Sign in

Gary Interiors Ltd.

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Gary Interiors Ltd.? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Gary Interiors Ltd.

Gary Interiors Ltd. Reviews (8)

Thank you for allowing us to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] ***, “the customer”.FACTSThe subject vehicle is a Toyota RAV4, VIN [redacted] .The subject vehicle was purchased at Miller Toyota on October 19, 2015.The customer’s service history is as follows:October 5, - Customer requested installation of Body MoldingCompleted.January 27, - Customer requested a 5K ToyotaCare serviceService was completed at no chargeService included a tire rotation.April 8, – Customer reported a vibration from the hood areaService performed at Warrenton ToyotaNo problem found.June 23, - Customer requested a 10K ToyotaCare serviceService was completed at no charge by Charles ToyotaService included a tire rotation.October 17, 2016- Customer requested a 15K ToyotaCare serviceService was completed at no chargeService included a tire rotation.December 29, - Customer requested a 20K ToyotaCare serviceService was completed at no chargeService included a tire rotation.April 4, - Customer requested a 25K ToyotaCare serviceService was completed at no chargeService included a tire rotation.May 25, – Customer’s daughter requested a 30K serviceShe expressed no knowledge of where the vehicle had been purchasedOur associates researched the vehicle history and determined that the 30K Service was to be completed at no charge under Miller Toyota Elite Customer Care ownership benefitThe customer’s daughter expressed no knowledge of thisThis repair order was written at 8:AM and signed by the customer’s daughterUpon inspection and advice of the technician, the following items were recommended:wheel alignment, Clean and adjust rear brakes including parking brake system, Tire rotation and balance, and Ventilation service.Customer’s daughter authorized repairs 1, and and they were completedRepair was not authorized and not completedVehicle was returned to customer’s daughter at 11:PM and was paid via credit card by the customer’s daughter.The customer was not present during any conversations between Miller Toyota associates and his daughter during this service visitThere is no direct statement of record made by the customer’s daughter in this regardThe customer’s statements are based on this third party conversation and the customer does not provide facts to back up his opinions and accusations.In the complaint the customer references a “2005” ToyotaWe acknowledge that the intent was to describe a “2015”.We submit the above facts as indisputable.OPINIONIt is the job of a vehicle technician to inspect every vehicle for immediately-required work, matters to keep an eye on and all preventative maintenance suggestionsSome suggestions are clear cut, some require a degree of judgment and all require a customer’s authorization to completeFailure to address these items can put a dealership in a position of blame and/or negligence should a failure occur following a vehicle service.There is no record of an alignment being ever being performed on this vehicleThe purpose of a proper alignment is to adjust the angles of the tires which affect how they make contact with the roadBased on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.Cleaning and adjusting of rear disc brakes is a preventative maintenance itemIts main purpose is to adjust the emergency brake system to prevent e-brake pedal fadeE-brake cables do stretch making the emergency brake less effective, even to the point of allowing a vehicle to move at idle when the e-brake is engagedBased on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.This vehicle shows a history of five (5) tire rotations completed on a fairly regular intervalThere is no history however of the wheels ever being balancedIt is a best practice and industry standard to re- balance every two years or 30,miles, and more often is the vehicle is subject to rough roads, potholes and etcBased on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.Furthermore, Miller Toyota does not prey on any customerWe do not question a customer’s authority or capacity to make such decisionsIn the course of business, a customer of legal age has the right to make decisions, request clarification and counsel with family and others prior to making a repair or purchase commitmentIn this case, the customer’s daughter had ample time, access and opportunity to check with another party if needed, decline repairs and seek a second opinion if necessary.The customer discussed this matter with three dealership managers and the Toyota Consumer HotlineThe opinion of all Miller associates is that we did nothing wrong and any refund or adjustment was unjustifiedI concur with that assessment.The customer has the right to comment to the Revdex.com and on social mediaWe would however encourage them to state the facts, in total.Sincerely,Kenneth MS [redacted] General Manager [redacted]

