Landmark Mazda

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2015/08/07) */ The client brought their vehicle into our service department on July 7/@ 1:16pm The clients concern was that the air conditioning did not operate in their [redacted] * Our technician began diagnosing the vehicle @ 2:24pm July 7th Initial diagnoses led us to the fact that the air conditioning control head was not functioning, testing on the component confirmed that the control head was faulty Our service advisor then contacted the client who approved the repairs late in the day on July 7th The parts order was processed on July 8th and the new parts arrived on the July 9th The technician resumed work on the vehicle @11:00am July 9th After replacement of the air conditioning control head, we were able to verify that the controls are now operating correctlyHowever the air conditioning still does not operate At this point the technician contacted [redacted] Technical assistance to consult with continued diagnosesTechnical assistant ticket was opened @ 4:18pm July 9th [redacted] Techline requested several test be performed, each time responding back to [redacted] with the results of said testsThis process can prove time consuming due to time zone differences On July 13th @ 10:15am diagnoses led to the instrument cluster as the possible failureOwing to the high cost of replacing an instrument cluster, we opted to exchange the cluster with a known good part from one of our stock unitsThis way we could verify the repair prior to ordering an expensive and non-returnable item The service advisor contacted the owner of the vehicle to inform them of the current situation on the vehicle and received his approval to proceed with exchanging the instrument clustersWe informed the client that in order to proceed with this step we would need a second keyUnfortunately the client did not own a second key, so the client approved ordering and programming a new key The key was ordered on July 14th and arrived on July 15th The instrument clusters were exchanged on July 15th, unfortunately this did not rectify the clients concernAt this point the original instrument cluster was re-installed into the client's vehicle During the Installation of the instrument cluster the technician noted that the client's vehicle has the incorrect engine cooling fan installed, he noted that the wiring from the vehicle does not match up with the wiring on the aftermarket cooling fan The technician then exchanged the cooling fan with a known good part from our stock unit, this did not rectify the clients concern The aftermarket cooling fan was then re-installed in the clients vehicle The technician then continued diagnoses along with assistance from [redacted] techline, this diagnoses led to the Powertrain control module as the most likely cause of the customers concern The technician then inspected the wiring harness for the powertrain control moduleUpon touching the wiring harness the vehicle stalled, and would not restart Closer examination revealed compromised wiring in the engine wiring harness, leading up to the powertrain control moduleDamaged wiring in the harness has caused damage to the powertrain control module At this point we inquired whether this repair was eligible for warranty coverageWe noted in [redacted] online system that the vehicle was a "salvage" title and therefore is ineligible for warranty The "Salvage" title means that at some point the vehicle was damaged to the point that the insurance company deemed it not worth repairing, and it was written offSince that time someone has done extensive work on the vehicle to repair it as salvage Most likely the damage to the wiring harness occurred at the time the vehicle was written off, however due to the hidden nature of the damage, it was missed by whoever did the original repair The service advisor then contacted the owner of the vehicle and explained the technician's findings An estimate of $+ taxes was providedThe client advised the service advisor that we could discuss the situation with family and would let us know On July 20th the fixed operations manager received a call from the client's father inquiring about what was wrong with the vehicle and why it failed now After explaining the situation and discussing with the clients father at length, the manager offer a 20% discount on all parts & labour, which brought the total estimate for repairs to $+ tax The client's father approved the repairs @ 3:51pm July 20thParts were ordered immediately, however the service department received a phone call the next day from the client's mother, declining the repairsAt this point the parts order was cancelled Over the next two weeks the clients met with the fixed operation manager to discuss the vehicle and also met with several individuals from the sales department to explore the option of trading the vehicle in In meetings with the fixed operations manager the client expressed that they would like the vehicle fixed for free, as the vehicles failures escalated while in our possessionAfter reviewing all of the events that transpired the fixed operations manager determined that the failure was in no way caused by any action of the technician Although we were not prepared to repair the powertrain control module & wiring harness at no charge to the client, Landmark Mazda was still prepared to honor the 20% discount that was previously offered The client left the meeting with the Fixed Operations manager, stating that they would look for cheaper parts to provide The fixed operations manager followed up with the clients via telephoneThe client stated that they would only like to talk with the Dealer Principal, who was away The clients met with the dealer principal & fixed operation manager on August the 6th At the time the clients stated that unless we were prepared to repair the powertrain control module & wiring with no charge to them they would tow the vehicle to an alternate facility The final meeting ended with the clients deciding to tow the vehicle away

My desired resolution on my complaint is to restore my car windshield the way it was before I brought my car to themIt is just annoying when im driving that there is crack in the middle of my windshieldA replacement of the windshield instead of just repairing it is my desired resolution on my complaint[redacted]

The clients complaint is damage caused by a rock chip to the windshieldThe vehicle was in for a routine oil & filter service and was not even test driven on the day of the service.Even though it is impossible for this damage to have been caused by Landmark Mazda, we already went above and beyond to offer to have the chip repaired at no cost to the clientThis is the extent of what the dealership is willing to offer, no other compensation will be provided

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because like I said, I brought my car to them with no chip on my windshieldBefore they accept my car for service, they checked it first to see if there are damages on my car and write it on the checklist form before I sign the formOn my recollection, the form that I signed stated that there are no damages on my car when they accepted it for serviceIt was so dissappointed on my part that they are keep denying that the chip was not caused by them without investigating it first They should follow what they always advertised in Mazda that they are going to take care of the car while servicing itIt is so frustrating that I brought my car to them without any chip in the windshield and when I pick it up, there was already damage on my windshieldI hope they will understand my situation where I always take care of my car thats why I choose them for the service and change oil because I rely on the customer satisfaction that *** always advertise
Sincerely,
*** ***

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/08/07) */
The client brought their vehicle into our service department on July 7/2015 @ 1:16pm.
The clients concern was that the air conditioning did not operate in their 2012 [redacted].
Our technician began diagnosing the vehicle @ 2:24pm July 7th...

