Jack Williams Tire

Review: Everytime I bring my car into this place they always find a problem and its always over $400. I know a little about cars so I needed an inspection and I pulled my tires off to check my brakes cause I can do them myself to save money saw they were good I take it to this place and the back brake are no good there is a line rotted and when I told them I want to take the car cause they wont have the parts till Monday and I needed a car to get to work then they were able to get them. I had to change my oil pan at on point a while back and it took them 3 times to get it right. They are major rip off artists they scare people into unnecessary repairs. Stay away you will save money.Desired Settlement: Never to go back there and they close down or get a new manager

Business

Response:

The customer has been in our Jack Williams [redacted] location a total of six (6) times since his first visit on March 1, 2012 with his 2000 [redacted], which at that time the vehicle had 110,456 miles on the vehicle. When he came in on March 1, 2012 he had us check for an oil leak, we advised that he needed to replace the oil pan. We did the work for him, he did come back on March 13, 2012 stating that the vehicle was still leaking oil. We checked the vehicle and found that the oil pan gasket that we put on when we replaced the oil pan had failed for some reason. We replaced the gasket for the customer, free of charge, and he has not complained of an oil leak to us since then. The customers third (3rd) visit to our location was on September 20, 2012. He came in and purchased 4 [redacted] tires from us had his vehicle aligned and we also did an oil change for him. We did not receive any complaints in regard to the tires or the work performed on this date. The customer then comes in for the fourth (4th) time on October 16, 2012 to have us check his exhaust as he is hearing a rattling noise. We checked the vehicle which then had 118,035 miles on it, and found that he needed a rear exhaust hanger and clamps installed to stop the rattling. The work was completed, but we also suggested to the customer to get a muffler and tail pipe. We did not receive any complaints in regard to this work that was performed for him. On March 22, 2013, his fifth (5th) visit, the customer returned to have a state inspection done, along with an oil change and we at that time put on a muffler and tail pipe for the customer. We did pass the vehicle for inspection but advised that he would need front brake pas and rotors and we also suggested front calipers due to uneven pad wear. His brake measurements at this time were:left front 2/32right front 5/32left rear 3/32right rear 3/32the customer declined to have the brake work done at that time. The customer then returned on July 19, 2014 for a state inspection, we did find that he needed to have his parking brake adjusted, and that a brake line had rotted and needed to be replaced. We completed the work and passed the vehicle for state inspection.It is the policy of Jack Williams, that we will not sell any products or repairs that are not needed for the customers vehicle. A service advisor will explain to the customer and show them the results of the inspections, a written estimate will be presented to the customer for them to authorize before any work is performed. All parts that are replaced on a customers vehicle will always be available for them to inspect. We also guarantee all of the work performed on the vehicle.I don't see where we would owe the customer a refund for any work that we performed.I also need to bring to your attention that the information that was given by the customer did not bring up any records for him with Jack Williams. We had to search to find records that matched what was described by the customer. If this is not the correct customer I would ask that you have him supply either his phone number or license plate number for the vehicle as this is the only way that we can search our system to find the correct records for our customers.If any other information is needed from us please do not hesitate to contact me directly.I am also going to attach for review the records for the customer.

Regards,

Robin D[redacted]

Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc

Customer Experience Administrator

Phone ###-###-####

www.jackwilliams.com

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: I was in there 3 times to fix the oil leak from the pan. Also I paid to have the muffler fixed because they wouldn't give me an inspection and when I asked to see the rotted muffler they said it was thrown away. The brake line they say was leaking was never shown to me and they would not give me my car back maybe they thought I would bring it somewhere else and have it checked out and find there was no leak. I did purchase tire which I over paid and I also needed a wheel alignment which was not done and tires rotated which now they are wearing uneven and I will need to replace 2 shortly.

Regards,

Business

Response:

I only show that the customer came in 1 time after we put the new oil pan on for him and at that time we replaced a gasket, since then I do not show any concerns with his oil pan or leaking oil - the oil pan was put on March 1, 2012 the gasket replaced March 13, 2012. So for over 2 years we do not have a problem with an oil leak on a 2000 [redacted] with over 132,000 miles on the vehicle. We follow the regulations for PA State Inspections so if there is an exhaust leak we will not pass the car for inspect. It is your choice to have us fix the muffler, at the price that we give you. The same thing with fixing your brake line. We advised that it was leaking and that it was a safety risk to you. We gave you a price to repair the brake line, if you choose to take it someplace else that is your decision. We just want to make you aware of what is wrong with your vehicle, what it would cost to fix it and if you choose not to fix it what may happen. Since the vehicle is running and working properly with no problems, we feel that we did our job.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:i had to bring it to another shop to get the oil pan from leaking also I had a mechanic look at the car before I did my inspection and there was no leaks on any brake lines but when it went into ur shop its leaking.

Regards,

Review: Through this company's website, an appointment was scheduled for four tires ([redacted] 195/65r-14)to be installed along with having a state emission / inspection done. The car is a 2009 [redacted] with approximately 60,000 miles.Problem 1: On the day of service I was told that their website was wrong in that it should not have allowed a different tire size from the OE size of 185/65r-14 to be installed (I was not told of any problems when I talked to Francisco D[redacted] at the corporate service department). Being well aware of the dimensional differences, I intentionally chose this tire in the slightly larger size. I was also told that it would violate every warranty known to man even though it was expressed to them that I was not interested in any warranty that they might want to sell me and the few MPH difference in the tire ratings was not a problem. I was eventually talked into a tire that I did not want.Problem 2: I was told that the car failed the inspection because the right front outer tie rod end was totally worn out and its rubber boot was missing. Since this tie rod end was bad I should have the other side replaced as well and then I would need an alignment - all for only another $250. It was also suggested that while this work was being done I should have the brake pads replaced as they only passed inspection by 1 or 2 thirty seconds of an inch. When I balked at all of this and asked to see the broken rod end I was told the new tires were already installed and the car was off the lift and in the lot. As this car is owned by my 85 year old father-in-law and is only used to drive him a few miles round trip to doctors appointments and the fact that he was paying for this work himself on a fixed income I agreed to replace the parts myself, in the hopes of saving some money. I purchsed new tie rod ends and new brake pads and installed them myself (not rocket science).Desired Settlement: The first thing noticable was the total lack of play in either tie rod end and both rubber covers were pliable and intact. All four sets of brake pads had better than double the thickness of material left. When shown the tie rod ends and brake pads that were removed, I was told the pat "that is what was found". No apologies. I would like the originally ordered tires installed, refund for the false tie rod ends and a free alignment because of having to replace the tie rods.

Business

Response:

The

customer did come into our [redacted] Jack Williams location on September 11,

2014 for tires and a state and emissions inspection.

First

let's address the problem with the tires. When the on-line appointment

was made the information input for the vehicle was a 2009 [redacted], and they

were asking for 4 tires that were 185/65R 14 86 T. At this point in

reviewing the online appointments, Francisco did call the customer and asked

about the [redacted] and advised that there were two (2) options for sizes for the

vehicle. Francisco was advised that there were after market wheels on the

vehicle and that he wanted the 185/65R 14 86T. The vehicle calls for a

185/65R 14 85 H.

It is the policy of Jack Williams that when it comes to speed rating that

we will never downgrade the speed rating of the tires. This can result in

poor handling and unpredictable steering. If the customer wants better

cornering response, there is no problem installing a higher speed rated tire on

the vehicle. Attached you will find the list of speed ratings along with

the corresponding speeds that they represent. I also believe that

this was discussed with the customer before the correct tires were put on the

vehicle. Also, the tires that were put on the vehicle were less expensive

than the tires that were selected on the web site. We also advised

the customer that the tires that he was looking for were discontinued and will

no longer even be available once supplies are depleted.

Now

to address the matter of the vehicle failing the Pennsylvania State safety inspection because of

the right front outer tie rod end. This failed

because of play in the part. If you look

on the invoice provided, we do suggest

the left front tie rod as well, but this only because with these parts once you

replace one, 9 out of 10 times you need to replace the other in a short amount

of time. And by doing them both at the

same time you would save on the labor cost. Also with the brakes there was a suggestion

for front brake pads, as by the time next inspection comes around it would probably need

brakes. But again the left front tie rod

and the brakes had nothing to do with the vehicle failing inspection; they were

suggestions on work that should be done soon.

We

also called the customer while the vehicle was on the lift to show the customer the play in

the tie rod and to come and look at the brakes.

They declined the offer to come and see the vehicle.

When

the customer replaced the left and right tie rod ends and brought in the one

(1) loose part, we did not know if it was the right tie rod or the left tie rod

and wanted us to show him the play in the part, this is not possible as it

needs to be installed on the vehicle to show you.

When

the customer came back with the car we did inspect the car again, and passed

the vehicle for inspection, only charging him for the sticker.

So

in summary we will not install the tires that he originally wanted, because of

the speed rating issue. If he would like to

get other tires at another tire shop and have them installed we will take the

tires back as long as it is within 30 days and there is less than 500 miles on

the tires. The customer will get a full

refund of the tires only $283.80 plus tax.

We will not refund for the tie rod ends as we did fail the vehicle for

the right front tie rod, but suggested that the other be replaced, and we will

not give him a free alignment, as even if we replaced or any other shop

replaced the tie rod end they would charge for an alignment.

Please

review all of the information attached and let me know if you have any

questions or concerns.

Regards,

Robin D[redacted]

Jack Williams Tire Co.,

Inc

Customer Experience

Administrator

Phone ###-###-####

Review: I had my break cables replaced on my 1995 jetta .They said they were done .went out to the car but did not have emergency brakes . told them about it . they said to come back tomorrow which I did.The next day when they worked on it they told me it was done . Still no emergency brakes .They told me they took up the adjustment as far as they could and there was nothing else they could do . remember these are new break cables.They sent me home with 99.00 dollars and no emergency brakes. The only way this could happen is if they put the wrong cables on my car .new cables taken all the way up and still no breaks .I want them to fix it correctly or refund all my money .The car will not pass inspection with no emergency brakes .I guess if your emergency breaks go out I should ,according to them , get another car . .this is unacceptable .If you cant help I guess the next step is to go to the state police barracks and see if they can do something . [redacted]Desired Settlement: A REFUND OR PROPER COMPLETION OF THE JOB.

Business

Response:

RE: [redacted]

Review: This facility refused to complete installation of my wheels and tires and refused to listen to the resources I had on the phone during the installation that suggested they had improperly torqued the wheels. Wheels and tires were purchased from sources online not Jack Williams. The online resources also have facilities in [redacted] and tested all the items for proper fitment on my vehicle. These wheels are [redacted] spec replacements. Yet this facility refused to complete the work which would have swapped summer wheels and tires out for winter wheels and tires.They also refused to pass my car for inspection. The Law specifically states that there should be no screening device or material that obstructs visibility into the vehicle through the windshield, Side Wing or Side Window. Which according to the letter of the Law my vehicle complies with fully. The light transmittance on any tinting that was dealer equipped on my vehicle was well within 20% to 30%. At this level there is also no obstruction to visibility looking out the windshield from the driver's position. And in fact there is no law stating any requirement of light transmittance in the State of PA. The law only states that visibility into the vehicle is not impaired. The law does state that the following is prohibited...a) Any sign, poster or other non-transparent material obstructs, obscures or impairs driver's clear view of highway or any intersecting highway.b) Non-transparent material extends more than 3 inches from lowest exposed portion of rear window, rear side windows or rear wings.c)Motor vehicle has any sign, poster or other non-transparent material on windshield or front side windows, other than officially approved and properly located parking stickers.With the above written into PA state law... there was no reason whatsoever to fail my vehicle for the transparent and dealer equipped sun screening on my front windshield.Desired Settlement: I want an apology from the shop steward and a refund of $577.00 that will account for my day of work lost due to this appointment. I would like to have the cost of $19.99 for the failed inspection refunded as well. And the cost for my travel $30.00 and another day of work $577.00 lost to make an appointment at another Licensed State inspection facility to complete the work and perform the inspection without incident. I don't feel this is an unreasonable request considering the time wasted.

Business

Response:

To whom it may concern,

As

regards this customers wheels not having been involved in the fitment process

we have limited knowledge as to their appropriateness without doing fairly

extensive legwork. Having someone on the phone really provides no assistance as

we do not really know who we are dealing with. We try to satisfy the requests

of our customers but potential liability is, and has to be, our ultimate

decision maker. As State inspection stations we will never allow the creation

of an unsafe condition. And will err on the side of caution.

As regards the inspection failure

the tinting on the windshield falls under In the

State Inspection Manual, Pg E-8/9 section 175.80 (2) (ii) states the following:

(ii) This paragraph does not prohibit the use

of a product or material along the top edge of a windshield as long as the

product or material is transparent and does not encroach upon the AS-1 portion

of the windshield as provided by FMVSS No. 205, and the product or material

is not more than 3 inches from the top of the windshield. My understanding is

that the tinting does extend well beyond the AS-1 mark and does extend below 3

inches from the top of the windshield. Please note that State inspection

regulations do not necessarily match up with motor vehicle laws as enforced by

the police, but we have had customers pulled over for their tinting.

We

would be happy to refund the customers fee for the failed inspection and as a

goodwill gesture, the $30 travel expense. We feel that there are numerous

systems in place at our stores to limit the amount of time taken out of our

customer’s days (Shuttle service, drop off or night owl capability) that a

payment for lost wage for a 1 hour inspection is unwarranted.

We look forward to your response

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I understand the conditions for the AS1 markings are due to a double layer laminate of safety glass and there may be reasons of safety for the passenger for preventing any material from encroaching upon that layer of glass. Its my understanding that there are conditions which apply for each make and model of vehicle. The AS1 designation marks on the glass clearly indicate where the safety glass layers begin from the top of the windshield going towards the bottom. In many passenger vehicles there are multiple AS1 designations that don't always line up horizontally, They are staggered. These designation points are used as a reference point to indicate where the safety glass laminate layers begin. As per the manufacturer of my Vehicle the AS1 markers that are considered for a sun screening applique is the as1 markers located at the rear view mirror location and followed horizontally across to both the passenger and driver side of the windshield. I also add that as an additional laminate layer applied to the areas above and beyond the vehicles AS1 designation point the glass layer is in effect being reinforced with the same properties as the [redacted] safety glass layers. I refer to the followingPA STATE INSPECTION PROCEDURES

Section 175.80

(2) Check glazing.

(i) Check glazing and REJECT IF any of the following apply:

(A) Approved safety glazing is not used in every windshield, window or

wing.

(B) Any sign, poster or other non-transparent material obstructs,

obscures or impairs driver's clear view of highway or any intersecting highway.

See Appendix C.

(C) Non-transparent material extends more than 3 inches from lowest

exposed portion of rear window, rear side windows or rear wings. See Appendix C.

(D) Motor vehicle has any sign, poster or other non-transparent material

on windshield or front side windows, other than officially approved

and properly located parking stickers.

(E) Glass is shattered or broken or has any exposed sharp edges.

(F) Windshield is removed.

(G) There are any defects in acute area of windshield,-center of critical

area on driver's side of vehicle directly in driver's normal line of vision,

8 _ inches wide and 5 1/2 inches high-or discolorations or hazardous cracks

to front, right, left, or rear of driver which would interfere with driver's

vision. See Appendix C.

(H) Glass etchings, except those used for identification, are on windshield

or front side windows.

(I) Glass etchings extend more than 3 inches.

I refer to the above since my vehicle was equipped this way from the Dealership. The same dealership uses a "Laminate" sunscreening that allows for over 75% light transmission... which is 50 state legal. As a transparent medium there is NO obstruction for the driver for visibility and no obstruction for law enforcement to see into the vehicle. In fact according to the AS1 designation point at the rear view mirror location the Vehicle does not even default for any reason for a PA state inspection. I also reiterate that the fact that this is also a laminate material any area above the AS1 designation is now in fact reinforced with the same safety properties as the double laminate layers below the AS1 designations. Penalizing a vehicle that complies legally with PA state laws and Inspection regulations for in fact being safer than [redacted] standards is absolutely appalling. I can provide evidence of the times my vehicle was pulled over for minor traffic violations and NEVER cited for any obstruction to the windshield or tinting that was non 50 state legal. I'll also remind anyone reviewing this rebuttal...the same vehicle passed inspection at the same business at their [redacted] area location for the two consecutive years prior. It was presented to them in the same form that their Hamlin location received it in. And that after having failed at this location the vehicle was taken the next day to another business that is a licensed PA state inspection station with a National presence and passed without issue. I think the idea that this only took about an hour for the inspection is incorrect. The inspection part of this was a very small part of my time there. The rest was spent dealing with their refusal to mount and balance my tires onto my newly purchased wheels. My time was spent waiting for other vehicles to have work performed before me, then the time my vehicle was in their bay, the time spent trying to make their shop steward understand that my wheels were in fact [redacted] spec replacement, Showing the shop steward the online specifications for the wheels as per the following site that specializes in [redacted] fitment for my model year vehicle.[redacted]The Shop steward stated as matter of fact... these were not purchased here so I won't install them. But, when spoke to on the phone prior he welcomed me to come in and have them do the wheel/tire swap, mount and balancing. He did not state that the wheels would not fit, were not the proper Offset or that they were defective. He only remarked that they were not purchased at his location and therefore he would not install them regardless of whether I had supporting documentation or evidence that these were in fact the proper wheels for my vehicle. There was time wasted in my effort to explain this to him. If in fact I were to purchase wheels from their facility, they had nothing that stated the wheels being purchased were [redacted] Spec replacement wheels for my Model year Vehicle. They could only suggest models of wheels they sell that would fit, but offered nothing [redacted] spec or listed as [redacted] replica replacements.There was time wasted in my conversation with the inspection agent at this facility. As his visual explanation to me of where the AS1 designations were, and his opinion of the glass treatment were completely opposite of any previous experience I've had at any other Jack Williams Tire location. And in complete contrast to the experience I had taking it to Pep Boys who passed my vehicle without any incident. It was at Pep Boys where the alternate AS1 designations were reviewed with me And under what condition they would in fact fail a vehicle. For all the reasons presents above in points. None of the situations described took under an hour. My time was tied up from 7AM until 1PM on the day of at the Hamlin facility. It then took more time to source another facility that would book an appointment either that same day or the next day. And then The time spent at that alternative. In addition to my time traveling there.I have a family business which performs showings by appointment on the weekends. As I was unavailable for the entire weekend there was no opportunity to fulfill any of the appointments during this time as my presence is required for these showings. Had the inspection taken place and passed and the wheels were swapped without incidence then I would have been able to get back to my ranch prior to the start of any appointments for Saturday. This for obvious reasons...did not happen. And the fact that I had to travel farther the next day to a facility that would swap my wheels and perform the inspection again took me out of the picture for any booked appointments for that Sunday. So my asking for this time of lost income is not unreasonable. I am happy that Jack Williams Tire co. has taken the time to actually address this complaint. It shows good faith and concern on their part for a long time customer. But I am not satisfied with them just saying we'll refund your inspection fee and your travel expense. Its certainly a kind gesture of good will, but Its just short of repairing everything I had to deal with and the time and money lost to accept appointments at my family business. I would accept restitution for a days lost time and income since I was already committed to losing a day if I had to. Understanding that sometimes while a vehicle is being worked on that things can come up that would cause for more time than what was initially calculated. Basically Murphy's law during that appointment was accounted for. What was certainly not accounted for was actually having to take that second day to have the work done elsewhere.I believe if you take all the above into account, its not an unreasonable request on my part to ask for that much more to compensate for the lost time and income. I certainly feel that as a whole Jack Williams Tire Company does have good operation procedures and standards, its just not something that is found in equal parts among all their facilities. As evidence I offer that the person who did in fact contact me From the Palmyra facility explained that there were two alternative locations that specialized in the care and maintenance of after market installations and fitment for clientele interested in custom modifications to improve performance and aesthetics to their vehicles. This was never offered as an alternative during my time at the Hamlin facility. Which may have resulted in a very different outcome had it been offered.

Regards,

Review: Recently I had my vehicle taken to this place for a state inspection, they gave me a long list of problems with my vehicle that would be required for it to pass inspection, some including all the brakes and rotors, calipers, axle seal and many other things. The price they gave me was outrageous and I could not afford this at this time ($1,725.00 plus blower motor for my heater that they had no price for). I decided to get the brakes and rotors and do the work myself. Upon doing the work I changed the front and back rotors and brakes and found the leak that the said was a rear seal that required a lot of labor it turned out the leak was a $3.70 brake line and the front rotors were in near perfect shape and the back rotors were passable and nothing wrong with calipers. the brakes did need replaced but I purchased lifetime brakes from autozone for a mere $40 for the front and back not $149.95 for front and $148.95 for back plus $261.00 for the labor could only imagine that the other required parts were only a way for this place to take my hard earned money as my vehicle passed inspection at a different location.Desired Settlement: Refund for front and back rotors and stop harassing me for the $19.00 for a failed inspection as they were not being honest with their inspection. $148.00

Business

Response:

RE: [redacted]

Compliant # [redacted]

Please accept this as our official response to the complaint

filed by the above referenced customer.

On June 3, 2013 [redacted]. brought his 2001 Chevrolet

S10 in to our [redacted] store for a ** State Inspection. It was found that the

following items were needed for compliance with the inspection regulations:

Front Brake Pads…. Pads were at 1/32 thickness, state

requires 2/32 minimum thickness to pass

Rear brake Pads…... Right rear pad at 0/32, below minimum

specification

Rear Rotors………….. Right rear rotor heavily scored (grooved)

due to above worn off brake pad

Right Rear Brake Caliper…..Caliper Piston heavily scored

(grooved) from pad worn off

Right front sway bar bushing…….The bushing was badly torn

Right front sway bar link…… link was broken

Right rear axle seal……..Seal was leaking

Emergency Brake Shoes………Shoes were oil soaked from above

axle seal leak

Wipers………………………&h...⇄ not effectively clear windshield

Back up light inoperable………….Bulb burned out

Battery Hold Down…………….Part was missing

Blower Motor Inoperable………. Blower not working, per State

defrost function needs to work. Estimate included Diagnostic time to determine

why motor was not working.

Exhaust leak………. Leaking where muffler meets catalytic

convertor, needs new gasket and bolts

Suggested (but not required) items were:

Front Brake rotors………………………&h...⇄ Suggested with new brake pads

to reduce potential noise

Serpentine Belt………………………&hel...⇄ Condition of Belt

Left Front Sway Bar Link……………. Suggest replacing in pairs as

both are generally same age

The Estimate for PA Inspection required parts (with

installation & Tax) was $ 1300.00

The total Estimate, required items with the suggested items,

was $ 1725.00

The front and rear brake prices mentioned include the

installation labor. The $261.00 labor charge was for both the rear axle seal replacement

and the labor for the emergency brakes.

Please note that we had made the customer aware that front

and rear brakes would be needed at an earlier visit on April 1, 2013 (a copy of

invoice is available).

The charge to the customer for the failed inspection

($17.95) is approved by the state.

I can provide a copy of the work order estimate, which shows

the potential charges for both the needed and the suggested work. If you need

further information, please feel free to contact me directly at [redacted].

Sincerely,

Customer Relations

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

All they are showing is a bogus bill that I have already,I have the rotors that were changed and still have the truck that is now inspected for far less than what they said it would need, this was not a resolution.

Regards,

Review: Filed on behalf of [redacted], [redacted], PA [redacted].

Business employs fraudulent business practices. (a) Inflates mark-up cost from 100% to 150% on items which was verified, (b) Attempts to correct alleged deficiencies which are, in fact, non-existent or not needed in order to increase service billing to consumer.

Two issues are in existence. The first issue involves an alternator repair which may not have been needed. The Technician involved, Art R[redacted], notes on the work order - AND I QUOTE - "Noise - Alternator noisy and air conditioner compressor also same noise but quiet. Think noise is following belt". The issue may have been a stretched serpentine belt which was creating the noise and that was replaced at a cost of $71 which is a mark-up of over 100% since this item basically costs $31. The alternator was replaced (which may not have been needed) at a cost of $298.06 which is a mark-up, of again, over 100% since the item was re-manufactured in Mexico with items of this type normally costing between $115 and $121. Essentially this technician is not reputable since "He thinks the noise is following belt". Overall costs incurred were for $593.20 which included "incidentals" on the purchase order. The serpentine belt which may have been the primary issue cost $71 (inflated mark-up) since this item normally costs $31 elsewhere. When confronted with the exorbitant mark-up costs Mr. D[redacted] stated no plausible explanation other than that, probably, was the cost they used.

The second issue involves an estimate they gave for exhaust system replacement. The work order notes, AND I QUOTE AGAIN per Art R[redacted], "Center pipe and muffler holes/cracks at welds - 2 gaskets". The estimate for this repair was $1133,72. A check with another auto repair service indicated that multiple holes did not, in fact, exist but that one hole existed where the tail pipe met the muffler and no other issues were noted. This was repaired at a cost of $149 yet Jack W[redacted] attempted to replace the entire exhaust system at a cost of $1133 which was, in fact, not needed. The unethical business practices are beyond comprehension.Desired Settlement: Refund should be requested but it is believed that this business would again employ practices which would attempt to deceive customers with invalid explanations. (a) They replaced an alternator for $593.20 and (b) They would have replaced an entire exhaust system at a cost of $1133 when, in fact, the needed repair cost $149. What should have been addressed initially was again a check with another reputable repair service who could have verified if the alternator was, in fact, defective. They charged $593 for an item that may have been needed for on;y $71 (inflated mark-up figure). It should be noted for future customers regarding (a) Their radically inflated mark-up costs as well as (b) Their attempts to initiate service which is, in fact, not needed. THIS COMPLAINT SHOULD BE MADE A PART OF THEIR PERMANENT RECORD FOR FUTURE CUSTOMER USE IF NEEDED.

Business

Response:

In review of the documents that we got from the [redacted] store, and with them showing that a complete diagnostics was not done to see exactly what the problem was. We are going to refund to the customer $366.82. This is for the $48 charge for the labor for diagnostics and the refund for the alternator for $298.06, plus tax of $20.76. I will submit a request for the check today and it will be in the mail next Monday, September 22, 2014.I do hope that this settles the complaint to your satisfaction.Thank you,[redacted]Customer Experience Administrator

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Regards,

Review: I went in back in March to get 4 new tires for my 2010 [redacted]. I was infomed that one for the 4 TPMS needed to be replaced. Knowing this I knew the TPMS sensor light would remain on since it is sending a fault. The vechile was involved in an accident and while at the repair shop we asked the ownr if he could let me know which ones need to be replaced. ALL damage to the vechile was in the front (bumper lights raditor etc) He then informed me all four was missing. I then called Jack williams and the responce I keep getting is "we dont do that, you are trying for free stuff." I informed them that The repair shop did not remove them, while Robin the customer service rep told me he had tothat they dont do that...I informed then what the case was, and that the light was always on since gettign my car back from there shop back in march, meaning that they were removed back then.Desired Settlement: Since I know one had to be replaced im not to sure what the right outcome should be. They shouldnt of be taken off the vechile. I feel they should be replaced, since according to Robin the rep from jack williams "They dont remove them." I think jack williams should replace 3 if not all four of the senors.

Business

Response:

When the customer came into our [redacted] location on April 11, 2014 to purchase 4 tires for his 2010 [redacted], we advised him that he should get 4 new TPMS Sensors as they are all corroded. We also advised that 1 of the sensors was not reading, I have attached all the paperwork from the customers visit that day. Also we noted that the TPMS light was on when the vehicle was brought into the garage and prior to the work performed on the vehicle. After 5 months, the customers comes back to us stating that he does not have any sensors, and he was told by a repair shop that they have been removed. When we change tires we do not remove the stems with the sensors, we reset them if they can be or advise that new sensors need to be purchased or replace. I know that this is going to be a back and forth thing with us saying that we don't remove the sensors and the customer saying that we did.Also in reviewing the owners manual for a 2010 [redacted] it does state that the TPMS light would be on as 1 of the sensors was not reading but according to the owners manual there would also be a chime if there were no TPMS Sensors (see this information in the attachment). The customer states that there was just the light on and never mentioned a "chime" noise to alert him that there was no TPMS Sensors.With the amount of time that has gone between the time the tires were replaced and the complaint from the customer, I don't see that anyone can say for sure that we removed the sensors. As I said before I can see that this is just going to be a "he said - she said" type of complaint.Please let me know if there is anything else that is needed.

Regards,

Robin D[redacted]

Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc

Customer Experience Administrator

Phone ###-###-####

Fax ###-###-####

www.jackwilliams.com

Consumer

Response:

There is a chime when the vehicle is first started up. It was never mentioned since a light on and chime do mean the same thing. The rejection reason, is regardless of how many were told to be replaced or recovered. only rubber value stems where in the tire, under omit ion from [redacted] tire in [redacted]. This is a common practice for Jack WIlliams to do and not the first the manger of [redacted] has heard it of.To resolve this case, I feel as a customer I should be compensated for the money I spent to buy new TPMS sensors, which buy omit ion from the DM rubber value stems may have been installed if we couldn't get air into the tire.[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

Regards,

Business

Response:

We advised of the TPMS Sensors 5 months ago - your vehicle was out of our care, custody and control since you left our location, and was also in another garage at some point in time. It is not our practice, regardless of what our competitor says, to remove the TPMS Sensors when we advise you there is a problem with them unless we are going to replace them with you approval.We are not going to pay you for the sensors that you purchased. Until there is concrete proof that we did remove them, which we did not. There will be no compensation for your sensors.

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that the business is not going to move on this issue. Since Jack Williams is known to do this I am not going to keep arguing. Jack Williams and its technician knows what happen, and under omition for the technician that did the work he could not get air into the TPMS sensors, there for removing them.

Regards,

Review: I had some repair work done on my vehicle starting in March 2014. I have had to return it multiple times for the same repair and every time I take it to them something else is wrong when I get it back. This had happened about 6 times now. The one incident could have cost a life. They did not put my drivers side front wheel back on properly and the wheel nearly fell off. A stud was and lug nut were broken. I returned to them to repair and another problem arose, as with every other time I took it to them. This last time I took it to them, they bent the rocker panels on both sides. They told me they will get back to me with a decision on what to do about it. I have taken it to another Auto shop for repairs during the time I have been dealing with them and had no problems with the other shop. I feel they should correct the damages they have caused and be reimbursed for all the work that has been done because of the constant problems that show up every time I take it to them and for their terrible business practices. They should be put out of business also. I have never had such a problem with an auto shop until I took my vehicle to them. Now its a nightmare having to fight with them to fix the mistakes and damage they have done. If they have done it to me I am sure there are others they have done this too. I have also spent much of my limited valuable time with having to return to them for fixing problems they caused. I will also be contacting a lawyer about this matter. I have lost track of some of the dates because of returning it to them so many times.Desired Settlement: Refund for all services they have done, funds to repair the continued damages that keep happening every time I take it to them, their reputation for fraud brought to light and even as far as shutting them down.

Business

Response:

On February 15, 2014 the customer did come to our Route *,

[redacted] location to have us check out his 2003 [redacted] We found that the vehicle needed to have both

front hub (wheel) bearings replaced. You

can see this on invoice 1 – reference number [redacted] dated 02/15/2014, for a

total of $626.13

Wheel bearing are one of the most

crucial components of a car's suspension. They are usually located in the hub

(the part that the brakes and wheels are attached to) or even the brake drum or

rotor itself. Wheel bearings, or hub bearings as they are sometimes called, allow the wheel to rotate freely as the car

travels down the road. Most cars have an inner and an outer bearing on each

wheel.

A wheel bearing is a

simple device made up of two main components, the bearing itself and the race.

The bearing itself consists of a metal housing that is pressed over a row of

ball bearings that circle the metal housing. These ball bearings in turn ride

on the race, which is a very smooth metal surface. When a wheel is rolling, the

action of the ball bearings rolling against the surface of the hub that allows

the wheel to spin smoothly.