Dear [redacted] ,Thank you for allowing us to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] “the customer”.FACTSThe subject vehicle is a Toyota RAV4, [redacted] .The subject vehicle was purchased at Miller Toyota on October 2, 2015.The customer’s service history is as follows:April 28, - Customer requested a 10K serviceService was completed at no chargeThere are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.August 16, - Customer requested a 15K serviceService was completed at no chargeThis is the noted complaint regarding the rodent nestThere are no documented “additional recommendations beyond the cabin air filter/ventilation service.” Customer invoice and multi-point inspection attached.I have researched the matter of August 16, regarding the rodent nestThis service visit was completed in minutes while the customer waitedIn discussing the matter with the Service Advisor and customer, it is acknowledged that there was a hole in the cabin air filter caused by an unknown source but most likely a rodentWhen a customer is not at the dealership, pictures are frequently emailed to the customerIn this case the customer was at the dealershipThe customer declined the filter replacementIt is likely that the lube technician vacuumed out the readily accessible areas and replaced the original cabin air filterThat would be normal.Considering that rodents can infest the unseen portion of the vent system with debris and feces, a recommendation for vent service would be appropriate to completely clean and sanitize the unseen vent systemThe multi-point inspection for this visit shows the cabin filter needing “immediate attention”.December 1, - Customer requested a 20K serviceService was completed at no chargeThere are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.January 31, - Customer requested that we check her brakes for a grinding noiseNeeded repairs were completed under factory warranty at no chargeThere is no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.March 8, - Customer requested a 25K serviceService was completed at no chargeThere are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.March 22, - Customer requested the installation of a tow hitchService was completedThere are no documented “additional recommendations.” The signed service repair order shows an estimate of $plus taxThe completed invoice shows a final price including tax of $.May 9, - Customer requested a 30K serviceService was completed at no chargeThis is the service that resulted in the Revdex.com complaintThere are no documented “additional recommendations beyond the tire replacement.”The repair visit on May 9, is not an error of diagnosis, but rather an error of poor communicationThe right rear tire in fact did have a nailThat tire was rotated to the front as part of the service: Poor communication yes, a malicious act; noThe customer invoice shows “nail near side wall, requires tire cannot patch.”It was the opinion/judgment of our master technician that the nail had entered the tire at a serve angle making the straigplug/patch an undesirable solution and one that could be a good first start that might end well or poor.Miller Toyota attempts to error on the side of safety regarding tiresWe perform very few patchesWe realize that many customers turn down our recommendations and find other repair shops to patch tiresThis is the action the customer took.OPINION and RESOLUTIONIt is the job of a vehicle technician to inspect every vehicle for immediately-required work, matters to keep an eye on and all recommended preventative maintenance suggestionsSome suggestions are clear cut, some require a degree of judgment and all require a customer’s authorization to complete.Miller Toyota could have been more succinct and complete in the communication with the customerThis is our error and we regret and apologize for itHowever, we will not cease from recommending current and future service needsMany customers appreciate this service, some take great umbrage with it.In the interest of fairness, Miller Toyota offered the customer, on a goodwill basis one new tire to replace the patched oneThis offer was turned down by the customer.There is no doubt that communication and documentation could and should have been betterAs a result of these mistakes we have lost a customer for life and all of the potential referrals of family, friends and co-workersThis is particularly sad to meThere is nothing in our playbook that suggests we should strive for less than 100%Regrettably, we let our customer downI sincerely apologize.The customer has requested compensation, an extension of the Toyota warranty and to end the relationship with Miller Toyota.• Miller Toyota does not reimburse lost wages.• The warranty the customer refers to is what we believe to be the exclusive Miller Toyota Elite Customer Care programIt was provided to the customer at no-charge when buying the vehicle from usMiller Toyota will buy the customer out of their future benefits under this in-house plan for $Miller Toyota will provide and require a signed waiver of benefitsThis has no effect on the manufacturer’s warranty coverage.• As to the customer not wishing to do future business with us, that is totally the customer’s choice.I trust this matter can be resolved and closedIf the customer wishes to proceed with this course please contact me.Sincerely,Kenneth MS [redacted] General Manager [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:The facts are not in question here What is in question is the methods used when discussing the "recommended"additional work with my daughter Multiple iterations of the word "Safety" were used to convince my daughter the extra work was of extreme necessity when each item performed was not in "Fact" a safety related matter Nothing done to the car would have prevented any safety related future occurrence I stand by my prior statement that service personal were predatory in their pursuit of service related bonuses I do notice many other similar comments on various rating sites You sir have a problem at Miller Toyota! Not to worry, I will not be back in the future! Regards, [redacted] **

