Kocourek Chevrolet, Inc.

Review: On 5-19-15 I took the vehicle in to Kocoureks Chev. for routine oil change, back up camera not functioning properly and what they said was a broken pin on the rocker panel. I was told they needed to replace the entire rocker panel to fix this. They have had the vehicle for 81 days trying to fix it. In the process they have done extensive damage to the car resulting in the entire left side of the car being repaired and repainted. Painting and repair was done at a independent local body shop (BRB) since their body shop was unable to fix the damage or match the paint after several attempts. I was contacted by BRB to see if my new car was in an accident due to the extensive damage. After that was done, while still at the dealership it somehow ended up with a chip in the hood and had to go back to to get that redone. I now have a new car with less than 10k miles on it with the entire left side and hood damaged and redone.Desired Settlement: Dealership should purchase for my cost or replace the vehicle.

Business

Response:

Guest

stated left rocker molding was loose. Determined replaced of the rocker molding

required due to being loose and cannot be removed to replace clips without

damaging. Ordered replacement rocker molding and sent part to ABRA Collision

Center to have painted so it was ready when guest came to have installed. On

5/19/15, installed left rocker molding, performed maintenance service, checked

operation of object detection system, recalibrated radio touch screen, checked

operation of back up camera, performed service update to seat wires, and detail

shop performed a touch up on a scratch the guest wanted done. Repairs were

completed at Kocourek Chevrolet the same day 5/19/15. Guest

was dissatisfied with the paint touchup so we had detail remove it and gave her

the option to have someone else perform the touchup, guest was dissatisfied

with the color match of the rocker molding, and dissatisfied with the operation

of the backup camera which we found to be operating as designed. Sent

rocker molding back to ABRA Collision Center to have it repainted. Guest was still

not satisfied with the paint match. Sent vehicle, original rocker molding, and

new rocker molding to ABRA Collision Center to have paint matched. At that

time, ABRA Collision Center took over contact with the guest. On

6/12/15 the vehicle was returned to us from ABRA Collision Center as the guest

would not pick up the vehicle until the backup camera was fixed. We

checked the operation of the backup camera and found to be operating as

designed as compared to numerous like vehicles. Guest came to pick up vehicle

and did not like the way the rocker molding fit on the vehicle and that the

backup camera was not fixed. Offered the guest to pick a body shop she would

like to repair her vehicle and offered to have the backup camera replaced for

her satisfaction. The

guest chose to have the vehicle go to BRB Auto body for repairs on 6/16/15. The

guest refused to take the vehicle there so Kocourek Chevrolet delivered the

vehicle to BRB. BRB

Auto body was in direct contact with the guest at that point. Since that time,

the vehicle has been at BRB either in the process of repair or being delayed as

the guest would not let them perform repairs. After conversation with the

general manager of Kocourek Chevrolet, the guest finally approved repairs be

started. Guest

was notified by BRB Auto body her vehicle was completed and ready for pickup on

6/29/15. The

guest has since refused to pick up her vehicle and had BRB deliver the vehicle

back to Kocourek Chevrolet and since that time the vehicle has been left inside

the building awaiting guest pickup. Kocourek Chevrolet has provided the guest

with a courtesy rental car at our expense since 5/19/15 in which she

accumulated 4,000 miles on the vehicles at no expense to her. Kocourek

Chevrolet compensated the guest with 2 monthly vehicle payments totaling

$794.82. Kocourek Chevrolet has also covered the expense to ABRA Collision

Center and BRB Auto body for the repairs. [redacted]General ManagerKocourek Automotive

Consumer

Response:

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.Response from kocoureks is copied below:

RE:

Revdex.com

Complaint ID: [redacted]