Problems with wheel bearings arise from wear, which can be

caused by a variety of factors. Bearings are protected from dirt and debris by

oil seals. If these seals fail and dirt finds its way into the bearing, damage

can occur to the bearing and the race. Another factor can be long-term wear,

affecting the bearings' ability to function properly. If a bearing falls apart

completely, it can render the car undrivable and dangerous. The brakes will not

function correctly and the wheel will not stay in its proper position.

The symptoms of a bad bearing are noisy rubbing as the car

is driven and that usually gets louder as speeds increase. If the bearings are

very worn, another symptom can be vague steering and vibrating suspension.

Bearings can be checked by jacking up the car and pushing on

the wheel. If there is excessive movement of the wheel on the spindle, it's

probably the bearing. Wheel-bearing maintenance is relatively simple but

time-consuming, since the wheel, brakes and hub need to be removed. Once the

bearing is visible, you should check the bearings for wear and the races for

any scratches or wear. Then clean everything thoroughly and repack the bearings

with a generous amount of bearing grease. This should be done every 20,000 to

30,000 miles.

When we found that the bearings needed to be replaced, we

advised that this is a time-consuming, job to do as it involves removing the

wheel, brake and hub. Once the hub is off, the bearing races are removed and

new ones pressed in, we do not do this in house we have to send it out to have

it sent out to have them pressed in. Once

the bearings are packed and installed, everything is reinstalled in the reverse

of removal.

We guarantee all of our parts and labor for 6 months or

6,000 miles.

When the customer came into our [redacted] location on March 14,

2014, and advised that he was having a problem we checked his left front wheel

bearing and we replaced it at no charge to the customer. You can see this on invoice 2 – reference

number [redacted] dated March 14, 2014 as you can see we did not charge the

customer, but charged the work back to the original store which did the work.

When the customer

came back again to [redacted] on June 27, 2014 we replaced his right front bearing. You can see this on invoice 3 – reference

number [redacted] dated June 27, 2014, again at no charge to the customer, it was

again charged to the original store which did the work on February 15, 2014.

The customer states that he has had the vehicle to us 6

times, I am only able to find 4 invoices for him. Three of those do have to do with the wheel

(hub) bearings, and the 4th one is for an oil change that he had

done when he had the vehicle in on June 27, 2014, which he had to pay for.

I do not see where at any time his driver’s side front wheel

nearly fell off as a result of any work that we did to his vehicle.

I also am attaching pictures that were taken when the

customer had his vehicle in our shop, this is a 2003 [redacted] with 136,903

mile on the vehicle. We did not find

that we had done any body damage to the vehicle while it was in our care,

custody or control.

If the customer has other supporting documentation that he

would like to present to us with regard to repairs that we did for him and he

had to have re-done at another garage, we would gladly review them for possible

reimbursement.

At this time I do not see that Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc.

owes the customer a refund for the work that was performed on his vehicle.

Attached please find the only 4 reciepts that I can find for

the customer, and the pictures that we have of his vehicle.

If you should have any questions or concerns, please do not

hesitate to contact me directly.

Regards,

Robin D[redacted]

Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc

Customer Experience Administrator

Phone ###-###-####

Review: On Thursday May 15th I searched tires on Jack Williams web site. I found tires I wanted and called a location close to where I work(I had not originally planned on having the tires mounted that day but the next day when I worked). I spoke with [redacted] who took my vehicle information. I explained to him I was only looking to buy 2 tires. He looked the tires up and said he did not have 2 in stock but could have 2 delivered immediately. The vehicle I was having the tires mounted on is the vehicle my wife uses for work and she hates driving my vehicle since it's bigger than hers so I decided to commute to [redacted] for the tires that evening. When I arrived at Jack Williams I ask for [redacted]. [redacted] looked up the information again and at that point informed me he could only sell me 2 tires if the other 2 tires not being replaced were at 1/2 tread or more. If they were not he could only sell me all 4. He went out and checked the other 2 tires and came back and stated he could not sell me just 2 tires because 1 of the 2 remaining tires was slightly less than 1/2 tread. I asked why and he stated because the vehicle was an all wheel drive. I explained I just drove around 40 miles one way (80 mile round trip plus PA Turnpike tolls in the amount of $5.20) to get to the store and he should have informed me of that over the phone. His response was he did not realize the vehicle was all wheel drive to which my response was "I gave you my vehicle information over the phone when I ordered the tires, how could you not know it was all wheel drive, as all [redacted]'s are all wheel drive?" He had no response to the question but refused to sell me 2 tires. I immediately drove to a National competitor near their store and had 2 tires installed without a problem.Desired Settlement: I think Jack Williams should train their staff better and eliminate their unnecessary ways of trying to sell more tires. There are no government regulations stating Jack Williams had to sell me 4 tires instead of 2 because one of the remaining tires on the vehicle was slightly less than 1/2 tread. Additionally, when discussing orders via the phone they should disclose all limitations they have as their policies. I would also like to be financially compensated for my 80 mile two way trip & tolls.

Business

Response:

I am in full agreement with the person who was looking

to purchase tires from us. We should have done a better job of providing

them with all the information about replacing 4 tires instead of just 2 on

all-wheel drive vehicles - this is not just something that we do to sell more

tires, but it is recommended by the manufacturer of the vehicle and is a common

practice among reputable and knowledgeable tire sales persons. Below is

what the vehicle manufacturer recommends when replacing tires on the vehicle, and

what can be found on [redacted]

regarding replacing tires on an all wheel drive vehicle. I will reimburse for gas and tolls because of this misunderstanding. Also, in speaking with [redacted] from our [redacted] location he does recall this incident and also advised the person that we have a store that is closer to him instead of coming all the way to Allentown, he was advised by this person that he had to come to [redacted] anyway as he had business to take care of there. With that being said, out of good faith, I will reimburse for gas using 20 MPG to calculate the reimbursement for gas @ $3.76 a gallon, and $5.20 for tolls, bringing the total to $20.24 to be reimbursed.

Tire Information on [redacted] - [redacted] / [redacted] Owners Manual / Inspection and Maintenance / Tires For safe operation of your vehicle, it is important that the tires be the correct type and size, in good condition, and properly inflated. Be sure to follow the requirements and recommendations in this section.Tire Sidewall Labeling Useful information about a tire is molded into its sidewall. The example below shows a typical passenger car tire. Typical Passenger Car Tire Sidewall A. Tire Manufacturer.The name of the tire manufacturer is shown here.B. Tire Name/Model.The tire name or model is shown here.C. Tire Size.The tire size code is a combination of letters and numbers used to define a particular tire’s width, height, aspect ratio, construction type, and service description. See the “Tire Size” explanation later in this section for more details.D. U.S. DOT Tire Identification Number.The Department of Transportation (DOT) marking indicates that the tire is in compliance with the U.S. Department of Transportation Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The letters and numbers following the DOT marking is the Tire Identification Number (TIN). The TIN identifies the tire manufacturer and plant, tire size, and date the tire was manufactured.E. Uniform Tire Quality Grading (UTQG).Tire manufacturers are required to grade tires based on three performance factors: treadwear, traction and temperature resistance. Refer to the “Uniform Tire Quality Grading” section for more details.F. Load Rating.Load rating is the maximum weight a tire is designed to support in normal service.G. Max Inflation Pressure.Max inflation pressure is the maximum inflation pressure a tire is designed for.H. Tire Ply Material.These tire markings describe the type of cord and number of plies in the sidewall and under the tread.I. Load Index and Speed Rating.The two- or three-digit number is the tire’s load index, the maximum load tire can carry at the speed indicated by its speed symbol at the maximum inflation pressure. The higher the number is, the greater the load carrying capacity. The letter symbol denotes the speed at which a tire is designed to be driven for extended periods of time. (Ratings are listed below.) *The letters ZR may be used on tires with a maximum speed capability over 149 mph and will always be used on tires with a maximum speed capability over 186 mph.J. M+S Marking.This marking indicates the tire has some mud and snow capabilities and is designed for all-season use.Tire Size The following illustration shows an example of a typical passenger car tire size. A. Tire Type.This letter code indicates the primary intended use of the tire. The letter “P” identifies a tire primarily intended for use on a passenger vehicle.B. Tire Width.This three-digit number indicates the tire section width in millimeters from sidewall to sidewall.C. Aspect Ratio.This two-digit number represents the tire section height divided by the tire section width.D. Construction Code.This letter code is used to indicate the type of ply construction in the tire. The letter “R” means radial ply tire construction, the letter “D” means diagonal or bias ply construction, and the letter “B” means belted-bias ply construction.E. Rim Diameter.This two-digit number is the wheel or rim diameter in inches. WARNING: Your [redacted] is equipped with tires which are all the same type and size. This is important to ensure proper steering and handling of the vehicle. Never mix tires of different size or type on the four wheels of your vehicle. Mixing tires could cause you to lose control while driving which may lead to an accident. The size and type of tires used should be only those approved by [redacted] Motor Corporation as standard or optional equipment for your vehicle. This is also something that is on the website [redacted] regarding replacing tires on an all wheel drive vehicle.If you purchased your first all-wheel-drive car and experienced a flat tire that can’t be repaired, you know what tire-related sticker shock is like. It’s not the individual price of each tire that will make you queasy; it's the requirement that all four tires be replaced. Yes, I said all four tires. The problem is that the wheel speed of the tires is monitored to detect slippage that would activate portions of the all-wheel-drive system. This is accomplished by using additional differentials or viscous couplings (sometimes both) to allow for differing wheel speeds experienced when cornering or encountering loose pavement and momentarily spinning a wheel. When the circumferences of tires are not matched, the number of times the tire revolves per mile can vary by tire. This can occur when tires are replaced with no attention paid to the qualities that affect circumference like size, type, and tread wear. When this happens, the system described above is asked to work 24/7--and soon, heat-related damage can occur.

