Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/10/28) */ Ms [redacted] Our records indicate that Ms [redacted] has already received two oil changes and tire rotations at no chargeUnder the certified program, she would be entitled to a maximum total of four oil changes and tire rotations within a twenty-four month period and subject to mileage restrictionsWhile I was not a party to Ms [redacted] ' purchase, and the employees she worked with at the time are no longer employees of Reliable Chevrolet, I will honor her request for four free oil changes and tire rotations As I mentioned earlier, Ms [redacted] has received two oil changes and tire rotations at no cost to her and, when she brought the matter up during her last visit, she was provided a card which may be exchanged for a thirdI will be sending out an additional card which can be exchanged for one free oil change and tire rotationEach of the cards, to include the one she has already received and the one I will be sending, may be used only one time each; but, unlike the restrictions under the certified program, these cards will not have a mileage or time restriction Though it is not possible for the dealership to certify her vehicle after the time of purchase, she will receive the benefit of the free regular maintenance program through the one card she already has received along with the one additional I will be sendingThe free services she has already received combined with the free services she will receive in exchange for the cards she will have, added to the service contract she has for her vehicle, will far and above exceed the provisions under the conventional certified program Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me [redacted] Customer Services Reliable Chevrolet, Inc
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/09/16) */ The customer leased a 2012 New Chevrolet Volt in September of 2012 for 27 months. They purchased a mainenance plan to pay for scheduled services throughout their lease. Customer brought the car in for a first oil change and tire rotation on 14... January 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer brought the car in on 08 April 2013 because of a tire losing air. Technician diagnosed the tire with a hole in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought the car in for an oil change and tire rotation on 12 June 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer had car towed in on 21 august 2013 with a flat tire. Tire was diagnosed with a nail in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought car in on 29 March 2014 for an oil change and tire rotation paid for by their contract. While at the dealership they asked for an estimate to repair the back of the front passenger seat as it had been kicked or pushed in and also to check on the front bumper facia as it had been ripped off when coming in contact with something. Customer brought car in on 15 may 2014 because the windshield wipers were streaking. Their maintenance plan replaced the worn wipers. Customer was contacted on 09 September 2014 in order to advise them of their options with the pending lease termination of their vehicle. Customer stated they wanted a truck and would come into the store on Tuesday 16 September 2014. Customer was contacted on 12 September 2014 to confirm the appointment. Delaership was advised that customer did not want another vehicle, that customer had already purchased another vehicle and that they wanted GM to pay their remaining lease payments as "goodwill" so they didn't have to make multiple payments. Customer was informed that GM only pays leases off early when you purchase another GM vehicle. Customer became very upset and told dealership that they had never said they wanted another vehicle. Dealership apologized and ended the phone call. Both of the phone calls first asking for a truck and then denying asking are recorded. We feel it is important to note that Reliable Chevrolet routinely calls random customers after their service visit to ensure they were 100% completely satisfied. This customer was actually contacted twice. The first call was on 27 June 2013, after the first flat tire was replaced and customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. The second time was on 10 April 2014 and once again customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. Customer purchased a second car from a different dealership in June of 2014. It is only after the strain of multiple payments begins that customer even brings up isues with the dealership. In conclusion, the customer's entire complaint is with the quality of the tires. This would then fall under the tire manufacturer for review and not affect the Dealership in anyway. Product liability for quality and workmanship stays with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Customer states that Dealership "knowingly" sold her a car with "faulty tires" The two tires failed because of physical damage well after the customer had purchased the vehicle. Reliable Chevrolet denies any financial responsibility or product liability on customers vehicle. Thank You Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/09/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Thank you for your response, but some of your details are factually inaccurate. The first tire had a hole that was not due to my negligence or normal wear so must have been faulty in some way. I was never told a nail was found in the second tire. The tire burst at the sides and I have pictures proving this. The front bumper facia is an optional piece that lowers the clearance of the car do reduce drag and increase gas mileage. This piece I believe is a fault in the design of the vehicle. It reduces the clearance of the car so much that any sort of an incline will scrape this piece. I was contacted multiple times after receiving this vehicle to the point of harassment. We were coerced into saying we were satisfied despite almost leaving without the vehicle at the time of purchase. We were led to believe that if we had responded that we were dissatisfied it would reflect as such in the salesman's pay. I would also love to hear the recording where I discussed wanting a truck because my husband and I have never wanted a truck and do not ever wish to have a truck. We bought a Mitsubishi vehicle because we were replacing completely different vehicle than the one that we had purchased from this company. I calmly expressed this to the manager who responded at length about how any attempt at customer satisfaction would be futile as I would not be a returning customer. The implication that any of these issues arose do to my negligence or were manufactured due to my inability to pay are completely unfounded. We have made every payment on time or early. The only damage I will admit is my fault is the damage to the back of the seat. This damage is a result of using my car for work in which a disabled client damaged the seat. Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2014/09/19) */ Without getting into a he said she said situation with this customer I would like to point out that the issues the customer brings forth are on the quality of the product purchased and not the design of the product purchased. Liability for these issues rests with the manufacturer and not the retailer. This customer should contact General Motors directly to seek any compensation for what she inaccurately believes to be a defect on the original product. This customer filled out several surveys from the manufacturer siting completely satisfied, not just the initial sales survey but several service surveys as well. We bring this up only to point out that this is obviously something that only now the customer is complaining about because their lease term is expiring and they purchased a non GM product and will now be responsible for disposition fees on the lease as well as the final payments. Throughout the entire history of the relationship between customer and business there is no mention of any problems, notes of complaints, etc. We ask that the BBB close this case as the customers issues, that we still adamantly deny, are issues with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2014/09/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I believe I have stated all issues and possible resolutions I can see for this situation. I feel the company should be responsible for the product they sell and could seek the help from GM themselves if they feel it is necessary. Your incorrect assumptions about the consumer are irrelevant and unprofessional. They do not offer any solution to this problem. I am seeking the help of the BBB because my complaints have been consistently brushed aside by Reliable and I would hope the BBB would see this. I have been very upfront during repairs about being upset and confused. I gave positive responses about the repair dept because their service was courteous and fast. They had nothing to do with the original product and are not included in my complaint.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/08) */
Ms***
I do not dispute the inconvenience caused to Ms*** as a result of the recall on her Chevrolet MalibuEqually, I regret and am sorry that she had to contend with the delays in getting the
parts for the recall repair in from General MotorsThe simple fact is, we knew as much about the recall as Ms*** knewThis is to say that we did not know when the parts would be availableWe explained to Ms*** back in June that we did not know when the parts would be available, but that once they arrived and the repair was completed, she would be contacted
To respond to her comments that she did not receive follow up calls, I have no doubt she is correctUnder circumstances, she would have received scheduled calls; the fact is, however, that this summer, and now into autumn, has been anything but for General Motors franchises in light of the numerous recallsBecause of our size, Reliable Chevrolet has been responding to, and repairing, thousands of recall customers' vehiclesThese requests have been in addition to our day-to-day service and maintenance businessThe dealership has increased its staff to better serve all of our customers; and yet, we simply have not had the free time in the day to perform our, otherwise, follow up calls to our customers who had, or have, vehicles in our shop in order to provide progress updatesGranted, in the case of Ms***, had we been in a position to have time to make a follow up call to her on scheduled basis, it would have been only to tell her time after time that we still didn't have the parts for the recall repair
In Ms***'s complaint she makes note of the condition of her vehicle at the time it was returned to herShe stated that the paint on her hood was deterioratingThe facts are that just because she didn't know that, prior to her ownership, that her vehicle had been in an accident which required repainting the hood does not make Reliable Chevrolet liable to any degrading of the paint that may have occurred while the vehicle was on our lotWe are required to maintain a reasonable degree of care for a customer's vehicle while in our possession which we didConcerning her battery, since the vehicle only sat back in the enclosed and monitored area of our lot until the parts were available suggests that the battery must have been in poor condition when we first received the vehicleFinally, rust on vehicle rotors is very common at dealerships and quickly comes off after using the brakes for a few city blocksIf there are other issues with Ms***'s brakes, then those issues were present prior to her bringing her vehicle to the dealership"Lot rust," as it is referred to, does not damage the rotors or the brake pads
Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience Ms*** encountered as a result of having a recall done on her MalibuI am glad, as I am sure she also is, that General Motors provided her with a current model year loaner vehicle for the period of time that her car was with usAs a gesture of goodwill, I will send her a check for *** to cover half the cost of the battery that needed to be replaced
Respectfully,
-***
*** ***, Customer Services, Reliable Chevrolet
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/28) */
Ms. [redacted]
Our records indicate that Ms. [redacted] has already received two oil changes and tire rotations at no charge. Under the certified program, she would be entitled to a maximum total of four oil changes and...
tire rotations within a twenty-four month period and subject to mileage restrictions. While I was not a party to Ms. [redacted]' purchase, and the employees she worked with at the time are no longer employees of Reliable Chevrolet, I will honor her request for four free oil changes and tire rotations.