August

18, 2015

Guest

stated left rocker molding was loose. Determined replaced of the rocker molding

required due to being loose and cannot be removed to replace clips without

damaging. Ordered replacement rocker molding and sent part to ABRA Collision

Center to have painted so it was ready when guest came to have installed. On

5/19/15, installed left rocker molding, performed maintenance service, checked

operation of object detection system, recalibrated radio touch screen, checked

operation of back up camera, performed service update to seat wires, and detail

shop performed a touch up on a scratch the guest wanted done. Repairs were

completed at Kocourek Chevrolet the same day 5/19/15. Guest

was dissatisfied with the paint touchup so we had detail remove it and gave her

the option to have someone else perform the touchup, guest was dissatisfied

with the color match of the rocker molding, and dissatisfied with the operation

of the backup camera which we found to be operating as designed. Sent

rocker molding back to ABRA Collision Center to have it repainted. Guest was still

not satisfied with the paint match. Sent vehicle, original rocker molding, and

new rocker molding to ABRA Collision Center to have paint matched. At that

time, ABRA Collision Center took over contact with the guest. On

6/12/15 the vehicle was returned to us from ABRA Collision Center as the guest

would not pick up the vehicle until the backup camera was fixed. We

checked the operation of the backup camera and found to be operating as

designed as compared to numerous like vehicles. Guest came to pick up vehicle

and did not like the way the rocker molding fit on the vehicle and that the

backup camera was not fixed. Offered the guest to pick a body shop she would

like to repair her vehicle and offered to have the backup camera replaced for

her satisfaction. The

guest chose to have the vehicle go to BRB Auto body for repairs on 6/16/15. The

guest refused to take the vehicle there so Kocourek Chevrolet delivered the

vehicle to BRB. BRB

Auto body was in direct contact with the guest at that point. Since that time,

the vehicle has been at BRB either in the process of repair or being delayed as

the guest would not let them perform repairs. After conversation with the

general manager of Kocourek Chevrolet, the guest finally approved repairs be

started. Guest

was notified by BRB Auto body her vehicle was completed and ready for pickup on

6/29/15. The

guest has since refused to pick up her vehicle and had BRB deliver the vehicle

back to Kocourek Chevrolet and since that time the vehicle has been left inside

the building awaiting guest pickup. Kocourek Chevrolet has provided the guest

with a courtesy rental car at our expense since 5/19/15 in which she

accumulated 4,000 miles on the vehicles at no expense to her. Kocourek

Chevrolet compensated the guest with 2 monthly vehicle payments totaling

$794.82. Kocourek Chevrolet has also covered the expense to ABRA Collision

Center and BRB Auto body for the repairs. [redacted]General ManagerKocourek Automotive~Chevrolet

Ph#715-359-7200

Please see my attachments in regards to this. My view point is, I do not believe I should have to pay for or accept a new car that has now sustained all this damage, not to mention the depreciated value caused by this. I purchased a new car, not a used car with a completely redone left side and hood. This is no longer a factory done car. Substantial damage has been done to this car. I believe that the dealership should take the responsibilty for what they did. When a consumer pays $30,000 plus for a car and takes it to a Chevy dealership to be fixed (uner warranty) it should not come out damaged and redone to someone else's standards, its not what I bought. Thank you, [redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]

Regards,

Business

Response:

I'm not sure where to go with this next.... [redacted]'s car is STILL here and she refuses to pick it up. I've been extremely respectful throughout this process. I do understand how she feels. But, I do not understand her expectations. As stated on the attachment (with dates) we have taken every precaution on the car to ensure perfection. She has never been in to look at it. She made it perfectly clear to me in our conversations that for one reason or another she doesn't like or trust almost any of our employees. I'm in need of the Revdex.com's guidance on how to ensure [redacted] removes her car from our property by 8-28-15.

