Majhor Murray Ltd

From: [redacted] RE: RE: Revdex.com Dispute #: [redacted] This is a response written on behalf of [redacted] by [redacted] ***This is in regards to an initial complaint filed by Mr [redacted] against Bruce and Terry M [redacted] of Majhor Murray LTDThis statement issued here is in response to Mrand MrsM [redacted] statement issued on 4/12/ In Mrand MrsM [redacted] statement, they stated that “there was nothing noted or requested by the customer for a safety inspection,” this is incorrectOn two separate occasions, a full service inspection was requestedOnce by Mr [redacted] when he initially brought the Toyota Longbed to Majhor Murray LTD on 12/23/and a second time by his daughter’s boyfriend when he picked up the truck on 2/18/ On 12/23/15, Mr [redacted] requested that the mechanics at Majhor Murray LTD“check everything” under the hood of the truck to determine what exactly was wrong with the vehicleHe also mentioned that he thought it may be something wrong with the carburetorWhen Mr [redacted] told Bruce and Terry M [redacted] to “check everything,” that was his way of telling them to do a safety inspection of the vehicleWith Mr [redacted] not being a mechanic, he didn’t know the specific jargon that was required by Bruce and Terry M [redacted] to perform this type of serviceIn response to this request, Bruce stated “do you expect us to check every nut and bolt on the vehicle?” to which our answer was always “yes, that’s exactly what we want.” Also on 2/18/16, when [redacted] ***, the boyfriend of Mr [redacted] daughter picked up the Toyota Longbed, he also mentioned to Bruce and Terry M [redacted] that Mr [redacted] had wanted a full-service inspection from the very first time we brought in the vehicle to which Mr [redacted] specifically remembers Terry M [redacted] saying the same thing that was mentioned to Mr [redacted] of “well do you expect us to check every nut and bolt?” to which Mr [redacted] said “yes, that what I thought we brought the vehicle to you guys for.” With multiple times mentioned in Bruce and Terry M [redacted] response to our complaint that “there was nothing noted or requested by the customer for a safety inspection,” “we didn’t have a conversation about a new purchase inspection or any other safety inspection,” which is incorrect and untrue, it appears to Mr [redacted] that Bruce and Terry M [redacted] want to rid themselves of any responsibility for any work they did on the truck, clearly stated in their response when they mentioned “We cannot be responsible for other areas of the vehicle we did not inspect, make any recommendation of perform work onThe vehicle is years oldIt will inherently have problems due to the age and mileage.” If Bruce and Terry M [redacted] would have just mentioned the inherent problems with this vehicle and their unwillingness to perform work on this vehicle from the beginning and just charged Mr [redacted] for a safety inspection like he wanted, then this situation would have never escalated into what it currently is Mr [redacted] feels the amount owed of $for services provided on his vehicle is grossly unfairThe vehicle was left with more issues than when it started and with problems never fixed on the vehicle as well, especially when he just wanted the vehicle “inspected” and the proper problems diagnosed from the very beginning Also included in Mr [redacted] response was the mention of taking the Toyota Longbed to a third-party mechanic Chris St was never mentioned that the Toyota was serviced in the Wentworth Chevrolet dealership, but rather at the residence of MrS [redacted] himselfMrS [redacted] is a longtime family friend of [redacted] and the rationale behind taking the vehicle to MrS [redacted] was to have someone that Mr [redacted] and therefore, Mr [redacted] trust take a look at the vehicleAnd as mentioned before, the problems with the vehicle were diagnosed by MrS [redacted] indicating many problems with the service and supposed repairs provided by the mechanics at Majhor Murray LTD

To: [redacted] From: Bruce M***RE: [redacted] Dispute # [redacted] I am responding to your letter and response from [redacted] This appears to be a futile processWe could go back and forth forever with no outcomeBoth of usdisagree on what occurred at our shopWe stand by what we said happened and provided supportinginformation to that factI am sure he stands by what he says occurredWe have not had a history ofRevdex.com disputes in our years of businessIronically, [redacted] came by our business to apologize forwhat has taken placeHe did not intend for the information he stated to be used as it was relayed inthis matter The funds have been taken out of our account Bruce M***