I am sorry this mistake has caused so much distress. One frequently looks to an error made during
an automobile negation as an event filled with nefarious intentions, deceit and
a ploy to somehow out-smart a savvy consumer.
To consider this behavior at Miller Toyota, or frankly,
at any franchise
dealership as anything but a mistake is a serious misstatement. *** *** is a previous customer as
well. To what purpose does this
inflammatory accusation of behavior lead:
a lost sale, an angry customer, and hours of time on everyone’s part
dealing with it?
*** * submitted an internet request on the gray ***,
stock number ***. When our
salesperson, MrI printed a worksheet, the computer auto-populated this stock
number on it. He did however write down
the correct pricing for the *** *** * drove
When negation ensued the manager considered the customer’s
offer based on the pre-printed stock number’s information found in the computer. This is the root mistake: inadvertent, honest and not malicious
During the paperwork process MrT discovered the mistake by
the mention of the gray color. The
pricing verbally agreed to for what management believed to be the gray vehicle
was not possible on the white vehicle.
MrT took the blame and did what he could to make up the difference by
offering a lower price on the white vehicleWhile it did not meet the
customer’s expectations, it was the best we could do
I appreciate that MrT accepted the blame for the
error. The error was not his but once
discovered, it was his responsibility to stop itThe settlement manager is the last filter to correct
errors before legal contracts are signed, finalized and accepted by dealership
management
This was an unfortunate mistake. We have apologized to *** * and I am doing so
again by this letterI completely understand his disappointmentI do not believe however, that honest mistakes
can be monetized and result in cash compensation. For many, an apology is all that is
necessary. Our salesperson, MrI has
been disciplined and is contrite

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The facts are not in question here.  What is in question is the methods used when discussing the "recommended"additional work with my daughter.  Multiple iterations of the word "Safety" were used to convince my daughter the extra work was of extreme necessity when each item performed was not in "Fact" a safety related matter.  Nothing done to the car would have prevented any safety related future occurrence.  I stand by my prior statement that service personal were predatory in their pursuit of service related bonuses.  I do notice many other similar comments on various rating sites.  You sir have a problem at Miller Toyota!  Not to worry, I will not be back in the future!
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted],Thank you for allowing us to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted] “the customer”.FACTSThe subject vehicle is a 2015 Toyota RAV4, [redacted].The subject vehicle was purchased at Miller Toyota on October 2, 2015.The customer’s service history is as follows:April...

