Elliott/Wilson Capitol Trucks Inc.

Review: The original diagnosis of the van in question was given to me in December 2012 for approximately $920. No funds. The van sat idle. In June of 2013 I returned the truck for necessary repairs according to the original diagnosis. Upon picking the van up from the shop after it had been repaired, I drove it across the street so I could get a second driver to help me drive it home. When I tried to put it in reverse, it would not shift. This is why I bought the van in the first place. . I got it to finally shift and dove it back across the street to the repair facility. I got them to try to shift it and they could not. I was advised to leave it so they could figure out what was going on. After a couple of days they called me and told me it was a separate issue with the transmission and it woud be about $1500 labor just to drop the transmission. I felt they misdiagnosed it from the start and for me to give them more money is ridiculous.Desired Settlement: I want a refund of my final repair bill and will seek to get van fixed esleewhere

Business

Response:

To Revdex.com,

In reference to [redacted] s vehicle. It is a 2014 mercury with over 125000 miles.lt was brought into the dealership on 11/24/2012 for repair for recalls issued by Ford Motor company , (lls25 - torque converter replacement). On 12/05/2013 the vehicle was brought into the dealership for an engine fault code, it was diagnosed as a engine intake manifold runner control. This has nothing to do with the recall performed. Repair was declined. On 01/23/2013 the vehicle was brought into the dealership for a recall issued by Ford Motor Company, (13s01 - 3rd row seat striker). The vehicle was not seen again until 07/23/2013 when **. [redacted] finally decided to complete the needed repair from 12/05/2012 . Running the vehicle for this long would further damage the vehicle drivetrain, engine and transmission. The vehicle was brought into the dealership on 08/20/2013 wiyh transmission problems, the customer was advised that the transmission would need to be removed and disassembled for a complete estimate, this was also declined.

Thank you,

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: [redacted] <[redacted]>

Date: Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Subject: #[redacted]

To: [email protected]

In response to the letter sent by the business I have a complaint against, I must refute some points. When I took my vehicle to the business in December for the engine code I was given the diagnosis. The repair was quoted about $900 dollars which I did not have. I did not bring my car in for a recall for the 3rd seat. This recall was done in July when I returned the vehicle for the previous diagnosis in December. I did not drive the vehicle during that time. I couldn't.

Regards,

Business

Response:

TO Revdex.com :

In reference to victor [redacted]s response. First let me first apologize for two errors in my first letter. The vehicle is a 2004 not a 2014 Mercury . Second , the 2nd recall was performed on 7/23/2013 -When the vehicle was brought in on 12/05/2012 , it was for a check engine light , not for a transmission problem , The two are different concerns, when it was brought in on 7/23/2013 the check engine light was repaired, that is what the customer was charged for.

Thank you,

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I am definitely not satisified with the reason given based on what was quoted to me at the time of the initial diagnosis and for the service subsequently rendered.

Regards,