Complaint: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted],I am rejecting this response because:These scratches were not present prior to our car wash visit that day. The damages are very obvious, and we would've noticed the scratches when we got into the car to drive to the car wash. After the cars go through the wash, it gets wiped down and vacuumed. When this process is complete, they normally drive the vehicle up to the waiting area for you. On this day, they didn't drive the car up, but instead honked at us to pick up the car from the wipe and vacuum area. The driver's side door were left open, so we didn't notice the scratches upon retrieving the car. It wasn't until a few minutes later that the scratches were noticed, when we were at the [redacted] gas station which is immediately across the street from the car wash. The scratches were outstanding and noticeable upon entry when opening the door after pumping gas. We drove the car to a parking stall to do a quick look over and noticed additional lighter scratches running along the side of the car. We returned to the car wash immediately after.They say they didn't see anything on the still images from their cameras. Their cameras did not pick up any of those damages when the vehicle entered the carwash, so this does NOT exclude the possibility that the damages were sustained in the carwash. The supervisor on duty that day who initially examined the video even admitted to me that their cameras would not pick up those types of scratches on dark colored vehicles (and our [redacted] is metallic black). They claim that there is NO way the scratches could've been made by the car wash because they would've seen damage to the entire side of the vehicle. However, there were scratches down the side of the vehicle. Most of them I was able to buff out, but the most significant ones on the driver door were too deep to buff out. They argue that there were no other cars that were damaged? How do they know there weren't other cars damaged and the owners just didn't notice it like we did? If only 1 car gets damaged, it automatically excludes the possibility that it was damaged in the car wash? Is this company the type of business that needs more than one complaint per day in order to accept responsibility?I've attached 3 images of the damages. The camera doesn't do a good job capturing the extent of the damages. However, the areas of damage that I managed to pickup through the camera appears as white lines or scratches above the door handle area, and off to the side of the door handle area. Sincerely,[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because there are some discrepancies in their response:I followed up after reading Tony Group's response & spoke to Sue E[redacted] at Tony Group and told her that we did not know the exact date of the incident. [redacted] noticed that the hooks & grommets were broken and/or missing sometime in October. On October 1, 2017, we did have our 2006 [redacted] (License No. [redacted]) car washed at Autoplex Car Wash, but we are not sure if the incident occurred sometime in September or earlier. We do not have the receipts for September or August. Also, [redacted] researched and found that the hooks & grommets for our 2006 [redacted] car are available to order on-line, which Tony Group claimed that the parts were not available. Lynne also spoke to Wesley A**, a Parts Sales Specialist at [redacted], who said that the parts were not available locally, but it can be ordered, if needed. Also, we did not make any appointment with an outside vendor as was indicated in Tony Group’s response. Lynne instead went to an appointment on November 4 for an inspection with [redacted], but they did not have the correct hooks & grommets for our car.We have an appointment scheduled on January 15, 2018, with Sue E[redacted] and a technician and we will follow-up with a response after this appointment. We are also agreeable to have an outside vendor install the hooks and grommets.
Sincerely,
[redacted] & [redacted]
I hand delivered copies of pictures of the hooks and missing grommets from the front driver's side and front passenger side since I was unable to attach them to this email. Copies of the pictures were previously sent to Tony Auto Group. Thank you.
[redacted]
Revdex.com of Hawaii1132 Bishop Street Suite 615Honolulu, HI 96813
Re: Complaint from [redacted]
July 14, 2015
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Thank you for allowing the Tony Group the opportunity to respond to the complaint from Mr. [redacted].
He did present his...
2011 [redacted] for service at the Autoplex Car Wash on June 11, 2015 and purchased a full-serve wash. The vehicle was washed in our wash tunnel at approximately 14:06. After exiting our tunnel car wash the customer drove to the finish area where our staff completed the service by vacuuming the interior and wiping the windows. The vehicle was returned to the customer at approximately 14:25 and the customer left our facility about 2 minutes later.
Subsequently, the customer returned and spoke with one of our Supervisors and claimed that there were scratches on the left front and rear doors that occurred on their visit to the carwash. The Supervisor examined the vehicle and explained to the customer that the damage claimed was not consistent with the operation of the carwash equipment and could not have been caused by the equipment. The customer was not satisfied with that evaluation. The Supervisor took still photos of the damage and took the contact information from Mr. [redacted] and let him know that the information would be forwarded to the carwash Manager.
I received the information the next day and initiated an investigation including discussing the issue with the Supervisor and reviewing surveillance video of the vehicle while it was at the carwash. I then called the Mr. [redacted] and explained that in my investigation I could not see anything on the images from our cameras that matched the images from the still cameras. I also reiterated the Supervisor’s conclusion that the type of damage on the vehicle is not consistent with the motion of the friction components of the carwash equipment and that there were no other claims of damage by other customers before or after his wash. Additionally, the carwash tunnel was used throughout the day to wash our internal vehicle jobs including brand new vehicles. None of those vehicles experienced any damage. Additionally, there was no report of any equipment issues that weekend that might have caused any damage to a vehicle washed in the tunnel.
I also reviewed surveillance video of the vehicle in the finish area and there does not appear to be anything out of the ordinary that could have caused the damage to the vehicle.
I informed Mr. [redacted] that as a result of my investigation it did not appear that the damage occurred during their visit to the carwash that day and as a result we would not accept responsibility for the damage.