Review: I took my vehicle in for an inspection and was told it needed front brakes and rotors, rear brakes and shoes. I decided to do the work myself as it would cost me over $600. They clearly weren't happy with my decision and they took a long time getting my vehicle. The next morning my vehicle didn't start properly. Very rough start and idle. Later that day my check engine light came on, my tire pressure sensor in one tire stopped working and I could smell an odor of burnt antifreeze after driving. Also, the remote start function no longer works. Since then I have encountered two other people who described experiencing almost the exact same scenario. Took vehicle in for inspection, needed brake work, they decided to do the work themselves and immediately had problems with their vehicles running roughly and the check engine light coming on. I am considering putting something in the local paper to find out how many more people have had the same occur to them. The two individuals brought the issue up in conversation without solicitation. I was the one to reply, " The same thing happened to me!" Very curious to find out if this is a standard practice of retribution by Jack Williams mechanics for not letting them do the brake work. At this point I am certain this is the case. The vehicle has never had a problem until the very next day after being at Jack Williams Tire. Now it has several. Same story on the other two. I am going to suggest these individuals also file a complaint and maybe this can be looked into.Desired Settlement: I am more interested in exposing a fraudulent business practice. I don't think I want them working on my vehicle again. I have an appointment with another garage to look into the issues with my truck. I have no idea what it's going to cost to fix it. If it comes out that this is a common occurrence at Jack Williams Tire I would certainly be interested in getting compensated for the cost of repairs for the damage they caused.

Business

Response:

I have looked through the records of this customer and I do see where he came into our location on October 27, 2014 for a PA State Inspection and failed for the following reasons:R/R Taillight AssemblyBoth Front Sway Bar Links were badFront Brake Pads - L/F was measured at 1/32 and R/F was measured at 2/32Front Brake RotorRear Brake Shoes - L/R was measured at 1/32 and R/R was measured at 1/32He advised us that he would do the work himself, we did not even write up an estimate for the work that needed to be performed to pass inspection. At no time do we ever try to retaliate when a makes the decision to do the work themselves. We just advise that we will have to reinspect the vehicle once the repairs are complete to make sure that the work is completed correctly. As far as his claim that the next morning his vehicle did not start properly and had a very rough start and idle can be any number of things from needing a tune-up to getting bad gas. There are also numerous reasons as to why a check engine light would come on - one being that the gas cap is not on tight enough. And a TPMS on a tire could be that either their is low tire pressure or that it needs to be reset with the computer in the vehicle. There is also a chance that it could have gone bad, and with a vehicle that is over 7 years old that could possibly be. Also with the smell of burning antifreeze that could be a leak in your radiator or a hose. Again with a vehicle that is over 7 years old hoses need to be replaced. Jack Williams Tire and Auto Service Centers would not intentionally damage any customers vehicle because they wanted to do the work themselves. I am also wondering why if after you left and all of these things were wrong and you suspected us doing this to your vehicle - why did you return on November 7, 2014 and purchase almost $600 worth of tires from us. If this customer thinks that Jack Williams Tire and Auto Service Centers is damaging vehicles just to get work or because the customer is going to do their own work, then he does not know what Jack Williams is all about. We are a family run business, we have been in business for over 85 years. We operate in a professional manner and commit ourselves to the highest ethical standards while focusing on the safety of our customers, the success of our stores, and the needs of our community.I would be very interested in seeing what the garage has to say is wrong with the truck.

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: In response to Jack Williams Tire Center: There WAS a quote written for the brake work, even though I told you I was doing the work myself, it was over $600. I waited while you wrote it up. I did not have the money at the time because I knew I was going to need snow tires so I chose to do the work myself so I could afford the snow tires. When my check engine light came on and the truck started hard I did not immediately jump to the conclusion that Jack Williams Tire had anything to do with it because I know that it is 7 years old and it is possible I got some bad gas, etc. as you mentioned. As you also know, I bought the tires three days after you initially had my vehicle when I brought it back in for inspection. Since that time I have checked my gas cap, put fuel in the vehicle numerous times, checked my hoses, etc., etc. It was not until I heard another person tell me that they had their vehicle in to Jack Williams Tire and it needed brake work, they decided to do the work themselves and their check engine light came on and their vehicle hasn't run right ever since that I thought to myself, hmmm, maybe there is a pattern here. And while it might not be the policy of Jack Williams Tire to behave in such a manner, to sabotage a customers vehicle, that does not in any way prove to me that you might not have a mechanic that might not be above acting unethically. Which I know, having done service work for a large company, comes down to the individual performing the service and not the organization's policies or practices. Maybe you might consider looking into the technician who performed my service? I am also urging the other party that told me of their experiences with Jack Williams Tire Center to file a complaint as well. Maybe you will find that the same individual serviced both of these vehicles? And then what?

Regards,

Consumer

Response:

At this point I am asking Jack Williams Tire to investigate and make inquiries into the possibility that one of their technicians might be acting unethically and tampering with customers vehicles. As I indicated in the original complaint I am more interested in having a potentially fraudulent business practice investigated. While it may not be the practice of Jack Williams Tire Center's corporation to engage in unethical business practices it is quite possible that an individual is responsible. If it is determined that there was, in fact, tampering with customers vehicles by one of their service techs then I would like to be compensated for the cost of repairs. An apology might also be in order. I am fully aware that components fail and problems do occur. The only reason I am filing this complaint is because I have learned of other instances, almost identical to my own experience, which have occurred recently involving this particular Jack Williams Tire Center location. Thank You.

Business

Response:

Whenever we receive any type of complaint - phone - email - mail - Revdex.com we inform the General Manager and District Manager of the store, along with the Williams Family. The General Manager and District Manager work with myself to review the complaint. If you have information from another garage/mechanic to suggest that something has been tampered with then we would be interested in seeing this also if you have instances of the same thing happening to others we welcome that as we can try to investigate further to see if there is a pattern.

Review: Bought tires in 2011 with a 60,000 mile warranty. On 7/8/2014 went in for a tire repair and was told all tires are low. There has been at most 25,000 miles put on the tires. Because I did not take it to them for rotation, they wanted documentation or they refused to honor the warranty. Sometimes I had [redacted] do it and sometimes I did it my self. Thy only offered a 35% discount on NEW tires. What good is a warranty when it isn't honored.Desired Settlement: 3 replacement tires. One was damaged and not coverable.

Business

Response:

The

customer did purchase four (4) [redacted] tires from us on

July 10, 2012, for a 2010 [redacted] which at the time of purchase had 39,927

miles on the vehicle. When the tires were purchased the customer paid

$498.13 for the four (4) tires; there was a sale at the time buy 3 get 1 free

and he also had an alignment done at the same time. When tires are

installed we charge $19.95 per tire, but this also gives the customer the

following:

Mounting

of the tire Nitrogen

inflation Lifetime

balancingHand

torque wheelsTire

disposalFree alignment

checkLifetime tire

rotationLifetime flat repairs

We

then offer the customer the Jack Williams Total Tire Protection Promise

(TTPP) for a cost of $15.95 per tire. We explained to the customer as we

do to everyone who purchases tires from us, that our TTPP would cover what the manufacturer’s

warranty would not, such as road hazard, damage resulting from improper

maintenance, or ever damage resulting from a vehicles mechanical problem. Our TTPP would cover the tires for 50 months

or 50,000 miles unconditionally. If

something would happen to the tire(s) in the 1st year or 12,000 miles, the

tire(s) would be replaced at no cost to the customer, but they would be

required to purchase another TTPP to cover the new tire(s) and pay to have them

installed along with the tax. After the 1st year, and/or 12,000 miles, the

tire(s) would be prorated based on mileage. Again, the customer would be

required to purchase the TTPP, pay for installation and tax. The customer

declined to purchase our TTPP, we advised the customer as we do anyone who

declines to purchase the Protection Promise, that if there were a problem with

the tire they then only have the limited warranty from [redacted] to cover his

tires.

When

the customer came in on July 8, 2014 to have us check one of the tires we

advised that all of his tires were well worn and that they should be replaced. At this time the 2010 [redacted] had 61,148

mile on the vehicle. The tire(s) would

have only 21,221 miles on them. In checking our records to see if he had

purchased our Total Tire Protection Promise and seeing that he did not, we contacted

[redacted]. Also, in reviewing the records we did not see

that he had come in for any maintenance for his tires, alignments, and rotation

of the tires. We offer free alignment checks and also

offer lifetime balancing and lifetime tire rotation for any

tires that we install for a customer, free of charge. When we asked for records to show that he had

the maintenance done at any other location he could not provide any

documentation. When we informed

[redacted] of this they offered the customer a 35% discount on his new set of

four (4) [redacted] tires, as a gesture of “Goodwill”.

At

this time I do not see that Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc. owes the customer

either replacement tires or a refund for the tires that he purchased from us on

July 10, 2012. Once he declined to

purchase from us the extra protection (TTPP) that we offer on all tires that we

sell, he is only covered by the warranty of the tire company. And he would need to take up any claims with

[redacted].

I

am attaching receipts from the customers purchase, the [redacted] Limited Warranty

and Adjustment Policy, and the maintenance checklist from [redacted].

If

you should have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact

me.

Regards,

Jack

Williams Tire Co., Inc

Customer

Experience Administrator

Phone

###-###-####

Review: On 11/29/2012, I purchased 4 new tires for my vehicle. From the start, I had ordered 4 tires online according to what I had researched and done so on the jackwilliams.com website. The day of install, I received a phone call after I dropped my car off that they did not, in fact, have those tires there, but they had a more expensive set. I agreed because I had my 1 year old twins walking around the adjacent mall and did not want to inconvenience myself or them anymore. Over the course of the year, the tires lost little bits of air at a time and my husband took it to the local gas station to refill often. On September 4th, 2013, I took it in to have the tires rotated and have the air checked. They assured me, that even though my tire light kept coming on, that there was nothing wrong and it was ok to drive. A week later, I brought it back in for low air and the tire light and they, again, assured me that nothing was wrong and that it was safe to drive. I was made to feel very silly for bringing it in when "nothing" is wrong. Since that time, I stopped bringing it in to be checked so I didn't feel stupid. The tires have been losing air very quickly, now and I am refilling at very minimum, weekly. This is not normal. I took it today and the gentleman, Justin, treated me like my concerns were invalid and said that the tires were driven on too low of air and that all 4 had to be replaced. Coincidence since I had brought it in twice before for the same reason. He said that it's not their problem because it was a different tire. I have never had to put air in my tires this often and it is really scaring me to put my now, almost 3 year old twins in this vehicle. They put my spare on today since I refused to let them put 4 new tires on. Something does not seem fair here. My tires should last more than 2 years since I drive the normal amount of miles that a normal person goes. I had my last tires for 4 years without filling them more than once at the very end.Desired Settlement: I don't really know how to approach settlement. I fear that if I get replacement tires that I will not feel safe after filing a complaint.

Business

Response:

The customer came in and purchased 4 [redacted]4 tires on

November 29, 2012 for her 2004 [redacted]. The price of the tires was

$226.95 each for a total of $907.80, then PA State Tire Tax of $1.00 per tire,

then installation for each tire at $19.95 per tire for a total of $79.80, and

she also purchased our Freedom Plan Package for Passenger and Light Truck/SUV

Tires which was $22.70 per tire for a total of $90.80. Her total for her

tires was $1,147.34 including tax. The next time the customer came into

the store was on September 4, 2013 to have her tires rotated and have us repair

a left rear tire that had gone flat. Since installing her tires on

November 29, 2012 until this visit on September 4, 2013, the customer put

11,286 miles on the vehicle. [redacted] recommends that your tires be

rotated every 6,000 to 8,000 miles and to have the PSI set as recommended on

the vehicle tire. We also noted on this

visit that all her tires were checked and rotated, but that the valve core was

lose on her right rear tire, this could account for air leaking out of her

tires. The customer then came back in

again on September 11, 2013 at that time she had us check her tires for her

because her tire light was on, indicating it was her right front tire, we

checked the right front tire for her, told her that there was nothing in her

tire, such as a nail or any object, and that we sealed the bead on the tire, so

no air would leak out. The next time we

saw the customer was on September 16, 2014, at this time the vehicle had

120,325 miles on it, and that would be 14,275 miles since we last did a tire

rotation. As stated before [redacted]

recommends that your tires be rotated every 6,000 to 8,000 miles and to have

the PSI set as recommended on the vehicles tires. The customer came in with very low tire

pressure on her left rear tire. We were

not able to repair the tire as she had driven on the tire with low tire

pressure causing the sidewall to crease.

We then advised her that we could adjust the tires for her, and give her

4 [redacted]4 tires at $111.82 per tire for a total of $447.28, plus

installation for 4 tires at $19.95 each total of $79.80, again purchasing our

Total Tire Protection Promise for $22.70 per tire – 4 tires $90.80, and then

adding the PA State Tire Tax of $1.00 per tire - $4.00 total for a total of

$659.19 including tax.

If the customer followed the recommended rotation and maintenance

schedule from [redacted], I am most certain that she would have gotten more

mileage out of her tires.

We also feel that the price that we offered the customer is fair,

considering that she had the tires for about 22 months and put 25,561 miles on

them.

The customer should not be afraid to come back to Jack Williams in

Easton, PA as a result of filing a complaint against us, we would never

jeopardize anyone’s safety.

Attached please find the receipts from the customer’s visits, along

with the [redacted] Passenger and Light Truck Replacement Tire Limited Warranty.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Robin D[redacted]

Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc

Customer Experience Administrator

Phone ###-###-####

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:I took my vehicle to have an opinion on this matter without supplying any prior information regarding the situation and two mechanics both agreed that it seemed as though there was no resurfacing done prior to mounting the wheels even though it was clearly necessary. They noted that this would certainly cause loss of air in the tires. I was treated with respect and not made to feel insignificant, which was certainly not the case at JW.

