Luther Brookdale Chevrolet

May 17, Revdex.com *** *** Complaint ID:*** On Friday April 21, *** *** had her Chevrolet Malibu towed to Luther Brookdale ChevroletThe information we had at the time is that her vehicle stalled and would not restartOn Monday April 24, a technician looked at
***’s MalibuAt this time it was discovered that the under hood fuse block was full of waterThomas ***, Service Writer, called *** *** with an estimate to repair her vehicle*** *** informed Thomas at this time that the vehicle stalled in a car wash and she gave Thomas her insurance information along with her extended warranty informationThomas contacted the extended warranty company and received authorization to repair ***’s vehicle, she just had to pay her deductible*** wanted Thomas to contact the car wash to tell them that they broke her vehicle and that the car wash was responsible for the cost of repairing her vehicleThe amount of money *** *** was seeking exceeded the amount of what her deductible was through her extended warranty companyThomas did not feel comfortable in asking the car wash to pay anything, at this time Thomas spoke with his superior Pat *** the Service Drive ManagerMr*** determined that Luther Brookdale Chevrolet could not make a determination as to how the under hood fuse block on *** ***’s Malibu became full of waterMr*** then spoke with *** and her boyfriend Sam, at this time Mr*** explained that no one from Luther Brookdale Chevrolet would be contacting the car wash on their behalfLuther Brookdale Chevrolet determined what was wrong with the vehicle and repaired the vehicleLuther Brookdale Chevrolet had no way of knowing the cause of the water intrusion*** *** claims that the owner of the car wash spoke with Pat *** the Service Drive Manager, at no time did Mr*** speak with anyone representing the car wash, this claim is simply falseThe owner of the car wash did come to Luther Brookdale Chevrolet and spoke to Thomas ***Mr*** is adamant that he did not disclose any of *** ***’s personal information with the owner of the car wash

Response received via e-mail to Revdex.com, 10-20-17:Mrs*** contacted Adam *** our Service Director on 10/She Informed him that her vehicle was coming back because she was still hearing a noise after her repair on 10/10/Upon reviewing her concern Adam found that she was in on 10/10/for a noise from the rear of vehicleWe found that the rear U-Joint was binding, causing a noiseUpon inspection of the vehicle we also found the left front wheel bearing was loose*** authorized us to replace the u-joint and bearingOn 10/11/the vehicle was returned to us to inspect for the grinding noiseWe found that the right rear inner brake pad was grinding due to failure of the right rear caliperAdam reviewed the vehicle inspection report from the initial visit and it appeared that the inspection report was not completed correctlyIt was his believe that if the inspection report had been filled out correctly we would have found the right rear inner brake pad to be low and *** would have been advised that she would need brake work at that time in addition to the work she approved on 10/10/This was an oversight on our technicians behalfAdam told *** that it was our fault the additional work was not found and that we would help with the repair costs because of the oversight. The original estimate using General Motors parts was over after we discounted it we got her bill down to to help herAdam followed up with *** on Friday 10/13/and she said the vehicle was good and not making any noiseWe want to help our guest out any way we can, after their conversation he was under the impression that she was satisfied with the outcome

I am rejecting this response because: I never asked Mr.*** to call anyone I made the call myself...And Luther Brookdale Chevrolet lied to my extended warranty company to get my vehicle repaired when there was no need to..they told my extended warranty company there was no water damage and there was and this came directly out of Pat *** the service managers mouth he also stated Thomas *** was in hot water for lying...Also I never asked for a dollar amount from the carwash so I have no idea where that came from I simply said that the service consultant Thomas *** stated the carwash did the damage and I feel you as a business owner need to pay half if not all of the damages...Now its clear that Mr.*** and the owner have spoken to put this story together but yet another lie has been told I didn't have a deductable on my extended warranty insurance and I can provide you with that information so you can see that I am making a valid statement! This business is corrupt and full of lies not only did they damage my vehicle and blamed it on the towing company until we asked to see the videotape then they partially repaired my car they lied to get my vehicle fixed and to add insult to injury when this matter was brought to Mr.***'s attention he denied talking to Jeff he said Thomas did not speak to him yet he just stated Thomas spoke to him when he came to Luther to check on my vehicle...also he stated that Mr.Jeff N.from crystal carwash may have picked my file up off the desk and gotten my information that way if this is true that is still negligence on their behalf because that would mean my checking/debit information...my social security number and everything else was now accessible and how many others have been done this way? Its clear that this business has broken the Bearing Act Of Privacy and this has a stiff penalty ..Mr.*** and Mr.*** can keep denying things but they are the liars and I have the proof...espically them lying to my insurance company its all documented...never should they have done business this way ..and then try and add to the story to make themselves look good

Revdex.com reached Ms [redacted] by phone. (Said the complaint typos were the result of having completed the complaint form on her phone.)Ms [redacted] explains that she initially took her 2007 Tahoe into the dealership when she began experiencing some noises from the back end of the vehicle. Says the dealership...

determined that some U-joints and wheel bearings needed to be replaced. Ms [redacted] paid approximately $1200 to have the work done, and when she initially left the dealership, the noise issue appeared to be resolved.Within a few days, Ms [redacted] says she began experiencing a similar but different noise, and took the truck back into Brookdale Chevrolet. This time, was told she needed new calipers, rotors, and brakes -- was told about $900 for this repair.Ms [redacted] says she never had these 'new' issues prior to the U-joint and wheel bearing work. She is questioning why these items were not caught or pointed out during her previous repair work, and feels the dealership should show her some consideration in having these additional repairs completed.

Response received via e-mail to Revdex.com -- PDF attached; text of letter reads as follows:"ID: [redacted]This is in response to the brake light coming on for the vehicle [redacted] purchased from CarMax.General Motors did issue a recall on this problem and the recall was done at another Chevrolet...

Dealership on June 29, 2015. When the vehicle was brought to us on October 16, 2015 our Service Department could not duplicate the issue [redacted] was having and no codes were found when a scan was done. We did, however, relearn the brake pedal position in hopes that may have been the problem. When CarMax brought us the vehicle on March 18, 2016 our Service Department scanned for codes again and the code C0161 came up. It appeared that some of the wires may not have been connected correctly when the recall was done at another dealership in June 2015. Our technician corrected the wiring, test drove the vehicle and rescanned for codes, nothing came up on the rescan. We rely on our scanning tools to help diagnose any issues with vehicles, if nothing comes up it's difficult to make any repairs on something that's not there when we have the vehicle in our Service Department.To clear up any questions on the warranty, once General Motors pays a Dealership to perform a recall they will not pay another Dealership to do it again or redo it. This is possibly where the thought that there was no longer a warranty on the car originated.We understand it's an inconvenience for a customer to have to return numerous times for the same issue, we hope it is now resolved for Stacy. We have reviewed Stacy's repair issue with our Service Manager and the Advisor that talked with [redacted] on March 26, 2016 in hopes to improve on communication with our guests going forward."