28, 2016 - Customer requested a 10K service. Service was completed at no charge. There are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.August 16, 2016 - Customer requested a 15K service. Service was completed at no charge. This is the noted complaint regarding the rodent nest. There are no documented “additional recommendations beyond the cabin air filter/ventilation service.” Customer invoice and multi-point inspection attached.I have researched the matter of August 16, 2016 regarding the rodent nest. This service visit was completed in 68 minutes while the customer waited. In discussing the matter with the Service Advisor and customer, it is acknowledged that there was a hole in the cabin air filter caused by an unknown source but most likely a rodent. When a customer is not at the dealership, pictures are frequently emailed to the customer. In this case the customer was at the dealership. The customer declined the filter replacement. It is likely that the lube technician vacuumed out the readily accessible areas and replaced the original cabin air filter. That would be normal.Considering that rodents can infest the unseen portion of the vent system with debris and feces, a recommendation for vent service would be appropriate to completely clean and sanitize the unseen vent system. The multi-point inspection for this visit shows the cabin filter needing “immediate attention”.December 1, 2016 - Customer requested a 20K service. Service was completed at no charge. There are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.January 31, 2017 - Customer requested that we check her brakes for a grinding noise. Needed repairs were completed under factory warranty at no charge. There is no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.March 8, 2017 - Customer requested a 25K service. Service was completed at no charge. There are no documented “additional recommendations.” Customer invoice attached.March 22, 2017 - Customer requested the installation of a tow hitch. Service was completed. There are no documented “additional recommendations.” The signed service repair order shows an estimate of $995 plus tax. The completed invoice shows a final price including tax of $953.94. .May 9, 2017 - Customer requested a 30K service. Service was completed at no charge. This is the service that resulted in the Revdex.com complaint. There are no documented “additional recommendations beyond the tire replacement.”The repair visit on May 9, 2017 is not an error of diagnosis, but rather an error of poor communication. The right rear tire in fact did have a nail. That tire was rotated to the front as part of the service: Poor communication yes, a malicious act; no. The customer invoice shows “nail near side wall, requires tire cannot patch.”It was the opinion/judgment of our master technician that the nail had entered the tire at a serve angle making the normal straight-on plug/patch an undesirable solution and one that could be a good first start that might end well or poor.Miller Toyota attempts to error on the side of safety regarding tires. We perform very few patches. We realize that many customers turn down our recommendations and find other repair shops to patch tires. This is the action the customer took.OPINION and RESOLUTIONIt is the job of a vehicle technician to inspect every vehicle for immediately-required work, matters to keep an eye on and all recommended preventative maintenance suggestions. Some suggestions are clear cut, some require a degree of judgment and all require a customer’s authorization to complete.Miller Toyota could have been more succinct and complete in the communication with the customer. This is our error and we regret and apologize for it. However, we will not cease from recommending current and future service needs. Many customers appreciate this service, some take great umbrage with it.In the interest of fairness, Miller Toyota offered the customer, on a goodwill basis one new tire to replace the patched one. This offer was turned down by the customer.There is no doubt that communication and documentation could and should have been better. As a result of these mistakes we have lost a customer for life and all of the potential referrals of family, friends and co-workers. This is particularly sad to me. There is nothing in our playbook that suggests we should strive for less than 100%. Regrettably, we let our customer down. I sincerely apologize.The customer has requested compensation, an extension of the Toyota warranty and to end the relationship with Miller Toyota.• Miller Toyota does not reimburse lost wages.• The warranty the customer refers to is what we believe to be the exclusive Miller Toyota Elite Customer Care program. It was provided to the customer at no-charge when buying the vehicle from us. Miller Toyota will buy the customer out of their future benefits under this in-house plan for $300. Miller Toyota will provide and require a signed waiver of benefits. This has no effect on the manufacturer’s warranty coverage.• As to the customer not wishing to do future business with us, that is totally the customer’s choice.I trust this matter can be resolved and closed. If the customer wishes to proceed with this course please contact me.Sincerely,Kenneth M. S[redacted] General Manager [redacted]

Thank you for allowing us to respond to the complaint filed by [redacted], “the customer”.FACTSThe subject vehicle is a 2015 Toyota RAV4, VIN [redacted].The subject vehicle was purchased at Miller Toyota on October 19, 2015.The customer’s service history is as follows:October 5, 2015 - Customer...