2015.
Initial diagnoses led us to the fact that the air conditioning control head was not functioning, testing on the component confirmed that the control head was faulty.
Our service advisor then contacted the client who approved the repairs late in the day on July 7th 2015
The parts order was processed on July 8th 2015 and the new parts arrived on the July 9th 2015
The technician resumed work on the vehicle @11:00am July 9th 2015.
After replacement of the air conditioning control head, we were able to verify that the controls are now operating correctly. However the air conditioning still does not operate.
At this point the technician contacted [redacted] Technical assistance to consult with continued diagnoses. Technical assistant ticket was opened @ 4:18pm July 9th 2015
[redacted] Techline requested several test be performed, each time responding back to [redacted] with the results of said tests. This process can prove time consuming due to time zone differences.
On July 13th 2015 @ 10:15am diagnoses led to the instrument cluster as the possible failure. Owing to the high cost of replacing an instrument cluster, we opted to exchange the cluster with a known good part from one of our stock units. This way we could verify the repair prior to ordering an expensive and non-returnable item.
The service advisor contacted the owner of the vehicle to inform them of the current situation on the vehicle and received his approval to proceed with exchanging the instrument clusters. We informed the client that in order to proceed with this step we would need a second key. Unfortunately the client did not own a second key, so the client approved ordering and programming a new key.
The key was ordered on July 14th and arrived on July 15th.
The instrument clusters were exchanged on July 15th, unfortunately this did not rectify the clients concern. At this point the original instrument cluster was re-installed into the client's vehicle.
During the Installation of the instrument cluster the technician noted that the client's vehicle has the incorrect engine cooling fan installed, he noted that the wiring from the vehicle does not match up with the wiring on the aftermarket cooling fan.
The technician then exchanged the cooling fan with a known good part from our stock unit, this did not rectify the clients concern.
The aftermarket cooling fan was then re-installed in the clients vehicle.
The technician then continued diagnoses along with assistance from [redacted] techline, this diagnoses led to the Powertrain control module as the most likely cause of the customers concern.
The technician then inspected the wiring harness for the powertrain control module. Upon touching the wiring harness the vehicle stalled, and would not restart.
Closer examination revealed compromised wiring in the engine wiring harness, leading up to the powertrain control module. Damaged wiring in the harness has caused damage to the powertrain control module.
At this point we inquired whether this repair was eligible for warranty coverage. We noted in [redacted] online system that the vehicle was a "salvage" title and therefore is ineligible for warranty.
The "Salvage" title means that at some point the vehicle was damaged to the point that the insurance company deemed it not worth repairing, and it was written off. Since that time someone has done extensive work on the vehicle to repair it as salvage.
Most likely the damage to the wiring harness occurred at the time the vehicle was written off, however due to the hidden nature of the damage, it was missed by whoever did the original repair.
The service advisor then contacted the owner of the vehicle and explained the technician's findings.
An estimate of $4398.62 + taxes was provided. The client advised the service advisor that we could discuss the situation with family and would let us know.
On July 20th the fixed operations manager received a call from the client's father inquiring about what was wrong with the vehicle and why it failed now.
After explaining the situation and discussing with the clients father at length, the manager offer a 20% discount on all parts & labour, which brought the total estimate for repairs to $3518.90 + tax.
The client's father approved the repairs @ 3:51pm July 20th. Parts were ordered immediately, however the service department received a phone call the next day from the client's mother, declining the repairs. At this point the parts order was cancelled.
Over the next two weeks the clients met with the fixed operation manager to discuss the vehicle and also met with several individuals from the sales department to explore the option of trading the vehicle in.
In meetings with the fixed operations manager the client expressed that they would like the vehicle fixed for free, as the vehicles failures escalated while in our possession. After reviewing all of the events that transpired the fixed operations manager determined that the failure was in no way caused by any action of the technician.
Although we were not prepared to repair the powertrain control module & wiring harness at no charge to the client, Landmark Mazda was still prepared to honor the 20% discount that was previously offered.
The client left the meeting with the Fixed Operations manager, stating that they would look for cheaper parts to provide.
The fixed operations manager followed up with the clients via telephone. The client stated that they would only like to talk with the Dealer Principal, who was away.
The clients met with the dealer principal & fixed operation manager on August the 6th 2015.
At the time the clients stated that unless we were prepared to repair the powertrain control module & wiring with no charge to them they would tow the vehicle to an alternate facility.
The final meeting ended with the clients deciding to tow the vehicle away.

The clients complaint is damage caused by a rock chip to the windshield. The vehicle was in for a routine oil & filter service and was not even test driven on the day of the service.Even though it is impossible for this damage to have been caused by Landmark Mazda, we already went above and beyond to offer to have the chip repaired at no cost to the client. This is the extent of what the dealership is willing to offer, no other compensation will be provided.

My desired resolution on my complaint is to restore my car windshield the way it was before I brought my car to them. It is just annoying when im driving that there is crack in the middle of my windshield. A replacement of the windshield instead of just repairing it is my desired resolution on my...

complaint.[redacted]