Mr [redacted] came in to Volvo San Diego (VSD) on 11/14/at 5:PM requesting for mile service along with the concern on a "sluggish" start Approval of $was given at that time for the routine maintenance Client was called back on 11/15/at 12:with recommendations for engine battery Verbal approval was given at that time to adviser [redacted] for a total of $385.00.Mr [redacted] came back in a little under two months later on 01/05/at 7:am with a concern of something 'hanging" down Service Adviser [redacted] called back at 10:am on 1/05/to inform of broken sway bar due to impact He recommends replacement of link rods along with sway bar replacement and alignment totaling $Mr [redacted] gave verbal agreement during that phone call Volvo San Diego, at this time, will not be refunding Mr [redacted] his money for the services performed above.Thank-you,
11/25/VEHICLE CAME IN FOR CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND HESITATION UNDER ACCELERATION -TECH FOUND MIS-FIRE IN CYLINDER #AND #3., RECOMMENDS REPLACEMENT OF SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COIL CUSTOMER AGREED, TECH INSTALLED AND VEHICLE LEFT DEALERSHIP DRIVING NORMALLY VEHICLE DROVE FOR APPROXIMATELY MILES 12/16/VEHICLE CAME BACK INTO DEALERSHIP WITH CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AGAINNO OTHER CONCERN DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT DRIVEABILITY TECH FOUND SAME MIS-FIRE CODES FOR CYLINDER #AND #HE FURTHER DIAGNOSE THE VEHICLE BY PRESSURIZING ENGINE SYSTEM, FOUND COOLANT IN CYLINDER #THROUGH A BORE SCOPE VOLVO SAN DIEGO RECOMMENDS THE REMOVAL OF CYLINDER HEAD FOR HEADGASKET REPLACEMENT TO START WE ALSO MENTION COOLANT RESERVOIR BOTTLE CAP CRACKEDCAN CAUSE COOLANT LEAK- VOLVO SAN DIEGO REPLACED CAP AT NO CHARGE TO CLIENTNOTHING ELSE WAS DONE BECAUSE CLIENT DECLINED REPAIRS VOLVO SAN DIEGO WILL NOT REPAIR HER VEHICLE AND PAY FOR HER RENTAL VEHICLE AT THIS TIME IF SHE FEELS THAT THE DIAGNOSTICS WAS WRONG ON 11/25/2014, WE ARE WILLING TO GIVE HER BACK $FOR SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COILS ONLY
[redacted] ***:I have not received a copy of the report from The Bureau of Automotive Repair I was informed by Mr [redacted] ***, the representative that I would have to subpoena the report if we go to court and then they would send a copy of the report to the courts I was also, informed by Mr [redacted] that he spoke with someone at the company and they are not admitting to any wrong doing and they want to charge me an additional $for the negligence, shoddy and poor quality of work of their mechanic leaving parts just sitting under the hood unsecured endangering my life and the lives of others had this car stopped on me on the freeway instead of a side street.I won't pay this company another penny of my money because I have spent over $in a one month period and my car was running perfectly except that the check engine light came back on and they are trying to rip me off for more money due to their mechanic's inadequacy.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent and received by the If it come to the point of doing to court - I will subpoena the representative and report at that time.All I want is my car running right without the dashboard lighting up and the car not getting gas and stopping on me - which has never happened until I took it in in December and they touch it and it has been sitting every since with parts left loose and not secured endangering my life Plus, I still have to pay insurance and car tags for a car that not running after spending all that money and they want more money I don't ever have the enjoyment of my car because of their shoddy work.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent to them and I pray that I don't have to go to court that they have the decency to right the wrong the mechanic has done, but if we have to go to court, so be it
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [From the outset of my discussions with Mr***, the Certified Pre-Owned Manager for San Diego Volvo, the position of the dealership has been that my son installed the neon lighting system and was being dishonest with me about it Mr [redacted] told me that since I was not present when the car was delivered to my son, that my son must have purchased the system and had it installed because "kids like these lighting systems" I was then told by Mr [redacted] that his boss, Mr [redacted] , based on the information he was provided at the time by Mr***, had nothing else to add, and, therefore, refused to speak with me on the matter I've been told by Mr ***, and since by Mr [redacted] , that there was absolutely no possibility that the technicians at San Diego Volvo could have missed this neon lighting system, which, of course, was professionally installed to be invisible to the naked eyeThere is only one answer here Either the system was in the car when it was sold to me or it was not If it was not, then my son and I are engaging in treachery, lying to the dealership and to the Revdex.com to extort money from San Diego Volvo The other possibility is that a simple mistake was made in the certification process, the technician who certified the vehicle missed the system (which was intentionally installed to be hidden from view), and that the system was, indeed, in the vehicle when I purchased it On the matter of trying to place blame on me for not bringing the lighting system to the attention of the dealership before now, the question is why would I? I bought a warranty to cover everything that was on the car when I bought it There was nothing wrong with anything on the car, so there was no reason to ever bring anything having to do with the car to the attention of the dealership Saying that I bear some responsibility for bringing the existence of lights that were in the car to the attention of the seller makes no sense The lighting system came with the car The warranty came with the car Yet I am expected to contact the dealership and complain that there is a lighting system in the car, which I should rightfully assume is covered by the warranty? It is not a strong argumentThe further argument that the dealership should not be responsible for a problem occurring with the vehicle so long after the purchase is yet another attempt to escape financial responsibility The warranty (which I paid extra for) is in effect through December 31st, If the dealership does not want to honor their warranties for years, then they should not sell warranties that extend