Response:In response to the complaint filed, we would agree to pay half of the bill for the $954.11. [redacted] had told the customer he would pay the change fees for the IRP to be put on another truck and believed that would be a couple hundred dollar. The bill we received for the $954.11 is...
the full fees for IRP on the truck. We feel if the customer had waited to process the IRP fees on the first truck, the change would not have been needed. There was no way for us to have known the first truck did not qualify for the grant until the air district told us. We should be the only ones held responsible to pay the $954.11 as it was not our mistake, the engine was checked and found to be eligible. The air district changed their requirements and stated because it was not the original engine in the truck that they no longer accept that situation, which they had previously accepted. We followed the correct processes as we had done in the past and if you call the Air district they will confirm that it is the customers responsibility to apply for the grant and verify that eligible truck, but we handled the application and process for the customer because they were unaware of the processes and we did not charge any fees for doing so. We should not get penalized for helping them get free money that they didn’t know how to apply for. Thanks,[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I do not approve of the fact that you would accept only to take half responsibility, I am asking for complete ownership from youof the mistake you committed. It is not right that we take even half of the payment due because this was not our mistake at all. If he remembers correctly, I made the process to register the truck only per [redacted]'s direct request. He had also asked us to get the insurance for the truck and that is why the dealer should have made sure that the truck qualified for the program before any paper work was completed or submitted to finalize the sale of the truck, which again, [redacted] had guaranteed that the truck qualified under the program, therefore we'd expect no future problems. The CDL dealer was in contact with the Air District grant program was the one to find out and inform us that in fact that specific truck did not qualify because it didn't meet those requirements for the grant program. [redacted] delivered incorrect information to us about the truck, giving us the go for the purchase. That is not correct that you only want to take responsibility for only half the payment due now as a result of [redacted]'s misleading information. After making that mistake whether purposely or not, i'd like to see that your business chose to handle this issue more professionally, so that we can resolve this, have the payment made in full, and move on. The district never changed their policies, they were in contact with the dealer all throughout, waiting to receive all the information about the truck until they found out that the truck didn't qualify because it didn't have it's original engine. By that time, [redacted] had already confirmed that he was sure and guaranteed the truck was fine,and asked us to complete the process on IRP and the insurance, when instead he as a man of business shouldn't have guaranteed anything to his customers prior to being sure himself and especially before he heard back from the district to reassure that this purchase was completely ok for either parties involved. A professional business is not usually based upon making deceitful statements nor guesses of their product to sell to consumers. I just don't understand where you concluded that I was the one to apply for anything on my own without [redacted]'s urging request for us to do so. That is not true, we believed this business man knew what he was doing, just like he said. So again, my response to you is that I'd decline to your willingness only to take 50% of the payment due. I would like to see to it that your business desire to resolve this by taking the full responsibility. We are individuals whom just do not have those means to throw money away like this, the way [redacted] caused to happen. I think that if you would take these facts wholeheartedly, we could come to resolve. Thank you.
I am rejecting this response because:I still find it difficult to believe that the DPF needs to be cleaned again after 2000 miles, and when we first meet you said they had already performed the service, upon inspection the fuel filter showed signs of being wrenched on with what looked like channel locks. [redacted] then stated that it was scheduled for the service. It may be petty but it's the truth you did not grease the 5th wheel and the a/c service was also a crock.... You added freon to get off the lot. The EGR you replaced with out replacing the gaskets. Your claims to honor or your word is as useless as the paper they are on. The repairs being made validate that.
Response:In response to the complaint filed, we would agree to pay half of the bill for the $954.11. [redacted] had told the customer he would pay the change fees for the IRP to be put on another truck and believed that would be a couple hundred dollar. The bill we received for the $954.11 is...
the full fees for IRP on the truck. We feel if the customer had waited to process the IRP fees on the first truck, the change would not have been needed. There was no way for us to have known the first truck did not qualify for the grant until the air district told us. We should be the only ones held responsible to pay the $954.11 as it was not our mistake, the engine was checked and found to be eligible. The air district changed their requirements and stated because it was not the original engine in the truck that they no longer accept that situation, which they had previously accepted. We followed the correct processes as we had done in the past and if you call the Air district they will confirm that it is the customers responsibility to apply for the grant and verify that eligible truck, but we handled the application and process for the customer because they were unaware of the processes and we did not charge any fees for doing so. We should not get penalized for helping them get free money that they didn’t know how to apply for. Thanks,[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I do not approve of the fact that you would accept only to take half responsibility, I am asking for complete ownership from youof the mistake you committed. It is not right that we take even half of the payment due because this was not our mistake at all. If he remembers correctly, I made the process to register the truck only per [redacted]'s direct request. He had also asked us to get the insurance for the truck and that is why the dealer should have made sure that the truck qualified for the program before any paper work was completed or submitted to finalize the sale of the truck, which again, [redacted] had guaranteed that the truck qualified under the program, therefore we'd expect no future problems. The CDL dealer was in contact with the Air District grant program was the one to find out and inform us that in fact that specific truck did not qualify because it didn't meet those requirements for the grant program. [redacted] delivered incorrect information to us about the truck, giving us the go for the purchase. That is not correct that you only want to take responsibility for only half the payment due now as a result of [redacted]'s misleading information. After making that mistake whether purposely or not, i'd like to see that your business chose to handle this issue more professionally, so that we can resolve this, have the payment made in full, and move on. The district never changed their policies, they were in contact with the dealer all throughout, waiting to receive all the information about the truck until they found out that the truck didn't qualify because it didn't have it's original engine. By that time, [redacted] had already confirmed that he was sure and guaranteed the truck was fine,and asked us to complete the process on IRP and the insurance, when instead he as a man of business shouldn't have guaranteed anything to his customers prior to being sure himself and especially before he heard back from the district to reassure that this purchase was completely ok for either parties involved. A professional business is not usually based upon making deceitful statements nor guesses of their product to sell to consumers. I just don't understand where you concluded that I was the one to apply for anything on my own without [redacted]'s urging request for us to do so. That is not true, we believed this business man knew what he was doing, just like he said. So again, my response to you is that I'd decline to your willingness only to take 50% of the payment due. I would like to see to it that your business desire to resolve this by taking the full responsibility. We are individuals whom just do not have those means to throw money away like this, the way [redacted] caused to happen. I think that if you would take these facts wholeheartedly, we could come to resolve. Thank you.
I am rejecting this response because:I still find it difficult to believe that the DPF needs to be cleaned again after 2000 miles, and when we first meet you said they had already performed the service, upon inspection the fuel filter showed signs of being wrenched on with what looked like channel locks. [redacted] then stated that it was scheduled for the service. It may be petty but it's the truth you did not grease the 5th wheel and the a/c service was also a crock.... You added freon to get off the lot. The EGR you replaced with out replacing the gaskets. Your claims to honor or your word is as useless as the paper they are on. The repairs being made validate that.