Complaint: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted],I am rejecting this response because:These scratches were not present prior to our car wash visit that day. The damages are very obvious, and we would've noticed the scratches when we got into the car to drive to the car wash. After the cars go through the wash, it gets wiped down and vacuumed. When this process is complete, they normally drive the vehicle up to the waiting area for you. On this day, they didn't drive the car up, but instead honked at us to pick up the car from the wipe and vacuum area. The driver's side door were left open, so we didn't notice the scratches upon retrieving the car. It wasn't until a few minutes later that the scratches were noticed, when we were at the [redacted] gas station which is immediately across the street from the car wash. The scratches were outstanding and noticeable upon entry when opening the door after pumping gas. We drove the car to a parking stall to do a quick look over and noticed additional lighter scratches running along the side of the car. We returned to the car wash immediately after.They say they didn't see anything on the still images from their cameras. Their cameras did not pick up any of those damages when the vehicle entered the carwash, so this does NOT exclude the possibility that the damages were sustained in the carwash. The supervisor on duty that day who initially examined the video even admitted to me that their cameras would not pick up those types of scratches on dark colored vehicles (and our [redacted] is metallic black). They claim that there is NO way the scratches could've been made by the car wash because they would've seen damage to the entire side of the vehicle. However, there were scratches down the side of the vehicle. Most of them I was able to buff out, but the most significant ones on the driver door were too deep to buff out. They argue that there were no other cars that were damaged? How do they know there weren't other cars damaged and the owners just didn't notice it like we did? If only 1 car gets damaged, it automatically excludes the possibility that it was damaged in the car wash? Is this company the type of business that needs more than one complaint per day in order to accept responsibility?I've attached 3 images of the damages. The camera doesn't do a good job capturing the extent of the damages. However, the areas of damage that I managed to pickup through the camera appears as white lines or scratches above the door handle area, and off to the side of the door handle area. Sincerely,[redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because there are some discrepancies in their response:I followed up after reading Tony Group's response & spoke to Sue E[redacted] at Tony Group and told her that we did not know the exact date of the incident. [redacted] noticed that the hooks & grommets were broken and/or missing sometime in October. On October 1, 2017, we did have our 2006 [redacted] (License No. [redacted]) car washed at Autoplex Car Wash, but we are not sure if the incident occurred sometime in September or earlier. We do not have the receipts for September or August. Also, [redacted] researched and found that the hooks & grommets for our 2006 [redacted] car are available to order on-line, which Tony Group claimed that the parts were not available. Lynne also spoke to Wesley A**, a Parts Sales Specialist at [redacted], who said that the parts were not available locally, but it can be ordered, if needed. Also, we did not make any appointment with an outside vendor as was indicated in Tony Group’s response. Lynne instead went to an appointment on November 4 for an inspection with [redacted], but they did not have the correct hooks & grommets for our car.We have an appointment scheduled on January 15, 2018, with Sue E[redacted] and a technician and we will follow-up with a response after this appointment. We are also agreeable to have an outside vendor install the hooks and grommets.
Sincerely,
[redacted] & [redacted]
I hand delivered copies of pictures of the hooks and missing grommets from the front driver's side and front passenger side since I was unable to attach them to this email. Copies of the pictures were previously sent to Tony Auto Group. Thank you.
[redacted]
Revdex.com of Hawaii1132 Bishop Street Suite 615Honolulu, HI 96813
Re: Complaint from [redacted]
July 14, 2015
Dear Ms. [redacted]
Thank you for allowing the Tony Group the opportunity to respond to the complaint from Mr. [redacted].
He did present his...
2011 [redacted] for service at the Autoplex Car Wash on June 11, 2015 and purchased a full-serve wash. The vehicle was washed in our wash tunnel at approximately 14:06. After exiting our tunnel car wash the customer drove to the finish area where our staff completed the service by vacuuming the interior and wiping the windows. The vehicle was returned to the customer at approximately 14:25 and the customer left our facility about 2 minutes later.
Subsequently, the customer returned and spoke with one of our Supervisors and claimed that there were scratches on the left front and rear doors that occurred on their visit to the carwash. The Supervisor examined the vehicle and explained to the customer that the damage claimed was not consistent with the operation of the carwash equipment and could not have been caused by the equipment. The customer was not satisfied with that evaluation. The Supervisor took still photos of the damage and took the contact information from Mr. [redacted] and let him know that the information would be forwarded to the carwash Manager.
I received the information the next day and initiated an investigation including discussing the issue with the Supervisor and reviewing surveillance video of the vehicle while it was at the carwash. I then called the Mr. [redacted] and explained that in my investigation I could not see anything on the images from our cameras that matched the images from the still cameras. I also reiterated the Supervisor’s conclusion that the type of damage on the vehicle is not consistent with the motion of the friction components of the carwash equipment and that there were no other claims of damage by other customers before or after his wash. Additionally, the carwash tunnel was used throughout the day to wash our internal vehicle jobs including brand new vehicles. None of those vehicles experienced any damage. Additionally, there was no report of any equipment issues that weekend that might have caused any damage to a vehicle washed in the tunnel.
I also reviewed surveillance video of the vehicle in the finish area and there does not appear to be anything out of the ordinary that could have caused the damage to the vehicle.
I informed Mr. [redacted] that as a result of my investigation it did not appear that the damage occurred during their visit to the carwash that day and as a result we would not accept responsibility for the damage.
Respectfully
Dean M[redacted]
Manager
Autoplex Car Wash