requested installation of Body Molding. Completed.January 27, 2016 - Customer requested a 5K ToyotaCare service. Service was completed at no charge. Service included a tire rotation.April 8, 2016 – Customer reported a vibration from the hood area. Service performed at Warrenton Toyota. No problem found.June 23, 2016 - Customer requested a 10K ToyotaCare service. Service was completed at no charge by Charles Toyota. Service included a tire rotation.October 17, 2016- Customer requested a 15K ToyotaCare service. Service was completed at no charge. Service included a tire rotation.December 29, 2016 - Customer requested a 20K ToyotaCare service. Service was completed at no charge. Service included a tire rotation.April 4, 2017 - Customer requested a 25K ToyotaCare service. Service was completed at no charge. Service included a tire rotation.May 25, 2017 – Customer’s daughter requested a 30K service. She expressed no knowledge of where the vehicle had been purchased. Our associates researched the vehicle history and determined that the 30K Service was to be completed at no charge under Miller Toyota Elite Customer Care ownership benefit. The customer’s daughter expressed no knowledge of this. This repair order was written at 8:27 AM and signed by the customer’s daughter. Upon inspection and advice of the technician, the following items were recommended:1. 4 wheel alignment, 2. Clean and adjust rear brakes including parking brake system, 3. Tire rotation and balance, and 4. Ventilation service.Customer’s daughter authorized repairs 1, 2 and 3 and they were completed. Repair 4 was not authorized and not completed. Vehicle was returned to customer’s daughter at 11:45 PM and was paid via credit card by the customer’s daughter.The customer was not present during any conversations between Miller Toyota associates and his daughter during this service visit. There is no direct statement of record made by the customer’s daughter in this regard. The customer’s statements are based on this third party conversation and the customer does not provide facts to back up his opinions and accusations.In the complaint the customer references a “2005” Toyota. We acknowledge that the intent was to describe a “2015”.We submit the above facts as indisputable.OPINIONIt is the job of a vehicle technician to inspect every vehicle for immediately-required work, matters to keep an eye on and all preventative maintenance suggestions. Some suggestions are clear cut, some require a degree of judgment and all require a customer’s authorization to complete. Failure to address these items can put a dealership in a position of blame and/or negligence should a failure occur following a vehicle service.There is no record of an alignment being ever being performed on this vehicle. The purpose of a proper alignment is to adjust the angles of the tires which affect how they make contact with the road. Based on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.Cleaning and adjusting of rear disc brakes is a preventative maintenance item. Its main purpose is to adjust the emergency brake system to prevent e-brake pedal fade. E-brake cables do stretch making the emergency brake less effective, even to the point of allowing a vehicle to move at idle when the e-brake is engaged. Based on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.This vehicle shows a history of five (5) tire rotations completed on a fairly regular interval. There is no history however of the wheels ever being balanced. It is a best practice and industry standard to re- balance every two years or 30,000 miles, and more often is the vehicle is subject to rough roads, potholes and etc. Based on time and miles, this is a fair and proper recommendation.Furthermore, Miller Toyota does not prey on any customer. We do not question a customer’s authority or capacity to make such decisions. In the course of business, a customer of legal age has the right to make decisions, request clarification and counsel with family and others prior to making a repair or purchase commitment. In this case, the customer’s daughter had ample time, access and opportunity to check with another party if needed, decline repairs and seek a second opinion if necessary.The customer discussed this matter with three dealership managers and the Toyota Consumer Hotline. The opinion of all Miller associates is that we did nothing wrong and any refund or adjustment was unjustified. I concur with that assessment.The customer has the right to comment to the Revdex.com and on social media. We would however encourage them to state the facts, in total.Sincerely,Kenneth M. S[redacted] General Manager [redacted]

Dear Revdex.com, Sorry, I have been out of town. We reached a settlement with the customer on Thursday.  We paid her $250 as a goodwill adjustment in lieu of a replacement tire. Secondly, we paid the customer an additional $300 to buy them out of the future benefits of the Miller Toyota in-house coupon book. I believe the customer was satisfied and signed the necessary waiver.     Thanks, [redacted]Miller Toyota of Manassas

Check fields!

Write a review of Gary Interiors Ltd.

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Gary Interiors Ltd. Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 156C Government St, Wellington, Kansas, United States, 67152-0133

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

This website was reported to be associated with Gary Interiors Ltd..



Add contact information for Gary Interiors Ltd.

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated