Gleam Car Wash

Mr [redacted] and his wife were unlimited members with us since our grand opening in SeptemberThey've been nothing but pleased with the service we've provided themWe even went above and beyond when they left their sunroof open while going through the car washWe completely detailed the inside of their car, where the chemicals stained the interior, absolutely freeThey even wrote kind online reviews expressing their gratitude for our actions and admiration for our operationWe often go out of our way to please our good customers, however, we can't pay an unsubstantiated claim like thisWe have high definition cameras throughout our property (of which captured the event in question)It plainly showed our lead supervisor guiding Mr [redacted] in straightThe cameras also plainly show Mr [redacted] going off the track by turning his steering wheel to the leftOur lead supervisor is clearly motioning him straightI offered to show this video to them and they declinedAs far as anybody being rude to anybody, that is completely falseI was nothing but professionalThey just didn't want to hear that I wouldn't pay a claim that was clearly their faultAlso, I spoke with her on the phone, not Mr [redacted] -- [redacted]

Please see below for our response to the above referenced complaint: We have redundant measures we take to ensure roof racks aren't broken: aWe retract all top cleaning/drying equipment for all roof racks via an employee with a button on our computerSometimes they forget, sobWe have taken the "human factor" out of the equation by taking the top cleaning/drying equipment out of commission by automatically bringing said equipment up at the top of the windshield so as not to rely on employees to remember to do soWe have a disclaimer sign saying we can't be held responsible for after market parts, because car washes are built with "off the lot" vehicles in mindThis disclaimer even spells out roof racksHowever, when we're negligent, we pay for after market items that are damagede.gwe generally pay for ana install electric antennas that get broken even though our signage clearly says to put them down before entering the wash, because we feel the attendant should notice themThere was no way the attendant could have noticed the unlatched ski rack in this caseWe reviewed several cameras (the GM and I both reviewed the footage)The ski rack portion of the roof rack came unlatched, because it wasn't locked down (easy for customer to overlook)We have record of all of this gentleman's visits and nothing like this happened upon his previous visitsFurthermore, our computer records show the retract of the top brushes was completed (not that it needed to be, because of our redundant measures) It's difficult to explain and convince a customer of no fault in a situation like thisThe video shows the ski rack come up and when it got to the air dryers it doesn't look like there was an impact with the sunroof, because of the very large luggage rack the ski racks are mounted to, but I'll take his word for it that it happened the way he said it did and wasn't previously damagedHowever, we can't take responsibility for something for which we weren't negligent-- [redacted] Owner/Operator

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because of all of the aforementioned reasons I have already provided Next time I will heed online reviews before patronizing a new business and urge other consumers to do the same Sincerely, [redacted]

Below are my responses (labeled “Reply”) to Gleam’s counter argument (the manager’s statements are bulleted), line by line.• There is a 2' isolated scratch on the back of this suv. There were no other vehicles scratched before or after this "incident". This industry gets a lot of "it had to have happened here, because it wasn't like this before."Reply: Immediately before driving to Gleam, I placed a gardening tool I borrowed from a neighbor in the trunk of my car. The back of my CRV was not scratched. I arrived at the car wash and my car was not damaged. I returned home half an hour later and it was damaged, by something sharp. I am incredibly careful with my car, and am keen to every door ding and scuff on it; I just paid it off and I take exceptional care of it.The only people touching my car were the people (and machines) at Gleam. If I did not think this was a valid issue, seeing as I am an honest individual, I would not have taken the time to contact Gleam management immediately and multiple times (via phone three times and then in person when I did not get a reply), research filing a police report, search out Gleam's co-owner, nor contact BBB and the attorney general. I am sure the car wash industry indeed does receive unfounded claims, and I am not one of them.• That's why we have 32 cameras throughout our property and tunnel. I've been in this business for 14 years and have worked with hundreds of operators all over the country.Reply: The number of cameras in the tunnel is irrelevant because the angles captured and lighting are insufficient for damage to my car to be visible on Gleam’s footage. Gleam’s manager already knows that the lighting on the surveillance video does not permit the scratch to be seen on camera, as demonstrated by my friend and I on our own high definition camera. We tested with an iPhone camera, from less than a foot away and you cannot see the scratch on camera unless you are at a very specific angle. Gleam’s cameras are high and wide and aren’t able to see the scratch. It is near impossible to see unless the lighting is sufficient and the camera angle to the damage is precise. • I've never heard of or seen a scratch like this occur in a car wash tunnel like ours. When I mentioned a lure, it's kind of like an old wives tale. I've heard it before, but never witnessed it. Furthermore, there's no way something as light as a lure could make a deep scratch like that.Reply: Gleam’s manager contends at the end of his response (below) that there are "hundreds" of ways the car could have been damaged. However, the explanation the same manager gave my friend and I in person on the second visit was that the damage (across three panels and the rear windshield gasket) could have been caused by a fishing lure stuck in a mitter that dragged across the back of my car. “Wives tale” or not, that was provided as a valid explanation for potential damage on the second visit to Gleam. In addition, the body shop that provided me with the $972 repair estimate confirmed the damage is consistent with something sharp being dragged across the back of the car and stated this was likely caused by a sharp object stuck in the car wash equipment. • Whatever did it had to have been pretty heavy. And, if it was something like that, somebody would have to have removed it by hand.Reply: Anything heavy would likely have cause denting, which there is none of. The scratch is very deep and will cause the center panel to rust. The body is not dented, thereby indicating there was no contact with anything of substantial weight.• We have a manager communication log in our office. Nothing was documented and upon investigating nothing was discovered.Reply: This comment does not make sense to me, and I do not know about the communication log, nor do I care to. I do know that I made contact with Gleam on 5 separate occasions, and was dissuaded from being in touch with the manager until I arrived in person and offered to wait for him to come out of a meeting that he had been in “for hours”. If the “investigating” refers to the camera footage, see reply above.• The only resolution this customer will be satisfied with is me admitting it happened here. I can't do that, because it didn't. This customer is so sure it happened here that she can't fathom the potential of it happening anywhere else via hundreds of explanations.Reply: The statement above is an attempt at undermining my credibility, however it is not just my opinion that bolsters my claim. The opinion that this incident occurred at Gleam is shared by other credible professionals. I would like to reiterate that my friend who accompanied me to the car wash is a mechanical designer with expertise in similar technologies. In addition, the opinion of the body shop augments the argument that the damage in question likely occurred at Gleam car wash.It is entirely possible that a piece of debris could have been caught in the mitters (long shammy type cloth) as they have loops like a towel. This is a fine, precise two-foot scratch that runs vertically across the entire door panel. It runs from under the bend in the sheet metal, up the door, skips over the chrome logo and picks back up again. It continues all the way to the window gasket and slices through it. I don’t believe that there are “hundreds of ways” this could happen. It is a fine and precise scratch that could only be caused by something mechanical in nature.I am not the only person who has reported having issues with Gleam car wash. Gleam’s current manager has become notorious for his defensive approach to customer complaints, and multiple other people have reported having damage to their cars in reviews online. In these same instances of damage, other customers similarly reported that said manager would review video footage, only to put the blame back on the customer. Indeed, an acceptable resolution would include some sort of customer service which Gleam is apparently incapable of providing.

There is a 2' isolated scratch on the back of this suvThere were no other vehicles scratched before or after this "incident"This industry gets a lot of "it had to have happened here, because it wasn't like this before." That's why we have cameras throughout our property and tunnelI've been
in this business for years and have worked with hundreds of operators all over the countryI've never heard of or seen a scratch like this occur in a car wash tunnel like oursWhen I mentioned a lure, it's kind of like an old wives taleI've heard it before, but never witnessed itFurthermore, there's no way something as light as a lure could make a deep scratch like thatWhatever did it had to have been pretty heavyAnd, if it was something like that, somebody would have to have removed it by handWe have a manager communication log in our officeNothing was documented and upon investigating nothing was discoveredThe only resolution this customer will be satisfied with is me admitting it happened hereI can't do that, because it didn'tThis customer is so sure it happened here that she can't fathom the potential of it happening anywhere else via hundreds of explanations

Gleam Car Wash ("Gleam")needs to take responsibility for having hazards in their car wash that will pop tires*** responded and said that his supervisor led me thru the car washNaturally, the supervisor should be educated by the owners that if a car has a tire hissing air, than at no point should that car be allowed to travel through the car wast is undisputed that the supervisor did not mention or notify me of my tire hissing air because my tire was fine until I was erroneously led into the car wash and my tire went over the barrierThis, and only this led to my tire becoming punctured by a hazard in the car washAfter I pulled out of the car wash and into the covered car port to have my car vacuumed, the workers notified me that my tire was hissing air and tried to fill it upThe workers used an air gauge and noted the tire was losing air fastI am sure Gleam has the video on one of their high definition cameras of their workers trying to fill up my tire. Moreover and more importantly, regardless of whether or not the supervisor erroneously lead me over the barrier, the fact of the matter remains consistent - that Gleam should not have anything in their car wash or on their barriers that would puncture a tire. Gleam needs to take responsibility for their negligence and reimburse me for the cost of a new tire.
Sincerely,
*** ***