Consumer

Response:

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.I'm not sure where to go with this next.... [redacted]'s car is STILL here and she refuses to pick it up. I've been extremely respectful throughout this process. I do understand how she feels. But, I do not understand her expectations. As stated on the attachment (with dates) we have taken every precaution on the car to ensure perfection. She has never been in to look at it. She made it perfectly clear to me in our conversations that for one reason or another she doesn't like or trust almost any of our employees. I'm in need of the Revdex.com's guidance on how to ensure [redacted] removes her car from our property by 8-28-15. (response from Kocourek) I feel Kocoureks is not making any attempt to resolve this issue as they have yet to address the issue of all the damage which is the basis of the complaint. The only thing not redone on that car is the right side and the trunk, otherwise the entire rest of the vehicle has had to be repaired/repainted due to the damage they did. This is not the vehicle I paid $30,000 plus dollars for! I have not looked at the vehicle as I'm not interested in a vehicle with that amount of damage done, fixed up or not! I didn't buy a fixer upper. I feel Kocoureks need to step up and own their errors. As far as the allegations that I don't like the staff at Kocoureks..... I find this to be quite inappropriate. As I told [redacted] when he accused me of this, I don't know them well enough to come to that conclusion.

Review: On 6/17/13 I went into the dealership to get an oil change. While I was there I mentioned to them that the Service Engine Soon light was on and that I had tried to get a reading of the code at one of the auto parts stores and it wouldn't pull the code to tell me what the problem was. They told me it was because the cigarette lighter outlet fuse was blown, so they would need to replace that fuse to be able to pull the code. Once they had "performed the work" they told me that the code they pulled indicated a leak in the fuel filler neck and it would need to be replaced to resolve the Service Engine Soon light issue. They told me it would cost $570 to replace this and I told them I would need to think about it. For the oil change, fuse, and diagnostics I was charged $118.48. Then on 8/23/13 I tried to use the cigarette lighter outlet to charge my cell phone for the first time since the work was done and it didn't work I looked at the fuse box and saw that the was blown. This seems impossible since the dealership claimed to have replaced it. I then went to walmart to purchase a fuse to replace it and when I did replace it the lighter outlet worked and the Service Engine Soon light was no longer on. This leads me to believe that the dealership never replaced the fuse and as a result of that they would not have been able to pull any codes and fabricated the whole fuel issue to try to get more money out of me since they figured I wasn't an informed consumer.Desired Settlement: I would like for the dealership to admit that their employees who were involved in the transaction were committing fraudulent acts, admit negligence, and give me a written apology. I would also like a refund for the fuse that they claimed to have replaced and the diagnostic work they claimed to have performed.

Business

Response:

Guest had taken vehicle 2 other repair shops prior to bringing it to us as the service engine soon light was on. The other locations the guest had gone to were unable to pull any codes as their tools would not work. On 6/7/13 the guest brought the vehicle to us with two fuses that were blown. The fuse that powers the diagnostic link and power outlets was blown prior to presenting the vehicle to us. Guest requested that we replace only the fuse that would allow us to power the scan tool. We install a new fuse and then had power to the diagnostic link. The guest requested that we diagnosis the service engine soon light. We scanned for diagnostic trouble codes and found code P0442 stored for evaporative emission small leak detected. We performed evaporative emission system leak diagnosis using a nitrogen smoke machine. The technician inspected for leaks and found a leak around the fuel filler neck. We provided the guest with an estimate to repair the leak at the fuel filler neck and the guest declined repairs. We returned the vehicle to the guest with no repairs being performed. We did not perform any tests or diagnosis on the reason the fuse was blown prior to coming to us. We charged the guest for 1 fuse and labor to perform the requested diagnosis at the amount the guest had approved prior to starting any work. We also applied a 50% discount for the fuse and diagnosis charge. The guest paid his portion of the bill and left. Guest notified us on 8/26/13 that the same fuse was blown and when he replaced the fuse the service engine soon light went out. The guest accused us of never replacing the fuse nor diagnosing the service engine soon light. We informed the guest that the fuse for the power outlets does not control any functions of the evaporative emission system. Guest requested a refund stating we did not perform the work that was requested. We informed the guest we did perform the work that was requested and in no way deceived him on what we had done and we denied reimbursment. Guest ended conversation.

Consumer

Response: