry standard procedures for dealing with a flooded vehicle. This would have been easily accomplished with a little due diligence on his part.
We helped him out with a bunch of stuff, he even reported to the Bureau of Automotive and they dropped the case because they didn't find anything. We tried to talk to him about the work that would need to be done and he just asked if he could work on it himself at our shop. We let him use our tools and some other parts. We did not provide a written estimate because we were not going to perform any work on his vehicle. He is mad that we did not let him know that the jeep could seize.
I am rejecting this response because:I am submitting this response to the business Payless Wheel Drive’s last response to my complaint dated 5/4/ Please add this dialogue to my complaint as I was unable to submit it online before the case was automatically closed[redacted] continues his rhetoric and misrepresentations of the truth He claims to have helped me out with a “bunch of stuff”I would like to know what he is referring to He goes on to say that the BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair) dropped the case because they didn’t find anything The BAR does not simply drop casesTheir job is to investigate the complaint and try to mediate between the opposing parties and come to a resolution The results of the investigation are not a matter of public record and [redacted] would not have known what the investigation revealedThe results are only available by subpoena from the court He rambles on as he tries to protect himself from the well-established liability of failing to provide a customer a written estimate of workNot only was he bound by contract to provide a written estimate, but the Automotive Industrial Standards demand it of him There is zero tolerance in the industry for not providing a customer a written estimate of repairHe goes to say that he was not going to do any work on my vehicle and that is why he did not provide me with a written estimateThat is the weakest of excuse I can imagine Whether he was going to do any work or not he is still obligated to provide a written estimate to his customerThat is the only way a customer would know what work was needed to be done and at what costThere is a repair invoice/order nostating that the shop was to diagnose the damage to vehicle after fully submerging vehicle That work order was dated 04/12/Had he done the diagnoses as stated he would have been able to provide me with the estimate as required by lawHe never did a diagnosis and hence was unable to provide the estimateI don’t know when he decided he was not going to do work that he originally agreed to do for meIf he was not going to do the work as agreed, then he would have an obligation to me to advise me as such so that I could find another shop that was willing to do the work before jeep suffered catastrophic damage When I brought the jeep to his shop he stated he was familiar with the work required to remedy a flooded vehicle and he was willing to do itWhy else would I have jeep towed to his shop and leave it with him to fixIf I wanted to work on my own jeep I would have towed it to my home where I have a double garage and all the tools I neededThat was never my intentionI did not know how to deal with a flooded vehicle and I was totally reliant on [redacted] and his expertiseAny work that I did at his shop was done under his supervision and with his permission That work occurred only because [redacted] stated that the jeep needed to dry out for a couple of weeks before he could do any workI asked if I could help dry out the electrical connections while he waited for the jeep to dry outHe agreed and said I could use his tools as needFinally, the jeep did not seizeA seizure occurs because of overheating due to lack of coolant or oil while the vehicle is runningMy jeep damage was a direct result of water intrusion into the internals of the motor and all the running gearThe motor rusted from the inside because [redacted] did not follow industry standard procedures for dealing with a flooded vehicle This would have been easily accomplished with a little due diligence on his part
We helped him out with a bunch of stuff, he even reported to the Bureau of Automotive and they dropped the case because they didn't find anythingWe tried to talk to him about the work that would need to be done and he just asked if he could work on it himself at our shopWe let him use our tools and some other partsWe did not provide a written estimate because we were not going to perform any work on his vehicleHe is mad that we did not let him know that the jeep could seize
The customer asked us to inspect a bronco for any flaws and to list those flaws on an invoiceThe cost was to be $dollars which was to be a one hour inspectionThe inspection had no verbal or written guarantee and included the followingI drove the vehicle miles at mph and miles
at mph and did not hear or feel any problems that would be dangerous or should be addressed in the futureWe were to inspect and listen to the components without tearing down or disassemblingBrakes (All brakes had over of pad) no noise and no pullEngine had no strange noises, leaks, or knocksLights to include headlights, directional, and taillights all functionedNo broken glass and windows/doors worked correctlyDashboard illumination and gauges all functioned correctlyHeater and windshield wipers worked correctlySteering alignment to include steering wheel alignment and tracking was with no shake or vibrationTired had no uneven tread, cuts, or cracks that would be considered dangerous or wear into the track barsBoth front axle seals were leaking (could cause bearing failure or pull on brakes if oil to contaminate brake pads)Buyer said his mechanic would handleRight tie rod worn outBuyer said his mechanic would handleSoft brake line which rubbed header (dangerous should be repaired) buyer said his mechanic would handleSmall rear axle leak into brake drumCould cause pull at later dateAgain, the buyer said his mechanic would handleThe gas tank filler neck leaked gasolineThe buyer said his mechanic would handleThe engine valve cover leaked oilThe buyer said his mechanic would handleThe rear u joint was looseBuyer said his mechanic would handleTransfer case had small leakBuyer said his mechanic would handleThe emergency crake did not workBuyer said his mechanic would repairU bolts on rear axle were loose and buyer said his mechanic would tightenTested wheel drive function and the locking hubs and transfer case work correctlyAll flaws were listed on invoice and were told to buyer on the phoneWe were instructed by the buyer not to repair anything as his mechanic deal with the flaws.We tested the vehicle on the gas diagnostic smog machine and it was set up at the lean roll with acceptable carbon monoxides and hydrocarbonsGood for fuel economy not performanceWe did a balance test on the engine which indicated all cylinders were firing equally and we had good compression at idle and rpmsWe did not do any mechanical work on the engineThere were no indications that there was a major flaw in the engine as the buyers mechanic noted three weeks laterWhen the Bronco left our company it had no major engine problems as the buyers mechanic asserted three weeks later.Over three weeks after the vehicle left or shop, I received a call from the buyer of the vehicle wanting a full refund of $I told him that I would get the invoice and consider compensation based on the work done to the vehicleHe only complained about the engine noise and said he wanted the inspection money returned which amounted to $He did not complain about the additional goods and services he obtained which included a complete lube and oil on all components of the drive trainThe additional amount was $It bothered me at the time that his mechanic (and the buyer) accused us of not hearing a terminal noise in the engine and I was not going to make a judgement till I got all the facts.The buyer was insistent that the noise was there in the engine (his mechanic said so) even though he and his mechanic were not our company at the time of inspection over three weeks earlier in CaliforniaThe buyer and his mechanic were in Texas at the time of the inspection.The two mechanics that inspected the vehicle have years of experience; they both have all ASE’s in engine performance/advanced engine performance/electronic systems, ATS automotive training school state tests and are both licensed Smog inspectors.Why delay in response to buyers request? The seller, after repeated phone calls finally returned our calls after weeksWe also investigated the hauler and obtained a witness to the loading of the BroncoResults of what happened:1. The Bronco was picked up the morning of 7/2/15.2. The Bronco was driven daily for days after it left our company by the sellerIt’s a wheel driveWe have no idea what type of use or abuse happened.3. The Bronco was driven on trips to include a trip to Sacramento“miles to Sacramento”4. The Bronco was loaded on transport“degree ramp/2ndgear/slipping clutch/over reviving engine” witness statedThe comment was made that the transporter did not know how to drive a manual transmission Bronco.After the vehicle left our company, we could not control the use and abuse of the vehicle as we were no party to the driving of the vehicle after the inspection, the sale of the vehicle, or the delivery of the vehicleAlso we have no control over the days it was driven in Texas before the buyers mechanic was able to look and listen to the vehicleObviously the year old Bronco suffered an engine failure after it left our companyWe did no mechanical work on the engine, brakes, fuel system or the axles and therefore we are very sorry to inform you that there will be no warranty or refund. Payless Wheel DriveOwner
*** sank his boat and jeep when trying to go fishing. He towed the truck to payless wheel drive and his boat to my home for storage as he was living at a motel. We drained the engine oil, fuel, intake, and cylinders. We dried out the seats and the interior. We dried
the electrical system. AT that point (days) we called *** and told him that he had more problems and gave him an estimate. At this point we had not charged for anything as he was my friend. He said that he could NOT AFFORD IT AND COULD HE WORK ON IT AT NO CHARGE AT MY HOME AND SHOP. FOR 5 WEEKS (ON AND OFF) *** WORKED ON HIS OWN VEHICLE USING MY TOOLS AND SUPPLIES FOR WHICH HE WAS NOT CHARGED. HE COULD NOT GET IT STARTED AND EVENTUALLY SIEZED THE MOTOR. THAT WAS OVER A YEAR AGO . WE ARE STILL STORING HIS VEHILE FOR HIM ON OUR PROPERTY. WE RECIEVED NO COMPENSATION (TAG WAS VOIDED) WHEN *** SAID HE COULD NOT AFFORD FOR US TO REPAIR HIS VEHICLE
I am rejecting this response because:If we were to try this in a court of law, it would be easy to bring the owner (who has owned this vehicle for years) in and ask what kind of driving he did to ruin the engine in daysI spoke to him as wellHe has a bad back and can no longer take the harsh ride of the bronco- that's why he was selling it Secondly, *** and his years of experience missed a severe brake/safety problemAfter my mechanic looked at it, he suggested that I had been "taken" and asked if the owner and the *** new each otherRegardless of what *** has stated, there are two facts:When I received the bronco, the engine was bad (amongst other issues) and that had been missed by *** and his "experienced" staffHe told me I would receive a re-reimbursement over the phone and I didn't.He can choose not to pay me but I'm going to make sure others don't have the same experience I had.*** ***
I am rejecting this response because:I am submitting this response to the business Payless 4 Wheel Drive’s last response to my complaint dated 5/4/2018. Please add this dialogue to my complaint as I was unable to submit it online before the case was automatically closed.[redacted] continues his rhetoric and misrepresentations of the truth. He claims to have helped me out with a “bunch of stuff”. I would like to know what he is referring to. He goes on to say that the BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair) dropped the case because they didn’t find anything. The BAR does not simply drop cases. Their job is to investigate the complaint and try to mediate between the opposing parties and come to a resolution. The results of the investigation are not a matter of public record and [redacted] would not have known what the investigation revealed. The results are only available by subpoena from the court. He rambles on as he tries to protect himself from the well-established liability of failing to provide a customer a written estimate of work. Not only was he bound by contract to provide a written estimate, but the Automotive Industrial Standards demand it of him. There is zero tolerance in the industry for not providing a customer a written estimate of repair. He goes to say that he was not going to do any work on my vehicle and that is why he did not provide me with a written estimate. That is the weakest of excuse I can imagine. Whether he was going to do any work or not he is still obligated to provide a written estimate to his customer. That is the only way a customer would know what work was needed to be done and at what cost. There is a repair invoice/order no. 110700 stating that the shop was to diagnose the damage to vehicle after fully submerging vehicle. That work order was dated 04/12/2016. Had he done the diagnoses as stated he would have been able to provide me with the estimate as required by law. He never did a diagnosis and hence was unable to provide the estimate. I don’t know when he decided he was not going to do work that he originally agreed to do for me. If he was not going to do the work as agreed, then he would have an obligation to me to advise me as such so that I could find another shop that was willing to do the work before jeep suffered catastrophic damage. When I brought the jeep to his shop he stated he was familiar with the work required to remedy a flooded vehicle and he was willing to do it. Why else would I have jeep towed to his shop and leave it with him to fix. If I wanted to work on my own jeep I would have towed it to my home where I have a double garage and all the tools I needed. That was never my intention. I did not know how to deal with a flooded vehicle and I was totally reliant on [redacted] and his expertise. Any work that I did at his shop was done under his supervision and with his permission. That work occurred only because [redacted] stated that the jeep needed to dry out for a couple of weeks before he could do any work. I asked if I could help dry out the electrical connections while he waited for the jeep to dry out. He agreed and said I could use his tools as need. Finally, the jeep did not seize. A seizure occurs because of overheating due to lack of coolant or oil while the vehicle is running. My jeep damage was a direct result of water intrusion into the internals of the motor and all the running gear. The motor rusted from the inside because [redacted] did not follow industry standard procedures for dealing with a flooded vehicle. This would have been easily accomplished with a little due diligence on his part.
We helped him out with a bunch of stuff, he even reported to the Bureau of Automotive and they dropped the case because they didn't find anything. We tried to talk to him about the work that would need to be done and he just asked if he could work on it himself at our shop. We let him use our tools and some other parts. We did not provide a written estimate because we were not going to perform any work on his vehicle. He is mad that we did not let him know that the jeep could seize.