As I mentioned earlier, Ms. [redacted] has received two oil changes and tire rotations at no cost to her and, when she brought the matter up during her last visit, she was provided a card which may be exchanged for a third. I will be sending out an additional card which can be exchanged for one free oil change and tire rotation. Each of the cards, to include the one she has already received and the one I will be sending, may be used only one time each; but, unlike the restrictions under the certified program, these cards will not have a mileage or time restriction.
Though it is not possible for the dealership to certify her vehicle after the time of purchase, she will receive the benefit of the free regular maintenance program through the one card she already has received along with the one additional I will be sending. The free services she has already received combined with the free services she will receive in exchange for the cards she will have, added to the service contract she has for her vehicle, will far and above exceed the provisions under the conventional certified program.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
[redacted]
Customer Services
Reliable Chevrolet, Inc.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/09/16) */
The customer leased a 2012 New Chevrolet Volt in September of 2012 for 27 months. They purchased a mainenance plan to pay for scheduled services throughout their lease. Customer brought the car in for a first oil change and tire rotation on 14...
January 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer brought the car in on 08 April 2013 because of a tire losing air. Technician diagnosed the tire with a hole in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought the car in for an oil change and tire rotation on 12 June 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer had car towed in on 21 august 2013 with a flat tire. Tire was diagnosed with a nail in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought car in on 29 March 2014 for an oil change and tire rotation paid for by their contract. While at the dealership they asked for an estimate to repair the back of the front passenger seat as it had been kicked or pushed in and also to check on the front bumper facia as it had been ripped off when coming in contact with something. Customer brought car in on 15 may 2014 because the windshield wipers were streaking. Their maintenance plan replaced the worn wipers. Customer was contacted on 09 September 2014 in order to advise them of their options with the pending lease termination of their vehicle. Customer stated they wanted a truck and would come into the store on Tuesday 16 September 2014. Customer was contacted on 12 September 2014 to confirm the appointment. Delaership was advised that customer did not want another vehicle, that customer had already purchased another vehicle and that they wanted GM to pay their remaining lease payments as "goodwill" so they didn't have to make multiple payments. Customer was informed that GM only pays leases off early when you purchase another GM vehicle. Customer became very upset and told dealership that they had never said they wanted another vehicle. Dealership apologized and ended the phone call. Both of the phone calls first asking for a truck and then denying asking are recorded. We feel it is important to note that Reliable Chevrolet routinely calls random customers after their service visit to ensure they were 100% completely satisfied. This customer was actually contacted twice. The first call was on 27 June 2013, after the first flat tire was replaced and customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. The second time was on 10 April 2014 and once again customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. Customer purchased a second car from a different dealership in June of 2014. It is only after the strain of multiple payments begins that customer even brings up isues with the dealership. In conclusion, the customer's entire complaint is with the quality of the tires. This would then fall under the tire manufacturer for review and not affect the Dealership in anyway. Product liability for quality and workmanship stays with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Customer states that Dealership "knowingly" sold her a car with "faulty tires" The two tires failed because of physical damage well after the customer had purchased the vehicle. Reliable Chevrolet denies any financial responsibility or product liability on customers vehicle. Thank You
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/09/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Thank you for your response, but some of your details are factually inaccurate. The first tire had a hole that was not due to my negligence or normal wear so must have been faulty in some way. I was never told a nail was found in the second tire. The tire burst at the sides and I have pictures proving this. The front bumper facia is an optional piece that lowers the clearance of the car do reduce drag and increase gas mileage. This piece I believe is a fault in the design of the vehicle. It reduces the clearance of the car so much that any sort of an incline will scrape this piece. I was contacted multiple times after receiving this vehicle to the point of harassment. We were coerced into saying we were satisfied despite almost leaving without the vehicle at the time of purchase. We were led to believe that if we had responded that we were dissatisfied it would reflect as such in the salesman's pay. I would also love to hear the recording where I discussed wanting a truck because my husband and I have never wanted a truck and do not ever wish to have a truck. We bought a Mitsubishi vehicle because we were replacing completely different vehicle than the one that we had purchased from this company. I calmly expressed this to the manager who responded at length about how any attempt at customer satisfaction would be futile as I would not be a returning customer. The implication that any of these issues arose do to my negligence or were manufactured due to my inability to pay are completely unfounded. We have made every payment on time or early. The only damage I will admit is my fault is the damage to the back of the seat. This damage is a result of using my car for work in which a disabled client damaged the seat.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2014/09/19) */