Regards,

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I contacted the manufacturer of the tire to see what their suggestion was. I fully disclosed all information as you will see in the correspondence I am including. I explained that the tires were not rotated on time and the process that I have followed this far. The following is my email to them:I purchased 4 new [redacted]4 S8 tires from a retailer that installed them on 11/29/2012. I did not have them rotated until September at 11k miles, which I am aware is over the typical range, but here is my question. Is it typical for the tires to consistently lose air? We have taken my vehicle back 3 times for air loss (significant to the point that I fear putting my 2 year old twins in my vehicle) and it hasn't been 2 years. We continuously have had the tires refilled with air, several times while on vacation, which was majorly inconvenient. The company tells me that this is completely normal, but I am fearful for my safety. The last time they told me that the air loss was so severe they would not keep the tire on my vehicle and that I had to purchase 4 new tires. These tires did not last on my vehicle for 2 years, yet cost $1600. That is a costly investment for a product that did not last 24 months. Up until this point, the tires have just over 25k miles on them. Please advise. Their response was as follows:We are sorry to hear that you have a tire that is losing air pressure. We would recommend you present the tire to an authorized tire dealer for an inspection and have the dealer call us to review while there if needed. Our limited warranty covers tires for defects in workmanship and materials for 6 years or the usable life of the tread, whichever comes first. Injury or damage due to road hazards are conditions beyond our control and not covered under the limited warranty. They need to check the valve stems and put the tires in a dunking tank or water to check for a leak.We appreciate your business and thank you for choosing [redacted].It is our goal to ensure that your issue has been resolved or your question answered to your satisfaction. If we can assist you further, please respond to this email or call us at ###-###-#### (toll free) between 8:00AM and 8:00PM Eastern Time Monday through Friday or between 8:30AM and 4:30PM Eastern Time on Saturday.Sincerely,[redacted]Consumer Care DepartmentCertified [redacted] Product ExpertAs an authorized dealer of their tires, it could have been resolved if your techs would have contacted the manufacturer either of the 2 times I brought it in 10 months after purchase. Instead of following all avenues to assist me in this, they were trying to force me into buying 4 new tires.

Regards,

Business

Response:

In response to the customer: Tires were purchased on November 29, 2012. The customer came back the 1st time after purchasing the tires on 09/04/2013 about 8 1/2 month after she purchased the tires and 11,286 miles since the tires were put on. All 4 tires were checked as you can see from the documents attached the reason for the tires leaking was not because of a defect or problem with the tire , it was because of a valve stem core that was loose, valve stems are used to keep the air in a tire. They have a pin in their center that is depressed in order to allow air into the chamber, then immediately pops up to keep the air in. Once in a while this stem will become loose and cause a leak in the tire; when this happens, the valve stem must be tightened. Which was done on 09/04/2013 on the right rear tire, and then on the left rear tire, which was the tire that the customer came in to have us check we found a small bead leak on the inside where the wheel weight had been hammered on, again not a tire problem, but this tire could have been loosing air since the wheel weight was put on when the tires were purchased 8 1/2 months prior, why did the customer wait for 8 1/2 months to come back with a tire that she had to keep putting air in? We took the tire off the wheel - cleaned the wheel - resealed the tire on the wheel and put a stick on weight on the tire. All 4 tires were checked, and tire pressure on all was good. The customers second visit was on 09/11/2013, 227 miles were put on the vehicle since we last saw it, and when the check tire light came on - again we found that it was not a tire problem, but a wheel, that was leaking - we again took the tire off the wheel, cleaned the wheel and sealed the tire back onto the wheel. We did not see the customer until a little over 1 year later. Why would you keep on having to put air in your tires and not come back to the store to have this looked at? The customers third visit was then over 1 year later on 09/14/14 and 14,048 miles were put on the vehicle and when the customer came in it was apparent that the tire was driven when the tire was low, causing the sidewall to crease. We at that time advised because of the condition of the tire and the damage that was done to the sidewall we advised that we could not fix this tire, and that 4 new tires would need to be purchased. The reason that 4 tires would need to be purchased and not just 1 tire is because this is an all wheel drive vehicle, It is recommended to replace your tires in sets of four for all vehicles but particularly important for all-wheel drive vehicles. All four tires should be the same size, brand, tread design, construction and tread depth to prevent differences in the outside diameter of each tire. Even small differences in the outside diameter may cause drivetrain damage or mechanical malfunction. We offered the customer tires at an adjusted price (where the tires where originally purchased at $226.95 each - we gave the customer a price of $111.82 per tire, plus installation of the tire, and taxes). Being that the customer has had these tires for almost 2 years and has put almost 26,000 miles on the tire, we feel that this is a fair offer and will be the only offer that we are willing to extend. I am confused that the customer keeps on stating that they paid $1600 for tires when you can see on the invoice from 11/29/2013 that the price per tire was $226.95 - and 4 where purchased for a total of $907.80, with the cost of installation at $19.95 per tire, and tire tax at $1.00 per tire which is a total of $4.00. This does not even come close to $1600 that they claim they paid for tires. Even in the email from [redacted] they state that their "limited warranty" covers tires for defects in workmanship and materials (none of which were found by us). We would gladly replace the tires but not for free, the customer has to pay a pro-rated amount based on the mileage that was put on the tires and the wear that was put on the tires.I am open to discuss this with the customer if they wish to call Jack Williams Customer Service at ###-###-####.Please review all the documents that have been sent and the current copies of work orders along with technicians notes on each time the vehicle came in with a problem.

Review: I have change tires in this store when my car had 22416 miles on it (12/08/2012). I was assured that new tires installed ([redacted] Assurance Fuel Max VS) would run up to 65000 miles. I was doing the maintenance in this store each 5000 miles including tire rotation and alignment check. But when next time (4/7/2014) I bought my car for regular state inspection / oil change and / tire rotation (in that moment my car had 45274 miles) I was informed that I must replace all 4 tires in order to pass the State Inspection. So the tires served me less then third of the term I was promised, although I was providing proper maintenance (or may be Jack Williams did not provide proper service) . I had to $363+ labor to replace the tires. I have contacted the Customer Support of Jack Williams, and the manager of the store offered me refund $183+tire insurance. He said that all he can do.Desired Settlement: I'm looking for full refund of my expenses for tires which is 519.8 + labor for the last tire installation package which is $79.80Total:$599.6

Business

Response:

The Customer did purchase four (4) [redacted] Assurance Fuel Max Tires from us on

December 8, 2012 for his 2011 [redacted] which at the time had 22,416 miles on

it. He paid $519.80 for the tires and also paid to have them installed at

a cost of $19.95 per tire, also at this time we offered The Customer our Jack

Williams Total Tire Protection Plan (TTPP) for a cost of $10.95 per tire, which

he declined. We explained to him as we do all of our customers that our

TTPP would cover the tires for 50 months or 50,000 miles

unconditionally. If something would happen to the tire(s) in the 1st

year or 12,000 miles, the tire(s) would be replaced at no cost to the

customer, but they would be required to purchase another TTPP to cover the new

tire(s) and pay to have them installed along with tax. After the 1st

year, or over 12,000 miles the tire(s) would be prorated based on

mileage. Again, the customer would be required to purchase the TTPP,

installation and tax. Being that The Customer declined to purchase our TTPP

he only has the limited warranty from [redacted] to cover his tires. I

have attached a copy of the Limited Warranty, Tire Care and Maintenance Guide

from [redacted].

When The Customer came in on April 7, 2014 for a state inspection we advised him

that he needed four (4) tires to pass state inspection. His vehicle

at that time had 45,274 miles on it. So from when he had his tires

installed on December 8, 2011 until he came in on April 7, 2014 he put only

22,858 miles on his [redacted] Assurance Fuel Max Tires. We at that time

called [redacted] to see what they would offer him with his "Limited

Warranty" they advised us that as a goodwill gesture, he would be responsible to pay $45.48 per

tire plus tax and installation of $19.95 per tire, if he replaced them with a

"comparable" set of four (4) [redacted] Tires. The Customer decided to go with General G-Max tires instead of [redacted] tires. We

then offered a refund of $193.00 and to give him the TTPP for free on his

new tires and he was not accepting this from us, and at that time we

presumed that he was going to contact [redacted].

At this

time I do not see that Jack Williams Tire Co., Inc. owes The Customer a full refund for tires

that he purchased from us on December 8, 2012. Once he declined the extra protection that we

offer on all tires that we sell, he is only covered by the limited warranty of

the tire company. And he should take up any claims with [redacted].

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

The proper tire maintenance

such as alignment and rotation was not provided at moment of service

which I have done regularly on scheduled as recommended, the negligence

cause the premature ware of the tires. I have paid for tires

and expected to have proper service each time , but to pay for

negligence and poor maintenance by paying extra money for insurance -

this was not a good deal. I have no complains about the tire quality, so I have nothing to discuss with [redacted].

Regards,