*** *** had a rock chip in his windshield prior to coming to the car washAs I told him (and his attorney) we don't put rock chips in windshields in our car wash (nor do any other car washes)Gravel on highways does thatHis chip did run into a crack, because that's what they often do when they
experience a temperature changeInsurance companies cover rock chips because they're so common and because they want their customers to catch them before they run into a crack

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:Once again, there was not a chipped windshield when I entered their car wash, but I did have a cracked windshield when I left the car washThere has been no evidence provided by Gleam that my windshield was damaged before entering their car washThere are no visible signs or warnings given by their employees that this type of damage can even happenWe were referred to their partner and attorney who was non-responsive about this issueClearly they are trying to ignore the damage they have caused to my carAccidents do happen, but the simple fact is that damage occurred when my car was entrusted in Gleam’s care and they have provided no actions to rectify that
Sincerely,
*** ***

Mr. [redacted] and his wife were unlimited members with us since our grand opening in September. They've been nothing but pleased with the service we've provided them. We even went above and beyond when they left their sunroof open while going through the car wash. We completely detailed the inside of...

their car, where the chemicals stained the interior, absolutely free. They even wrote kind online reviews expressing their gratitude for our actions and admiration for our operation. We often go out of our way to please our good customers, however, we can't pay an unsubstantiated claim like this. We have 32 high definition cameras throughout our property (6 of which captured the event in question). It plainly showed our lead supervisor guiding Mr. [redacted] in straight. The cameras also plainly show Mr. [redacted] going off the track by turning his steering wheel to the left. Our lead supervisor is clearly motioning him straight. I offered to show this video to them and they declined. As far as anybody being rude to anybody, that is completely false. I was nothing but professional. They just didn't want to hear that I wouldn't pay a claim that was clearly their fault. Also, I spoke with her on the phone, not Mr. [redacted]. -- [redacted]

Below are my responses (labeled “Reply”) to Gleam’s counter argument (the manager’s statements are bulleted), line by line.• There is a 2' isolated scratch on the back of this suv. There were no other vehicles scratched before or after this "incident". This industry gets a lot of "it had to have happened here, because it wasn't like this before."Reply: Immediately before driving to Gleam, I placed a gardening tool I borrowed from a neighbor in the trunk of my car. The back of my CRV was not scratched. I arrived at the car wash and my car was not damaged. I returned home half an hour later and it was damaged, by something sharp. I am incredibly careful with my car, and am keen to every door ding and scuff on it; I just paid it off and I take exceptional care of it.The only people touching my car were the people (and machines) at Gleam. If I did not think this was a valid issue, seeing as I am an honest individual, I would not have taken the time to contact Gleam management immediately and multiple times (via phone three times and then in person when I did not get a reply), research filing a police report, search out Gleam's co-owner, nor contact Revdex.com and the attorney general. I am sure the car wash industry indeed does receive unfounded claims, and I am not one of them.• That's why we have 32 cameras throughout our property and tunnel. I've been in this business for 14 years and have worked with hundreds of operators all over the country.Reply: The number of cameras in the tunnel is irrelevant because the angles captured and lighting are insufficient for damage to my car to be visible on Gleam’s footage. Gleam’s manager already knows that the lighting on the surveillance video does not permit the scratch to be seen on camera, as demonstrated by my friend and I on our own high definition camera. We tested with an iPhone camera, from less than a foot away and you cannot see the scratch on camera unless you are at a very specific angle. Gleam’s cameras are high and wide and aren’t able to see the scratch. It is near impossible to see unless the lighting is sufficient and the camera angle to the damage is precise. • I've never heard of or seen a scratch like this occur in a car wash tunnel like ours. When I mentioned a lure, it's kind of like an old wives tale. I've heard it before, but never witnessed it. Furthermore, there's no way something as light as a lure could make a deep scratch like that.Reply: Gleam’s manager contends at the end of his response (below) that there are "hundreds" of ways the car could have been damaged. However, the explanation the same manager gave my friend and I in person on the second visit was that the damage (across three panels and the rear windshield gasket) could have been caused by a fishing lure stuck in a mitter that dragged across the back of my car. “Wives tale” or not, that was provided as a valid explanation for potential damage on the second visit to Gleam. In addition, the body shop that provided me with the $972 repair estimate confirmed the damage is consistent with something sharp being dragged across the back of the car and stated this was likely caused by a sharp object stuck in the car wash equipment. • Whatever did it had to have been pretty heavy. And, if it was something like that, somebody would have to have removed it by hand.Reply: Anything heavy would likely have cause denting, which there is none of. The scratch is very deep and will cause the center panel to rust. The body is not dented, thereby indicating there was no contact with anything of substantial weight.• We have a manager communication log in our office. Nothing was documented and upon investigating nothing was discovered.Reply: This comment does not make sense to me, and I do not know about the communication log, nor do I care to. I do know that I made contact with Gleam on 5 separate occasions, and was dissuaded from being in touch with the manager until I arrived in person and offered to wait for him to come out of a meeting that he had been in “for hours”. If the “investigating” refers to the camera footage, see reply above.• The only resolution this customer will be satisfied with is me admitting it happened here. I can't do that, because it didn't. This customer is so sure it happened here that she can't fathom the potential of it happening anywhere else via hundreds of explanations.Reply: The statement above is an attempt at undermining my credibility, however it is not just my opinion that bolsters my claim. The opinion that this incident occurred at Gleam is shared by other credible professionals. I would like to reiterate that my friend who accompanied me to the car wash is a mechanical designer with expertise in similar technologies. In addition, the opinion of the body shop augments the argument that the damage in question likely occurred at Gleam car wash.It is entirely possible that a piece of debris could have been caught in the mitters (long shammy type cloth) as they have loops like a towel. This is a fine, precise two-foot scratch that runs vertically across the entire door panel. It runs from under the bend in the sheet metal, up the door, skips over the chrome logo and picks back up again. It continues all the way to the window gasket and slices through it. I don’t believe that there are “hundreds of ways” this could happen. It is a fine and precise scratch that could only be caused by something mechanical in nature.I am not the only person who has reported having issues with Gleam car wash. Gleam’s current manager has become notorious for his defensive approach to customer complaints, and multiple other people have reported having damage to their cars in reviews online. In these same instances of damage, other customers similarly reported that said manager would review video footage, only to put the blame back on the customer. Indeed, an acceptable resolution would include some sort of customer service which Gleam is apparently incapable of providing.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because of all of the aforementioned reasons I have already provided.  Next time I will heed online reviews before patronizing a new business and urge other consumers to do the same.  
Sincerely,
[redacted]

The mitter curtains are designed to clean the fronts and the tops of cars. There is some contact with the rear, but much more with the tops of cars. Zero scratches to the rest of the vehicle.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The owner is claiming that Gleam Car Wash did not act negligently.I specifically asked the Gleam Car Wash attendant about the roof rack being on the vehicle, and he assured me it was ok. He gave me further confidence in this by telling me that he retracted the roof cleaning portion. There was no mention of or caution for me to take additional measures regarding the rack. The attendant is the expert in the matter and should have guided me as a customer if there was a perceived problem.This is not a complaint about a broken accessory or aftermarket item. It is about a broken window on the vehicle because the machine at Gleam Car Wash acted in such a way that I could not have predicted.The owner's account of the ski rack portion becoming unlatched is very different from the original reason the GM gave me for why Gleam Car Wash is denying the claim. The most likely conclusion for this discrepancy is that the reasoning is changing to be in favor of Gleam Car Wash.Finally, I can show a very clear visual illustration of how the machine at Gleam Car Wash broke the window, so any claim (or insinuation of a claim) that this was a previous damage that I am trying to falsely attribute to the car wash can be negated.I maintain the position that Gleam Car Wash acted negligently in this incident and that Gleam Car Wash should resolve this issue with the appropriate repairs. Namely, I request that Gleam Car Wash pay the deductible that will be due for the repair to be made.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Please see below for our response to the above referenced complaint: 1. We have redundant measures we take to ensure roof racks aren't broken: a. We retract all top cleaning/drying equipment for all roof racks via an employee with a button on our computer. Sometimes they forget, so... b. We have...

taken the "human factor" out of the equation by taking the top cleaning/drying equipment out of commission by automatically bringing said equipment up at the top of the windshield so as not to rely on employees to remember to do so. 2. We have a disclaimer sign saying we can't be held responsible for after market parts, because car washes are built with "off the lot" vehicles in mind. This disclaimer even spells out roof racks. However, when we're negligent, we pay for after market items that are damaged. e.g. we generally pay for ana install electric antennas that get broken even though our signage clearly says to put them down before entering the wash, because we feel the attendant should notice them. There was no way the attendant could have noticed the unlatched ski rack in this case. 3. We reviewed several cameras (the GM and I both reviewed the footage). The ski rack portion of the roof rack came unlatched, because it wasn't locked down (easy for customer to overlook). 4. We have record of all of this gentleman's visits and nothing like this happened upon his previous visits. Furthermore, our computer records show the retract of the top brushes was completed (not that it needed to be, because of our redundant measures).   It's difficult to explain and convince a customer of no fault in a situation like this. The video shows the ski rack come up and when it got to the air dryers it doesn't look like there was an impact with the sunroof, because of the very large luggage rack the ski racks are mounted to, but I'll take his word for it that it happened the way he said it did and wasn't previously damaged. However, we can't take responsibility for something for which we weren't negligent. -- [redacted] Owner/Operator