Jim Holt Construction

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] Regards, Dustin [redacted] First of all, the truck was purchased through a dealer, but when we originally had issues with the bed, we were specifically ask by MTE to stay in touch with them with the issues, not to contact the dealer anymoreThe only reason we have to refuse letting them take the truck is because they cannot provide us with a vehicle of equal value to use during the downtimeThis truck is used for business on a daily basis, and it is the means of providing for our family When MTE representatives came and looked at the bed in person, they refused to go and have the truck put on a scale to see that it IS nearly Ton below the GVW for the truckThey also verbally admitted that the bed was clearly damaged before it was even attached to the chassisWe were not given option(s) on resolving the matter, we were only give ONE optionThey offered us $back on a bed that cost $10,They also stated that we were not supposed to attach components to the top of the bed that grossly overloaded itA welder was attached that weighed 540lbsHose reels, tool boxes, and a ladder rack we’re attaxhed but that is pretty common on a tool bodyPlease find me one that doesn’t have extras attached?? They were no warning labels attached to the bed stating that extra components couldn’t be attachedThere is also no serial number plate attached to the bed, which is supposed to be installed on a brand new unit to identify it for warranty claimsA damaged bed was originally placed on the bed, and we purchased a brand new one

Monroe Truck Equipment, Incsold a standard service body package to one of our Stocking truck DealersThis is very common in the Truck Equipment industry. Most of the time Monroe Truck Equipment, Inchas zero knowledge of who the end user will be on a standard build like this. If a Truck Dealer or Potential End user has questions about application of use of any of our products, we have people in place to help make the correct selection. The Manufacturer also has representatives in place to help. Because we did not sell this product directly to the End User, we cannot control what he actually paid the dealer for it, nor would we have any knowledge if additional items were added to the service body or the invoice after it left our facility. In this customer’s line of work Monroe Truck Equipment, Incwould have recommended a HD mechanic body This body is designed and reinforced for additional weight to be added to it. It is much more expensive than a standard body because it is much beefier. The Manufacturer of the body denied Warranty on the body because of the way it is being used. Monroe Truck Equipment, Inchas made an effort to help this customer purchase the heavier body. That offer is still valid if they wish However, we will not aid in the customer’s recuperation of money lost or damage done by product that was not purchased/installed by Monroe Truck Equipment, Inc because we had no knowledge/control over the additional items added. Monroe Truck Equipment, Incis not in the used equipment business. We also can use the VIN of the truck to Identify it for warranty consideration if serial tag is not present. Monroe Truck Equipment, Incwould have approved a ladder rack on this body and would have recommended how to mount it. Monroe Truck Equipment, Incwill handle our warranty direct with end users most of the time. Rarely will a dealer get involved unless there is a discrepancy in use or specifications that would require their input

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
Dustin [redacted] First of all, the truck was purchased through a dealer, but when we originally had issues with the bed, we were specifically ask by MTE to stay in touch with them with the issues, not to contact the dealer anymore. The only reason we have to refuse letting them take the truck is because they cannot provide us with a vehicle of equal value to use during the downtime. This truck is used for business on a daily basis, and it is the means of providing for our family.  When MTE representatives came and looked at the bed in person, they refused to go and have the truck put on a scale to see that it IS nearly 2 Ton below the GVW for the truck. They also verbally admitted that the bed was clearly damaged before it was even attached to the chassis. We were not given option(s) on resolving the matter, we were only give ONE option. They offered us $4000 back on a bed that cost $10,000. They also stated that we were not supposed to attach components to the top of the bed that grossly overloaded it. A welder was attached that weighed 540lbs. Hose reels, tool boxes, and a ladder rack we’re attaxhed but that is pretty common on a tool body. Please find me one that doesn’t have extras attached?? They were no warning labels attached to the bed stating that extra components couldn’t be attached. There is also no serial number plate attached to the bed, which is supposed to be installed on a brand new unit to identify it for warranty claims. A damaged bed was originally placed on the bed, and we purchased a brand new one.

First to clarify, the person listed as sales person on the complaint below does not work for Monroe Truck Equipment, Inc.   He is the sales person at the Ram dealership through which the customer purchased this truck package. Several people were contacted  to investigate this...

unfortunate situation:From Monroe Truck Equipment, Inc. KY[redacted] From Reading truck bodies (vendor and manufacturer of the body in question)                [redacted] The start of this story is Sep 6, 2016 when the Ram Dealer signed and turned in an order previously quoted by Monroe’s [redacted] for a  Standard Utility type body installed on a 4500 series Ram truck.   The body was painted Black to match the truck and installed by MTE- KY and then delivered to the Ram dealer who in turn sold the unit to the end user.   I am unclear exactly when the End user took delivery of the truck from the Ram Dealer, but should be sometime in October. 2016 April 11th 2017… MTE KY was contacted about issues with a utility body.  Concerns were Rail damage, broken welds/metal breaking,  bed liner pealing, and leaks into the body storage areas. April 12th… KY [redacted] asked to get truck back into shop if possible to look at the issues to figure out what was going on.  Customer stated truck couldn’t come in.   [redacted] requested pictures of issues to try to diagnose a game plan.  Discussed a loaner truck that the end user could use while we looked at /repaired body.  Customer declined due to amount of equipment installed on truck that would need to be moved.  Customer stated that they wanted a new body and chassis.  Threatened to contact attorney. At this time we believed that this was directed towards the Ram Dealership for issues the customer had with the chassis.  MTE loses communication at this point until customer and Dealer communicate. May 18th… Customer dropped truck off at Ram dealership.  Ram Dealership sent MTE pictures of the truck to submit a warranty claim with MTE (which MTE submits to Reading Bodies the mfg.)  When MTE gets pictures of the truck (see attached)  It is noted that since MTE built the truck, Multiple tool boxes, hose reels, ladder rack, and a welder/generator power unit has been added to the top of the OEM side packs. This is crucial as the body on this truck is not designed for any added components on top of the OEM Side packs.  MTE submitted a claim anyways to Reading with the pictures and they replied that the warranty claim was denied due to grossly overloading the OEM sides on a standard body.  This information was given to the end user and they threatened  to retain an attorney.  MTE replied that was unfortunate, but if they wanted to go that route MTE could no longer discuss with them. May 23rd…Customer states only truck dealer under attorney rule with chassis, and they were hoping to work body out with MTE.   May 26-30th…MTE and Reading Representatives schedule a time to see body in person.   Both  Company representatives confirm the body is grossly overloaded for its design.  GVWR of truck questioned.  MTE rep also confirms that Bed liner material that is peeling  was not installed by MTE.   Customer informed of decision to again deny warranty due to overloading of the OEM side packs.  Customer states they will contact attorney.  MTE replied that was unfortunate, but if they wanted to go that route MTE could no longer discuss with them. July 2017… End user contacts MTE and states that they have held off paying the retainer fee for the attorney against MTE.  July 13th… Reading discusses internally for potential solutions. July 20th…End user and MTE [redacted] discuss options  to offer the customer  the correct HD mechanics body.  [redacted] sends literature on the HD mechanic type body to the customer and explains the need for the heavier body.  MTE and Reading in cooperation decide to offer a Good Will  estimate/Proposal to the customer in which they would sell back the old body and pay the upcharge for the correct body.  MTE offered to remove the old and install the correct body for MTE’s cost.Customer declined offer.