Without getting into a he said she said situation with this customer I would like to point out that the issues the customer brings forth are on the quality of the product purchased and not the design of the product purchased. Liability for these issues rests with the manufacturer and not the retailer. This customer should contact General Motors directly to seek any compensation for what she inaccurately believes to be a defect on the original product. This customer filled out several surveys from the manufacturer siting completely satisfied, not just the initial sales survey but several service surveys as well. We bring this up only to point out that this is obviously something that only now the customer is complaining about because their lease term is expiring and they purchased a non GM product and will now be responsible for disposition fees on the lease as well as the final payments. Throughout the entire history of the relationship between customer and business there is no mention of any problems, notes of complaints, etc. We ask that the Revdex.com close this case as the customers issues, that we still adamantly deny, are issues with the manufacturer and not the retailer.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2014/09/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I believe I have stated all issues and possible resolutions I can see for this situation. I feel the company should be responsible for the product they sell and could seek the help from GM themselves if they feel it is necessary. Your incorrect assumptions about the consumer are irrelevant and unprofessional. They do not offer any solution to this problem. I am seeking the help of the Revdex.com because my complaints have been consistently brushed aside by Reliable and I would hope the Revdex.com would see this. I have been very upfront during repairs about being upset and confused. I gave positive responses about the repair dept because their service was courteous and fast. They had nothing to do with the original product and are not included in my complaint.
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/10/28) */ Ms [redacted] Our records indicate that Ms [redacted] has already received two oil changes and tire rotations at no chargeUnder the certified program, she would be entitled to a maximum total of four oil changes and tire rotations within a twenty-four month period and subject to mileage restrictionsWhile I was not a party to Ms [redacted] ' purchase, and the employees she worked with at the time are no longer employees of Reliable Chevrolet, I will honor her request for four free oil changes and tire rotations As I mentioned earlier, Ms [redacted] has received two oil changes and tire rotations at no cost to her and, when she brought the matter up during her last visit, she was provided a card which may be exchanged for a thirdI will be sending out an additional card which can be exchanged for one free oil change and tire rotationEach of the cards, to include the one she has already received and the one I will be sending, may be used only one time each; but, unlike the restrictions under the certified program, these cards will not have a mileage or time restriction Though it is not possible for the dealership to certify her vehicle after the time of purchase, she will receive the benefit of the free regular maintenance program through the one card she already has received along with the one additional I will be sendingThe free services she has already received combined with the free services she will receive in exchange for the cards she will have, added to the service contract she has for her vehicle, will far and above exceed the provisions under the conventional certified program Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me [redacted] Customer Services Reliable Chevrolet, Inc
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/09/16) */ The customer leased a 2012 New Chevrolet Volt in September of 2012 for 27 months. They purchased a mainenance plan to pay for scheduled services throughout their lease. Customer brought the car in for a first oil change and tire rotation on 14... January 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer brought the car in on 08 April 2013 because of a tire losing air. Technician diagnosed the tire with a hole in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought the car in for an oil change and tire rotation on 12 June 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer had car towed in on 21 august 2013 with a flat tire. Tire was diagnosed with a nail in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought car in on 29 March 2014 for an oil change and tire rotation paid for by their contract. While at the dealership they asked for an estimate to repair the back of the front passenger seat as it had been kicked or pushed in and also to check on the front bumper facia as it had been ripped off when coming in contact with something. Customer brought car in on 15 may 2014 because the windshield wipers were streaking. Their maintenance plan replaced the worn wipers. Customer was contacted on 09 September 2014 in order to advise them of their options with the pending lease termination of their vehicle. Customer stated they wanted a truck and would come into the store on Tuesday 16 September 2014. Customer was contacted on 12 September 2014 to confirm the appointment. Delaership was advised that customer did not want another vehicle, that customer had already purchased another vehicle and that they wanted GM to pay their remaining lease payments as "goodwill" so they didn't have to make multiple payments. Customer was informed that GM only pays leases off early when you purchase another GM vehicle. Customer became very upset and told dealership that they had never said they wanted another vehicle. Dealership apologized and ended the phone call. Both of the phone calls first asking for a truck and then denying asking are recorded. We feel it is important to note that Reliable Chevrolet routinely calls random customers after their service visit to ensure they were 100% completely satisfied. This customer was actually contacted twice. The first call was on 27 June 2013, after the first flat tire was replaced and customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. The second time was on 10 April 2014 and once again customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. Customer purchased a second car from a different dealership in June of 2014. It is only after the strain of multiple payments begins that customer even brings up isues with the dealership. In conclusion, the customer's entire complaint is with the quality of the tires. This would then fall under the tire manufacturer for review and not affect the Dealership in anyway. Product liability for quality and workmanship stays with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Customer states that Dealership "knowingly" sold her a car with "faulty tires" The two tires failed because of physical damage well after the customer had purchased the vehicle. Reliable Chevrolet denies any financial responsibility or product liability on customers vehicle. Thank You Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/09/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Thank you for your response, but some of your details are factually inaccurate. The first tire had a hole that was not due to my negligence or normal wear so must have been faulty in some way. I was never told a nail was found in the second tire. The tire burst at the sides and I have pictures proving this. The front bumper facia is an optional piece that lowers the clearance of the car do reduce drag and increase gas mileage. This piece I believe is a fault in the design of the vehicle. It reduces the clearance of the car so much that any sort of an incline will scrape this piece. I was contacted multiple times after receiving this vehicle to the point of harassment. We were coerced into saying we were satisfied despite almost leaving without the vehicle at the time of purchase. We were led to believe that if we had responded that we were dissatisfied it would reflect as such in the salesman's pay. I would also love to hear the recording where I discussed wanting a truck because my husband and I have never wanted a truck and do not ever wish to have a truck. We bought a Mitsubishi vehicle because we were replacing completely different vehicle than the one that we had purchased from this company. I calmly expressed this to the manager who responded at length about how any attempt at customer satisfaction would be futile as I would not be a returning customer. The implication that any of these issues arose do to my negligence or were manufactured due to my inability to pay are completely unfounded. We have made every payment on time or early. The only damage I will admit is my fault is the damage to the back of the seat. This damage is a result of using my car for work in which a disabled client damaged the seat. Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2014/09/19) */ Without getting into a he said she said situation with this customer I would like to point out that the issues the customer brings forth are on the quality of the product purchased and not the design of the product purchased. Liability for these issues rests with the manufacturer and not the retailer. This customer should contact General Motors directly to seek any compensation for what she inaccurately believes to be a defect on the original product. This customer filled out several surveys from the manufacturer siting completely satisfied, not just the initial sales survey but several service surveys as well. We bring this up only to point out that this is obviously something that only now the customer is complaining about because their lease term is expiring and they purchased a non GM product and will now be responsible for disposition fees on the lease as well as the final payments. Throughout the entire history of the relationship between customer and business there is no mention of any problems, notes of complaints, etc. We ask that the BBB close this case as the customers issues, that we still adamantly deny, are issues with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2014/09/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I believe I have stated all issues and possible resolutions I can see for this situation. I feel the company should be responsible for the product they sell and could seek the help from GM themselves if they feel it is necessary. Your incorrect assumptions about the consumer are irrelevant and unprofessional. They do not offer any solution to this problem. I am seeking the help of the BBB because my complaints have been consistently brushed aside by Reliable and I would hope the BBB would see this. I have been very upfront during repairs about being upset and confused. I gave positive responses about the repair dept because their service was courteous and fast. They had nothing to do with the original product and are not included in my complaint.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/08) */
Ms***
I do not dispute the inconvenience caused to Ms*** as a result of the recall on her Chevrolet MalibuEqually, I regret and am sorry that she had to contend with the delays in getting the
parts for the recall repair in from General MotorsThe simple fact is, we knew as much about the recall as Ms*** knewThis is to say that we did not know when the parts would be availableWe explained to Ms*** back in June that we did not know when the parts would be available, but that once they arrived and the repair was completed, she would be contacted
To respond to her comments that she did not receive follow up calls, I have no doubt she is correctUnder circumstances, she would have received scheduled calls; the fact is, however, that this summer, and now into autumn, has been anything but for General Motors franchises in light of the numerous recallsBecause of our size, Reliable Chevrolet has been responding to, and repairing, thousands of recall customers' vehiclesThese requests have been in addition to our day-to-day service and maintenance businessThe dealership has increased its staff to better serve all of our customers; and yet, we simply have not had the free time in the day to perform our, otherwise, follow up calls to our customers who had, or have, vehicles in our shop in order to provide progress updatesGranted, in the case of Ms***, had we been in a position to have time to make a follow up call to her on scheduled basis, it would have been only to tell her time after time that we still didn't have the parts for the recall repair
In Ms***'s complaint she makes note of the condition of her vehicle at the time it was returned to herShe stated that the paint on her hood was deterioratingThe facts are that just because she didn't know that, prior to her ownership, that her vehicle had been in an accident which required repainting the hood does not make Reliable Chevrolet liable to any degrading of the paint that may have occurred while the vehicle was on our lotWe are required to maintain a reasonable degree of care for a customer's vehicle while in our possession which we didConcerning her battery, since the vehicle only sat back in the enclosed and monitored area of our lot until the parts were available suggests that the battery must have been in poor condition when we first received the vehicleFinally, rust on vehicle rotors is very common at dealerships and quickly comes off after using the brakes for a few city blocksIf there are other issues with Ms***'s brakes, then those issues were present prior to her bringing her vehicle to the dealership"Lot rust," as it is referred to, does not damage the rotors or the brake pads
Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience Ms*** encountered as a result of having a recall done on her MalibuI am glad, as I am sure she also is, that General Motors provided her with a current model year loaner vehicle for the period of time that her car was with usAs a gesture of goodwill, I will send her a check for *** to cover half the cost of the battery that needed to be replaced
Respectfully,
-***
*** ***, Customer Services, Reliable Chevrolet
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/10/28) */
Ms. [redacted]
Our records indicate that Ms. [redacted] has already received two oil changes and tire rotations at no charge. Under the certified program, she would be entitled to a maximum total of four oil changes and...
tire rotations within a twenty-four month period and subject to mileage restrictions. While I was not a party to Ms. [redacted]' purchase, and the employees she worked with at the time are no longer employees of Reliable Chevrolet, I will honor her request for four free oil changes and tire rotations.
As I mentioned earlier, Ms. [redacted] has received two oil changes and tire rotations at no cost to her and, when she brought the matter up during her last visit, she was provided a card which may be exchanged for a third. I will be sending out an additional card which can be exchanged for one free oil change and tire rotation. Each of the cards, to include the one she has already received and the one I will be sending, may be used only one time each; but, unlike the restrictions under the certified program, these cards will not have a mileage or time restriction.
Though it is not possible for the dealership to certify her vehicle after the time of purchase, she will receive the benefit of the free regular maintenance program through the one card she already has received along with the one additional I will be sending. The free services she has already received combined with the free services she will receive in exchange for the cards she will have, added to the service contract she has for her vehicle, will far and above exceed the provisions under the conventional certified program.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
[redacted]
Customer Services
Reliable Chevrolet, Inc.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/09/16) */
The customer leased a 2012 New Chevrolet Volt in September of 2012 for 27 months. They purchased a mainenance plan to pay for scheduled services throughout their lease. Customer brought the car in for a first oil change and tire rotation on 14...
January 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer brought the car in on 08 April 2013 because of a tire losing air. Technician diagnosed the tire with a hole in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought the car in for an oil change and tire rotation on 12 June 2013 paid for by their contract. Customer had car towed in on 21 august 2013 with a flat tire. Tire was diagnosed with a nail in the sidewall and customer purchased a new tire. Customer brought car in on 29 March 2014 for an oil change and tire rotation paid for by their contract. While at the dealership they asked for an estimate to repair the back of the front passenger seat as it had been kicked or pushed in and also to check on the front bumper facia as it had been ripped off when coming in contact with something. Customer brought car in on 15 may 2014 because the windshield wipers were streaking. Their maintenance plan replaced the worn wipers. Customer was contacted on 09 September 2014 in order to advise them of their options with the pending lease termination of their vehicle. Customer stated they wanted a truck and would come into the store on Tuesday 16 September 2014. Customer was contacted on 12 September 2014 to confirm the appointment. Delaership was advised that customer did not want another vehicle, that customer had already purchased another vehicle and that they wanted GM to pay their remaining lease payments as "goodwill" so they didn't have to make multiple payments. Customer was informed that GM only pays leases off early when you purchase another GM vehicle. Customer became very upset and told dealership that they had never said they wanted another vehicle. Dealership apologized and ended the phone call. Both of the phone calls first asking for a truck and then denying asking are recorded. We feel it is important to note that Reliable Chevrolet routinely calls random customers after their service visit to ensure they were 100% completely satisfied. This customer was actually contacted twice. The first call was on 27 June 2013, after the first flat tire was replaced and customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. The second time was on 10 April 2014 and once again customer stated they were 100% completely satisfied. Customer purchased a second car from a different dealership in June of 2014. It is only after the strain of multiple payments begins that customer even brings up isues with the dealership. In conclusion, the customer's entire complaint is with the quality of the tires. This would then fall under the tire manufacturer for review and not affect the Dealership in anyway. Product liability for quality and workmanship stays with the manufacturer and not the retailer. Customer states that Dealership "knowingly" sold her a car with "faulty tires" The two tires failed because of physical damage well after the customer had purchased the vehicle. Reliable Chevrolet denies any financial responsibility or product liability on customers vehicle. Thank You
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/09/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Thank you for your response, but some of your details are factually inaccurate. The first tire had a hole that was not due to my negligence or normal wear so must have been faulty in some way. I was never told a nail was found in the second tire. The tire burst at the sides and I have pictures proving this. The front bumper facia is an optional piece that lowers the clearance of the car do reduce drag and increase gas mileage. This piece I believe is a fault in the design of the vehicle. It reduces the clearance of the car so much that any sort of an incline will scrape this piece. I was contacted multiple times after receiving this vehicle to the point of harassment. We were coerced into saying we were satisfied despite almost leaving without the vehicle at the time of purchase. We were led to believe that if we had responded that we were dissatisfied it would reflect as such in the salesman's pay. I would also love to hear the recording where I discussed wanting a truck because my husband and I have never wanted a truck and do not ever wish to have a truck. We bought a Mitsubishi vehicle because we were replacing completely different vehicle than the one that we had purchased from this company. I calmly expressed this to the manager who responded at length about how any attempt at customer satisfaction would be futile as I would not be a returning customer. The implication that any of these issues arose do to my negligence or were manufactured due to my inability to pay are completely unfounded. We have made every payment on time or early. The only damage I will admit is my fault is the damage to the back of the seat. This damage is a result of using my car for work in which a disabled client damaged the seat.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2014/09/19) */
Without getting into a he said she said situation with this customer I would like to point out that the issues the customer brings forth are on the quality of the product purchased and not the design of the product purchased. Liability for these issues rests with the manufacturer and not the retailer. This customer should contact General Motors directly to seek any compensation for what she inaccurately believes to be a defect on the original product. This customer filled out several surveys from the manufacturer siting completely satisfied, not just the initial sales survey but several service surveys as well. We bring this up only to point out that this is obviously something that only now the customer is complaining about because their lease term is expiring and they purchased a non GM product and will now be responsible for disposition fees on the lease as well as the final payments. Throughout the entire history of the relationship between customer and business there is no mention of any problems, notes of complaints, etc. We ask that the Revdex.com close this case as the customers issues, that we still adamantly deny, are issues with the manufacturer and not the retailer.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2014/09/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I believe I have stated all issues and possible resolutions I can see for this situation. I feel the company should be responsible for the product they sell and could seek the help from GM themselves if they feel it is necessary. Your incorrect assumptions about the consumer are irrelevant and unprofessional. They do not offer any solution to this problem. I am seeking the help of the Revdex.com because my complaints have been consistently brushed aside by Reliable and I would hope the Revdex.com would see this. I have been very upfront during repairs about being upset and confused. I gave positive responses about the repair dept because their service was courteous and fast. They had nothing to do with the original product and are not included in my complaint.