for that long.On another note, the responder from the dealership previously said that I was "working with" Mr [redacted] I am not "working with" anyone I have exchanged emails with Mr [redacted] which contain the exact same line of reasoning as what I have written here I have asked Mr [redacted] to do the right thing and to pay the repairs Obviously, for reasons of profitability of the business, the management of San Diego Volvo has taken the position that it is easier to place the blame on the customer than it is to accept that the possibility that their technician could have made a mistake San Diego Volvo first held the position that the neon lighting system definitely was not in the car when it was sold to me and, therefore, the only answer was that I was lying, or as Mr [redacted] so implicitly indicated, my son must be lying to me I have refuted these allegations and I continue to do so Now that I've involved the Revdex.com, the tact has changed to be that if the system were in the car when I bought it, then I somehow bore some responsibility to bring that to the attention of the dealership That's so bizarre that I can't believe it has even been offered as an argument.I wholly reject the dealership's recommendation that I accept a mediator in this matter I will continue, through all avenues availed to me, to pursue San Diego Volvo in this matter I will not accept a mediator and I will not accept a partial payment I suggest that San Diego Volvo accept the possibility that their employee merely made a mistake in missing the system during the certification process and to stand by the warranty they sold me, which is still in effect I will accept nothing less than 100% payment by San Diego Volvo for the repair costs due to damages done to my vehicle by the neon lighting system that was in the car when I bought it from them.] Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[San Diego Volvo has repeatedly argued that their inspection of the car prior to certification for a Pre-Owned Warranty should be proof enough that the neon lighting system was installed in the car after my purchase of the vehicle from them. They want to argue that my son put the system into the car and that he has lied to me about it. At the time that he accepted delivery of the car, he was in Riverside, CA, going to college and playing football. He did not have a job. He did not have any money of his own. All of the money that he had was used on food and gasoline, of which he barely had enough to get byI know this because I provided all of the money he hadAt no time did he have access to the means to pay for the purchase and installation of this lighting system. I do not take kindly to their suggestions that he has been dishonest with me, but at this point, it is obvious that they will do anything to avoid admitting that they made a mistake and that they bear 100% of the responsibility for the damage that this system has done to my car. Their argument that since we have never brought the car to them before, and that years is too long a time to have passed for them to bear responsibility is another attempt to put the blame on me. I bought a Certified Pre-Owned Warranty from them that came along with the car. That warranty covered everything in the car, at the time of the purchase. The fire from the neon lighting system just occurred. This is the first time that I have had reason to contact them in regards to anything to do with the car, as it was, when it was sold to meI've had no reason to bring it to them before nowWhat they are attempting to argue against is their responsibility. The warranty that they sold to me, some years ago, is good through December 31st, 2014. Therefore, they are responsible for anything that occurs before that date on anything that was in the car when we bought it, including the neon lighting system that has caught fire and caused this damage]
Regards,
*** ***
We have no record of the installation of an aftermarket part that would invalidate coverage by Volvo Cars of NA for any normally covered repairsWe are not accusing anybody of lying or providing misleadinginformation about this issueWe are simply stating that after years we cannot be held responsible for the failure of something on the car that we have no knowledgeHad this been brought to our attentionat the onset of the purchase, we would have taken the appropriate steps to replace the part in questionWe have never been informed of any issue with the car for the entire ownership periodAt this point, we believe it is in the best interest of the owner to agree to utilize the arbitration services of the Revdex.com so that the facts can be evaluated by an independent third party
Hello ***,Though Volvo San Diego does not admit any wrong doing to Mrs***'s vehicle, we are willing to refund her the amount of $in an effort to promote customer satisfaction Mrs*** can contact me at 858-279-ext *** when she is ready for the credit.All computer components, including the CEM, have a two year unlimited miles warranty from date of purchase from the factory if she has any problems Thank-you, *** ***
Attached are the pictures of the damage to client's sway bar and sub-frame which he is aware of Evidence of impact is there and client agreed to the repairs on 1/05/at 10:AM via phone call from adviser *** Same situation occurs with previous repair order for routine
maintenance Vehicle came into dealership at 5:PM on 11/14/ Along with routine maintenance, client's original concern written on repair order was "CUSTOMER STATES AND HAS NOTICED ENGINE SLUGGISH WHEN STARTING/CRANKING OVER - CAN BE AT TIMESCK AND ADVISE BATTERY CONDITION FUEL PRESSURE SENSOR???CAN BE INTERMITTENT- ADVISE ONLY" Client signed and agreed to concerns Client was called on 11/15/at 12:for approval on engine battery by *** Client approved and technician replaced engine battery on 11/15/by end of day.Volvo San Diego has reviewed the files and can not see any wrong doing to client's vehicle We will not offer any refund to client at this time. Thank-you, *** ***Service
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
February 12,
Hello ***,
I received the response from Thinh *** stating that the
Volvo San Diego dealer does not admit to any wrongdoing and willing to refund
my $in an effort to promote customer service
I reject that offer at this time for the following reasons:
Last week a representative from Bureau of Automotive Repair
Agency came out to inspect my car and I will wait for his report due to:
1.
Upon
inspection of my car we found all the parts on top of the engine were just
sitting there and nothing had screws in it and was not secured, which may have
caused more damage to my car and the reason the whole dashboard lit up and the
Power System Unit came on with the car shutting down, not getting any gas and
steering not working after I picked it upI had to have it towed home that
night when I got off work
2.
Not putting my car back together properly and
securing parts endangered my life and the car could have stopped while I was on
the freeway and could have been detrimental
I will wait for the inspector’s report to ensure there is no
further damage to my car due to not securing parts and inadequate mechanic and
service representative
Respectfully
yours,
Patricia
***
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This complaint involves much more than *** ***'s responseI contacted *** *** multiple times and explained that the customer service I received at Volvo San DIego was absolutely unacceptable and unsatisfactoryThe customer service on 11/14/was slow, rude, and deceptiveThe customer service representative was never clear to me about the actual cost of service that he planned to charge meOn 11/14/I clearly agreed to pay only $for 82,mile service and when the service was delayed and I was called to pick up my car the cost was $357.67, which I had not agreed toMore unsatisfactory service occurred on 01/09/when I was charged $and had not agreed to this cost after having to wait days for my car since they "ordered the wrong part"In summary, I had agreed to a $charge for 82,mile service on 11/14/and the total cost charged from 11/14/to 01/09/was $1272.74, which I had not agreed toAdditionally, none of the service representatives at Volvo San Diego were able to explain what services were being performed and what the exact charges wereThe sway bar break due to impact did not occur when the car was in my possession as I have not had any accidents or impacts since I bought the car newI am the only owner of that car and have accurate records of every service ever performed and there has never been an accidentRusting and breakage as explained by *** *** sound like inferior parts as a possible reason for this problemRegardless, I did not agree to pay $for the "services" that were unsatisfactorily performed on my car at Volvo San DiegoI explained to *** *** that I expect a full refund due to unsatisfactory, unacceptable, and deceptive customer service.
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[From the outset of my discussions with Mr***, the Certified Pre-Owned Manager for San Diego Volvo, the position of the dealership has been that my son installed the neon lighting system and was being dishonest with me about it. Mr*** told me that since I was not present when the car was delivered to my son, that my son must have purchased the system and had it installed because "kids like these lighting systems". I was then told by Mr*** that his boss, Mr*** ***, based on the information he was provided at the time by Mr***, had nothing else to add, and, therefore, refused to speak with me on the matter. I've been told by Mr ***, and since by Mr***, that there was absolutely no possibility that the technicians at San Diego Volvo could have missed this neon lighting system, which, of course, was professionally installed to be invisible to the naked eyeThere is only one answer here. Either the system was in the car when it was sold to me or it was not. If it was not, then my son and I are engaging in treachery, lying to the dealership and to the Revdex.com to extort money from San Diego Volvo. The other possibility is that a simple mistake was made in the certification process, the technician who certified the vehicle missed the system (which was intentionally installed to be hidden from view), and that the system was, indeed, in the vehicle when I purchased it. On the matter of trying to place blame on me for not bringing the lighting system to the attention of the dealership before now, the question is why would I? I bought a warranty to cover everything that was on the car when I bought it. There was nothing wrong with anything on the car, so there was no reason to ever bring anything having to do with the car to the attention of the dealership. Saying that I bear some responsibility for bringing the existence of lights that were in the car to the attention of the seller makes no sense. The lighting system came with the car. The warranty came with the car. Yet I am expected to contact the dealership and complain that there is a lighting system in the car, which I should rightfully assume is covered by the warranty? It is not a strong argumentThe further argument that the dealership should not be responsible for a problem occurring with the vehicle so long after the purchase is yet another attempt to escape financial responsibility. The warranty (which I paid extra for) is in effect through December 31st, 2014. If the dealership does not want to honor their warranties for years, then they should not sell warranties that extend for that long.On another note, the responder from the dealership previously said that I was "working with" Mr*** ***. I am not "working with" anyone. I have exchanged emails with Mr*** which contain the exact same line of reasoning as what I have written here. I have asked Mr*** to do the right thing and to pay the repairs. Obviously, for reasons of profitability of the business, the management of San Diego Volvo has taken the position that it is easier to place the blame on the customer than it is to accept that the possibility that their technician could have made a mistake. San Diego Volvo first held the position that the neon lighting system definitely was not in the car when it was sold to me and, therefore, the only answer was that I was lying, or as Mr*** so implicitly indicated, my son must be lying to me. I have refuted these allegations and I continue to do so. Now that I've involved the Revdex.com, the tact has changed to be that if the system were in the car when I bought it, then I somehow bore some responsibility to bring that to the attention of the dealership. That's so bizarre that I can't believe it has even been offered as an argument.I wholly reject the dealership's recommendation that I accept a mediator in this matter. I will continue, through all avenues availed to me, to pursue San Diego Volvo in this matter. I will not accept a mediator and I will not accept a partial payment. I suggest that San Diego Volvo accept the possibility that their employee merely made a mistake in missing the system during the certification process and to stand by the warranty they sold me, which is still in effect. I will accept nothing less than 100% payment by San Diego Volvo for the repair costs due to damages done to my vehicle by the neon lighting system that was in the car when I bought it from them.]
Regards,
*** ***
Mr*** came in to Volvo San Diego (VSD) on 11/14/at 5:PM requesting for mile service along with the concern on a "sluggish" start Approval of $was given at that time for the routine maintenance Client was called back on 11/15/at 12:with recommendations for engine battery Verbal approval was given at that time to adviser *** for a total of $385.00.Mr*** came back in a little under two months later on 01/05/at 7:am with a concern of something 'hanging" down Service Adviser *** called back at 10:am on 1/05/to inform of broken sway bar due to impact He recommends replacement of link rods along with sway bar replacement and alignment totaling $Mr*** gave verbal agreement during that phone call Volvo San Diego, at this time, will not be refunding Mr*** his money for the services performed above.Thank-you,
Mr*** is currently communicating with our General Sales Manager about his concernMr *** was communicating with Mr *** before he left our companyThere is a dispute as to who is responsible for damage caused by aftermarket equipment failureThe car was purchased from our
dealership nearly years agoThe car has never returned to our dealership at any time during the ownership periodWe have no record of the installation of the disputed equipment and we have no record of the car ever returning to our dealership for an issue with the after market equipment mentioned in the complaintMr *** insists that the disputed equipment was in the car when he purchased itOur records do not support that argumentHad we identified aftermarket equipment at the time of our reconditioning process, we would have removed the equipment according to the requirements of the Volvo certified used car programHad the equipment been brought to our attention after the purchase date in some reasonable time frame, we would have corrected the situationyears is not a reasonable time to ask us to take responsibility for a problem that we have no record or knowledgeAt this point the best solution may be to recommend the use of Revdex.com arbitration servicesClearly there issufficient disagreement to warrant outside objective review of the facts
11/25/VEHICLE CAME
IN FOR CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND HESITATION UNDER ACCELERATION
-TECH FOUND MIS-FIRE IN
CYLINDER #AND #3., RECOMMENDS REPLACEMENT
OF SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COIL
CUSTOMER AGREED, TECH
INSTALLED AND VEHICLE LEFT DEALERSHIP DRIVING NORMALLY VEHICLE DROVE FOR APPROXIMATELY MILES
12/16/VEHICLE CAME
BACK INTO DEALERSHIP WITH CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AGAINNO OTHER CONCERN DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT DRIVEABILITY
TECH FOUND SAME MIS-FIRE
CODES FOR CYLINDER #AND #HE FURTHER DIAGNOSE THE VEHICLE BY PRESSURIZING
ENGINE SYSTEM, FOUND COOLANT IN CYLINDER #THROUGH A BORE SCOPE.
VOLVO SAN DIEGO
RECOMMENDS THE REMOVAL OF CYLINDER HEAD FOR HEADGASKET REPLACEMENT TO START
WE ALSO MENTION COOLANT
RESERVOIR BOTTLE CAP CRACKEDCAN CAUSE COOLANT LEAK- VOLVO SAN DIEGO REPLACED
CAP AT NO CHARGE TO CLIENTNOTHING ELSE WAS DONE BECAUSE CLIENT DECLINED REPAIRS VOLVO SAN DIEGO WILL NOT REPAIR HER VEHICLE AND PAY FOR HER RENTAL VEHICLE AT THIS TIME IF SHE FEELS THAT THE DIAGNOSTICS WAS WRONG ON 11/25/2014, WE ARE WILLING TO GIVE HER BACK $FOR SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COILS ONLY
*** ***:I have not received a copy of the report from The Bureau of Automotive Repair. I was informed by Mr*** ***, the representative that I would have to subpoena the report if we go to court and then they would send a copy of the report to the courts. I was also, informed by Mr*** that he spoke with someone at the company and they are not admitting to any wrong doing and they want to charge me an additional $for the negligence, shoddy and poor quality of work of their mechanic leaving parts just sitting under the hood unsecured endangering my life and the lives of others had this car stopped on me on the freeway instead of a side street.I won't pay this company another penny of my money because I have spent over $in a one month period and my car was running perfectly except that the check engine light came back on and they are trying to rip me off for more money due to their mechanic's inadequacy.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent and received by the. If it come to the point of doing to court - I will subpoena the representative and report at that time.All I want is my car running right without the dashboard lighting up and the car not getting gas and stopping on me - which has never happened until I took it in in December and they touch it and it has been sitting every since with parts left loose and not secured endangering my life. Plus, I still have to pay insurance and car tags for a car that not running after spending all that money and they want more money. I don't ever have the enjoyment of my car because of their shoddy work.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent to them and I pray that I don't have to go to court that they have the decency to right the wrong the mechanic has done, but if we have to go to court, so be it
Mr [redacted] came in to Volvo San Diego (VSD) on 11/14/at 5:PM requesting for mile service along with the concern on a "sluggish" start Approval of $was given at that time for the routine maintenance Client was called back on 11/15/at 12:with recommendations for engine battery Verbal approval was given at that time to adviser [redacted] for a total of $385.00.Mr [redacted] came back in a little under two months later on 01/05/at 7:am with a concern of something 'hanging" down Service Adviser [redacted] called back at 10:am on 1/05/to inform of broken sway bar due to impact He recommends replacement of link rods along with sway bar replacement and alignment totaling $Mr [redacted] gave verbal agreement during that phone call Volvo San Diego, at this time, will not be refunding Mr [redacted] his money for the services performed above.Thank-you,
11/25/VEHICLE CAME IN FOR CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND HESITATION UNDER ACCELERATION -TECH FOUND MIS-FIRE IN CYLINDER #AND #3., RECOMMENDS REPLACEMENT OF SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COIL CUSTOMER AGREED, TECH INSTALLED AND VEHICLE LEFT DEALERSHIP DRIVING NORMALLY VEHICLE DROVE FOR APPROXIMATELY MILES 12/16/VEHICLE CAME BACK INTO DEALERSHIP WITH CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AGAINNO OTHER CONCERN DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT DRIVEABILITY TECH FOUND SAME MIS-FIRE CODES FOR CYLINDER #AND #HE FURTHER DIAGNOSE THE VEHICLE BY PRESSURIZING ENGINE SYSTEM, FOUND COOLANT IN CYLINDER #THROUGH A BORE SCOPE VOLVO SAN DIEGO RECOMMENDS THE REMOVAL OF CYLINDER HEAD FOR HEADGASKET REPLACEMENT TO START WE ALSO MENTION COOLANT RESERVOIR BOTTLE CAP CRACKEDCAN CAUSE COOLANT LEAK- VOLVO SAN DIEGO REPLACED CAP AT NO CHARGE TO CLIENTNOTHING ELSE WAS DONE BECAUSE CLIENT DECLINED REPAIRS VOLVO SAN DIEGO WILL NOT REPAIR HER VEHICLE AND PAY FOR HER RENTAL VEHICLE AT THIS TIME IF SHE FEELS THAT THE DIAGNOSTICS WAS WRONG ON 11/25/2014, WE ARE WILLING TO GIVE HER BACK $FOR SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COILS ONLY
[redacted] ***:I have not received a copy of the report from The Bureau of Automotive Repair I was informed by Mr [redacted] ***, the representative that I would have to subpoena the report if we go to court and then they would send a copy of the report to the courts I was also, informed by Mr [redacted] that he spoke with someone at the company and they are not admitting to any wrong doing and they want to charge me an additional $for the negligence, shoddy and poor quality of work of their mechanic leaving parts just sitting under the hood unsecured endangering my life and the lives of others had this car stopped on me on the freeway instead of a side street.I won't pay this company another penny of my money because I have spent over $in a one month period and my car was running perfectly except that the check engine light came back on and they are trying to rip me off for more money due to their mechanic's inadequacy.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent and received by the If it come to the point of doing to court - I will subpoena the representative and report at that time.All I want is my car running right without the dashboard lighting up and the car not getting gas and stopping on me - which has never happened until I took it in in December and they touch it and it has been sitting every since with parts left loose and not secured endangering my life Plus, I still have to pay insurance and car tags for a car that not running after spending all that money and they want more money I don't ever have the enjoyment of my car because of their shoddy work.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent to them and I pray that I don't have to go to court that they have the decency to right the wrong the mechanic has done, but if we have to go to court, so be it
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [From the outset of my discussions with Mr***, the Certified Pre-Owned Manager for San Diego Volvo, the position of the dealership has been that my son installed the neon lighting system and was being dishonest with me about it Mr [redacted] told me that since I was not present when the car was delivered to my son, that my son must have purchased the system and had it installed because "kids like these lighting systems" I was then told by Mr [redacted] that his boss, Mr [redacted] , based on the information he was provided at the time by Mr***, had nothing else to add, and, therefore, refused to speak with me on the matter I've been told by Mr ***, and since by Mr [redacted] , that there was absolutely no possibility that the technicians at San Diego Volvo could have missed this neon lighting system, which, of course, was professionally installed to be invisible to the naked eyeThere is only one answer here Either the system was in the car when it was sold to me or it was not If it was not, then my son and I are engaging in treachery, lying to the dealership and to the Revdex.com to extort money from San Diego Volvo The other possibility is that a simple mistake was made in the certification process, the technician who certified the vehicle missed the system (which was intentionally installed to be hidden from view), and that the system was, indeed, in the vehicle when I purchased it On the matter of trying to place blame on me for not bringing the lighting system to the attention of the dealership before now, the question is why would I? I bought a warranty to cover everything that was on the car when I bought it There was nothing wrong with anything on the car, so there was no reason to ever bring anything having to do with the car to the attention of the dealership Saying that I bear some responsibility for bringing the existence of lights that were in the car to the attention of the seller makes no sense The lighting system came with the car The warranty came with the car Yet I am expected to contact the dealership and complain that there is a lighting system in the car, which I should rightfully assume is covered by the warranty? It is not a strong argumentThe further argument that the dealership should not be responsible for a problem occurring with the vehicle so long after the purchase is yet another attempt to escape financial responsibility The warranty (which I paid extra for) is in effect through December 31st, If the dealership does not want to honor their warranties for years, then they should not sell warranties that extend for that long.On another note, the responder from the dealership previously said that I was "working with" Mr [redacted] I am not "working with" anyone I have exchanged emails with Mr [redacted] which contain the exact same line of reasoning as what I have written here I have asked Mr [redacted] to do the right thing and to pay the repairs Obviously, for reasons of profitability of the business, the management of San Diego Volvo has taken the position that it is easier to place the blame on the customer than it is to accept that the possibility that their technician could have made a mistake San Diego Volvo first held the position that the neon lighting system definitely was not in the car when it was sold to me and, therefore, the only answer was that I was lying, or as Mr [redacted] so implicitly indicated, my son must be lying to me I have refuted these allegations and I continue to do so Now that I've involved the Revdex.com, the tact has changed to be that if the system were in the car when I bought it, then I somehow bore some responsibility to bring that to the attention of the dealership That's so bizarre that I can't believe it has even been offered as an argument.I wholly reject the dealership's recommendation that I accept a mediator in this matter I will continue, through all avenues availed to me, to pursue San Diego Volvo in this matter I will not accept a mediator and I will not accept a partial payment I suggest that San Diego Volvo accept the possibility that their employee merely made a mistake in missing the system during the certification process and to stand by the warranty they sold me, which is still in effect I will accept nothing less than 100% payment by San Diego Volvo for the repair costs due to damages done to my vehicle by the neon lighting system that was in the car when I bought it from them.] Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[San Diego Volvo has repeatedly argued that their inspection of the car prior to certification for a Pre-Owned Warranty should be proof enough that the neon lighting system was installed in the car after my purchase of the vehicle from them. They want to argue that my son put the system into the car and that he has lied to me about it. At the time that he accepted delivery of the car, he was in Riverside, CA, going to college and playing football. He did not have a job. He did not have any money of his own. All of the money that he had was used on food and gasoline, of which he barely had enough to get byI know this because I provided all of the money he hadAt no time did he have access to the means to pay for the purchase and installation of this lighting system. I do not take kindly to their suggestions that he has been dishonest with me, but at this point, it is obvious that they will do anything to avoid admitting that they made a mistake and that they bear 100% of the responsibility for the damage that this system has done to my car. Their argument that since we have never brought the car to them before, and that years is too long a time to have passed for them to bear responsibility is another attempt to put the blame on me. I bought a Certified Pre-Owned Warranty from them that came along with the car. That warranty covered everything in the car, at the time of the purchase. The fire from the neon lighting system just occurred. This is the first time that I have had reason to contact them in regards to anything to do with the car, as it was, when it was sold to meI've had no reason to bring it to them before nowWhat they are attempting to argue against is their responsibility. The warranty that they sold to me, some years ago, is good through December 31st, 2014. Therefore, they are responsible for anything that occurs before that date on anything that was in the car when we bought it, including the neon lighting system that has caught fire and caused this damage]
Regards,
*** ***
We have no record of the installation of an aftermarket part that would invalidate coverage by Volvo Cars of NA for any normally covered repairsWe are not accusing anybody of lying or providing misleadinginformation about this issueWe are simply stating that after years we cannot be held responsible for the failure of something on the car that we have no knowledgeHad this been brought to our attentionat the onset of the purchase, we would have taken the appropriate steps to replace the part in questionWe have never been informed of any issue with the car for the entire ownership periodAt this point, we believe it is in the best interest of the owner to agree to utilize the arbitration services of the Revdex.com so that the facts can be evaluated by an independent third party
Hello ***,Though Volvo San Diego does not admit any wrong doing to Mrs***'s vehicle, we are willing to refund her the amount of $in an effort to promote customer satisfaction Mrs*** can contact me at 858-279-ext *** when she is ready for the credit.All computer components, including the CEM, have a two year unlimited miles warranty from date of purchase from the factory if she has any problems Thank-you, *** ***
Attached are the pictures of the damage to client's sway bar and sub-frame which he is aware of Evidence of impact is there and client agreed to the repairs on 1/05/at 10:AM via phone call from adviser *** Same situation occurs with previous repair order for routine
maintenance Vehicle came into dealership at 5:PM on 11/14/ Along with routine maintenance, client's original concern written on repair order was "CUSTOMER STATES AND HAS NOTICED ENGINE SLUGGISH WHEN STARTING/CRANKING OVER - CAN BE AT TIMESCK AND ADVISE BATTERY CONDITION FUEL PRESSURE SENSOR???CAN BE INTERMITTENT- ADVISE ONLY" Client signed and agreed to concerns Client was called on 11/15/at 12:for approval on engine battery by *** Client approved and technician replaced engine battery on 11/15/by end of day.Volvo San Diego has reviewed the files and can not see any wrong doing to client's vehicle We will not offer any refund to client at this time. Thank-you, *** ***Service
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
February 12,
Hello ***,
I received the response from Thinh *** stating that the
Volvo San Diego dealer does not admit to any wrongdoing and willing to refund
my $in an effort to promote customer service
I reject that offer at this time for the following reasons:
Last week a representative from Bureau of Automotive Repair
Agency came out to inspect my car and I will wait for his report due to:
1.
Upon
inspection of my car we found all the parts on top of the engine were just
sitting there and nothing had screws in it and was not secured, which may have
caused more damage to my car and the reason the whole dashboard lit up and the
Power System Unit came on with the car shutting down, not getting any gas and
steering not working after I picked it upI had to have it towed home that
night when I got off work
2.
Not putting my car back together properly and
securing parts endangered my life and the car could have stopped while I was on
the freeway and could have been detrimental
I will wait for the inspector’s report to ensure there is no
further damage to my car due to not securing parts and inadequate mechanic and
service representative
Respectfully
yours,
Patricia
***
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This complaint involves much more than *** ***'s responseI contacted *** *** multiple times and explained that the customer service I received at Volvo San DIego was absolutely unacceptable and unsatisfactoryThe customer service on 11/14/was slow, rude, and deceptiveThe customer service representative was never clear to me about the actual cost of service that he planned to charge meOn 11/14/I clearly agreed to pay only $for 82,mile service and when the service was delayed and I was called to pick up my car the cost was $357.67, which I had not agreed toMore unsatisfactory service occurred on 01/09/when I was charged $and had not agreed to this cost after having to wait days for my car since they "ordered the wrong part"In summary, I had agreed to a $charge for 82,mile service on 11/14/and the total cost charged from 11/14/to 01/09/was $1272.74, which I had not agreed toAdditionally, none of the service representatives at Volvo San Diego were able to explain what services were being performed and what the exact charges wereThe sway bar break due to impact did not occur when the car was in my possession as I have not had any accidents or impacts since I bought the car newI am the only owner of that car and have accurate records of every service ever performed and there has never been an accidentRusting and breakage as explained by *** *** sound like inferior parts as a possible reason for this problemRegardless, I did not agree to pay $for the "services" that were unsatisfactorily performed on my car at Volvo San DiegoI explained to *** *** that I expect a full refund due to unsatisfactory, unacceptable, and deceptive customer service.
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[From the outset of my discussions with Mr***, the Certified Pre-Owned Manager for San Diego Volvo, the position of the dealership has been that my son installed the neon lighting system and was being dishonest with me about it. Mr*** told me that since I was not present when the car was delivered to my son, that my son must have purchased the system and had it installed because "kids like these lighting systems". I was then told by Mr*** that his boss, Mr*** ***, based on the information he was provided at the time by Mr***, had nothing else to add, and, therefore, refused to speak with me on the matter. I've been told by Mr ***, and since by Mr***, that there was absolutely no possibility that the technicians at San Diego Volvo could have missed this neon lighting system, which, of course, was professionally installed to be invisible to the naked eyeThere is only one answer here. Either the system was in the car when it was sold to me or it was not. If it was not, then my son and I are engaging in treachery, lying to the dealership and to the Revdex.com to extort money from San Diego Volvo. The other possibility is that a simple mistake was made in the certification process, the technician who certified the vehicle missed the system (which was intentionally installed to be hidden from view), and that the system was, indeed, in the vehicle when I purchased it. On the matter of trying to place blame on me for not bringing the lighting system to the attention of the dealership before now, the question is why would I? I bought a warranty to cover everything that was on the car when I bought it. There was nothing wrong with anything on the car, so there was no reason to ever bring anything having to do with the car to the attention of the dealership. Saying that I bear some responsibility for bringing the existence of lights that were in the car to the attention of the seller makes no sense. The lighting system came with the car. The warranty came with the car. Yet I am expected to contact the dealership and complain that there is a lighting system in the car, which I should rightfully assume is covered by the warranty? It is not a strong argumentThe further argument that the dealership should not be responsible for a problem occurring with the vehicle so long after the purchase is yet another attempt to escape financial responsibility. The warranty (which I paid extra for) is in effect through December 31st, 2014. If the dealership does not want to honor their warranties for years, then they should not sell warranties that extend for that long.On another note, the responder from the dealership previously said that I was "working with" Mr*** ***. I am not "working with" anyone. I have exchanged emails with Mr*** which contain the exact same line of reasoning as what I have written here. I have asked Mr*** to do the right thing and to pay the repairs. Obviously, for reasons of profitability of the business, the management of San Diego Volvo has taken the position that it is easier to place the blame on the customer than it is to accept that the possibility that their technician could have made a mistake. San Diego Volvo first held the position that the neon lighting system definitely was not in the car when it was sold to me and, therefore, the only answer was that I was lying, or as Mr*** so implicitly indicated, my son must be lying to me. I have refuted these allegations and I continue to do so. Now that I've involved the Revdex.com, the tact has changed to be that if the system were in the car when I bought it, then I somehow bore some responsibility to bring that to the attention of the dealership. That's so bizarre that I can't believe it has even been offered as an argument.I wholly reject the dealership's recommendation that I accept a mediator in this matter. I will continue, through all avenues availed to me, to pursue San Diego Volvo in this matter. I will not accept a mediator and I will not accept a partial payment. I suggest that San Diego Volvo accept the possibility that their employee merely made a mistake in missing the system during the certification process and to stand by the warranty they sold me, which is still in effect. I will accept nothing less than 100% payment by San Diego Volvo for the repair costs due to damages done to my vehicle by the neon lighting system that was in the car when I bought it from them.]
Regards,
*** ***
Mr*** came in to Volvo San Diego (VSD) on 11/14/at 5:PM requesting for mile service along with the concern on a "sluggish" start Approval of $was given at that time for the routine maintenance Client was called back on 11/15/at 12:with recommendations for engine battery Verbal approval was given at that time to adviser *** for a total of $385.00.Mr*** came back in a little under two months later on 01/05/at 7:am with a concern of something 'hanging" down Service Adviser *** called back at 10:am on 1/05/to inform of broken sway bar due to impact He recommends replacement of link rods along with sway bar replacement and alignment totaling $Mr*** gave verbal agreement during that phone call Volvo San Diego, at this time, will not be refunding Mr*** his money for the services performed above.Thank-you,
Mr*** is currently communicating with our General Sales Manager about his concernMr *** was communicating with Mr *** before he left our companyThere is a dispute as to who is responsible for damage caused by aftermarket equipment failureThe car was purchased from our
dealership nearly years agoThe car has never returned to our dealership at any time during the ownership periodWe have no record of the installation of the disputed equipment and we have no record of the car ever returning to our dealership for an issue with the after market equipment mentioned in the complaintMr *** insists that the disputed equipment was in the car when he purchased itOur records do not support that argumentHad we identified aftermarket equipment at the time of our reconditioning process, we would have removed the equipment according to the requirements of the Volvo certified used car programHad the equipment been brought to our attention after the purchase date in some reasonable time frame, we would have corrected the situationyears is not a reasonable time to ask us to take responsibility for a problem that we have no record or knowledgeAt this point the best solution may be to recommend the use of Revdex.com arbitration servicesClearly there issufficient disagreement to warrant outside objective review of the facts
11/25/VEHICLE CAME
IN FOR CHECK ENGINE LIGHT AND HESITATION UNDER ACCELERATION
-TECH FOUND MIS-FIRE IN
CYLINDER #AND #3., RECOMMENDS REPLACEMENT
OF SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COIL
CUSTOMER AGREED, TECH
INSTALLED AND VEHICLE LEFT DEALERSHIP DRIVING NORMALLY VEHICLE DROVE FOR APPROXIMATELY MILES
12/16/VEHICLE CAME
BACK INTO DEALERSHIP WITH CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AGAINNO OTHER CONCERN DID NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT DRIVEABILITY
TECH FOUND SAME MIS-FIRE
CODES FOR CYLINDER #AND #HE FURTHER DIAGNOSE THE VEHICLE BY PRESSURIZING
ENGINE SYSTEM, FOUND COOLANT IN CYLINDER #THROUGH A BORE SCOPE.
VOLVO SAN DIEGO
RECOMMENDS THE REMOVAL OF CYLINDER HEAD FOR HEADGASKET REPLACEMENT TO START
WE ALSO MENTION COOLANT
RESERVOIR BOTTLE CAP CRACKEDCAN CAUSE COOLANT LEAK- VOLVO SAN DIEGO REPLACED
CAP AT NO CHARGE TO CLIENTNOTHING ELSE WAS DONE BECAUSE CLIENT DECLINED REPAIRS VOLVO SAN DIEGO WILL NOT REPAIR HER VEHICLE AND PAY FOR HER RENTAL VEHICLE AT THIS TIME IF SHE FEELS THAT THE DIAGNOSTICS WAS WRONG ON 11/25/2014, WE ARE WILLING TO GIVE HER BACK $FOR SPARK PLUGS AND IGNITION COILS ONLY
*** ***:I have not received a copy of the report from The Bureau of Automotive Repair. I was informed by Mr*** ***, the representative that I would have to subpoena the report if we go to court and then they would send a copy of the report to the courts. I was also, informed by Mr*** that he spoke with someone at the company and they are not admitting to any wrong doing and they want to charge me an additional $for the negligence, shoddy and poor quality of work of their mechanic leaving parts just sitting under the hood unsecured endangering my life and the lives of others had this car stopped on me on the freeway instead of a side street.I won't pay this company another penny of my money because I have spent over $in a one month period and my car was running perfectly except that the check engine light came back on and they are trying to rip me off for more money due to their mechanic's inadequacy.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent and received by the. If it come to the point of doing to court - I will subpoena the representative and report at that time.All I want is my car running right without the dashboard lighting up and the car not getting gas and stopping on me - which has never happened until I took it in in December and they touch it and it has been sitting every since with parts left loose and not secured endangering my life. Plus, I still have to pay insurance and car tags for a car that not running after spending all that money and they want more money. I don't ever have the enjoyment of my car because of their shoddy work.Attached is a copy of the Demand Letter sent to them and I pray that I don't have to go to court that they have the decency to right the wrong the mechanic has done, but if we have to go to court, so be it