From: [redacted]
RE: RE: Revdex.com Dispute #: [redacted]
This is a response written on behalf of [redacted] by [redacted]. This is in regards to an initial complaint filed by Mr. [redacted] against Bruce and Terry M[redacted] of Majhor Murray LTD. This statement issued here is in response to Mr. and Mrs. M[redacted] statement issued on 4/12/16.
In Mr. and Mrs. M[redacted] statement, they stated that “there was nothing noted or requested by the customer for a safety inspection,” this is incorrect. On two separate occasions, a full service inspection was requested. Once by Mr. [redacted] when he initially brought the 1979 Toyota Longbed to Majhor Murray LTD on 12/23/15 and a second time by his daughter’s boyfriend when he picked up the truck on 2/18/16.
On 12/23/15, Mr. [redacted] requested that the mechanics at Majhor Murray LTD. “check everything” under the hood of the truck to determine what exactly was wrong with the vehicle. He also mentioned that he thought it may be something wrong with the carburetor. When Mr. [redacted] told Bruce and Terry M[redacted] to “check everything,” that was his way of telling them to do a safety inspection of the vehicle. With Mr. [redacted] not being a mechanic, he didn’t know the specific jargon that was required by Bruce and Terry M[redacted] to perform this type of service. In response to this request, Bruce stated “do you expect us to check every nut and bolt on the vehicle?” to which our answer was always “yes, that’s exactly what we want.”
Also on 2/18/16, when [redacted], the boyfriend of Mr. [redacted] daughter picked up the 1979 Toyota Longbed, he also mentioned to Bruce and Terry M[redacted] that Mr. [redacted] had wanted a full-service inspection from the very first time we brought in the vehicle to which Mr. [redacted] specifically remembers Terry M[redacted] saying the same thing that was mentioned to Mr. [redacted] of “well do you expect us to check every nut and bolt?” to which Mr. [redacted] said “yes, that what I thought we brought the vehicle to you guys for.”
With multiple times mentioned in Bruce and Terry M[redacted] response to our complaint that “there was nothing noted or requested by the customer for a safety inspection,” “we didn’t have a conversation about a new purchase inspection or any other safety inspection,” which is incorrect and untrue, it appears to Mr. [redacted] that Bruce and Terry M[redacted] want to rid themselves of any responsibility for any work they did on the truck, clearly stated in their response when they mentioned “We cannot be responsible for other areas of the vehicle we did not inspect, make any recommendation of perform work on. The vehicle is 36 years old. It will inherently have problems due to the age and mileage.”
If Bruce and Terry M[redacted] would have just mentioned the inherent problems with this vehicle and their unwillingness to perform work on this vehicle from the beginning and just charged Mr. [redacted] for a safety inspection like he wanted, then this situation would have never escalated into what it currently is.
Mr. [redacted] feels the amount owed of $852.00 for services provided on his vehicle is grossly unfair. The vehicle was left with more issues than when it started and with problems never fixed on the vehicle as well, especially when he just wanted the vehicle “inspected” and the proper problems diagnosed from the very beginning.
Also included in Mr. [redacted] response was the mention of taking the 1979 Toyota Longbed to a third-party mechanic Chris S[redacted]. It was never mentioned that the Toyota was serviced in the Wentworth Chevrolet dealership, but rather at the residence of Mr. S[redacted] himself. Mr. S[redacted] is a longtime family friend of [redacted] and the rationale behind taking the vehicle to Mr. S[redacted] was to have someone that Mr. [redacted] and therefore, Mr. [redacted] trust take a look at the vehicle. And as mentioned before, the problems with the vehicle were diagnosed by Mr. S[redacted] indicating many problems with the service and supposed repairs provided by the mechanics at Majhor Murray LTD.

To: [redacted]
From: Bruce M[redacted]
RE: [redacted]
 
I am responding to the complaint filed by [redacted]I have attached the work order for the initial appointment scheduled at our repair facility. It wasbrought in for carburetor repairs. There...

was nothing noted or requested by the customer for a safetyinspection.
• The intake manifold gasket was sucked in and the motor was running terrible because of thisproblem. We called and told him about the problem and were told to go ahead and replace it.We did and the truck ran much better. We checked and adjusted the ignition timing andrepaired other vacuum leaks. We cleaned "2" fouled spark plugs (other plugs were okay). Thedistributor cap and rotor did not need replacement. We set engine specs for WA emissionstandards.
Mr. [redacted] picked up the truck. A couple of weeks later he called saying it was not working andhad poor starting condition in the morning. We told him to bring it back and we would see what wasoccurring. Upon inspection, we noticed he had sprayed some kind of lubricant oil over the carburetor,valve cover and fire wall of the truck. We removed the carburetor and cleaned it externally andreinstalled it. We installed an idle cam spring on the carburetor. The spring appeared to have vibratedoff and was lying on the intake manifold. I explained to him how to start the vehicle, pump the throttletwo times to set the choke. It will then start once the choke has been set. The problem in starting wasrelated to a cold start condition. We returned the truck his daughter's boyfriend and he delivered itback to Mr. [redacted].
Approximately, 3 weeks later, he called me complaining that it would not start and run while at a stopsign. He said it wouldn't go because the transmission fluid was pouring on the ground and the starterwas falling off of the bell housing. He screamed on the phone until I told him to stop. I told him I wouldsend a tow truck over to him and pick up his truck. Upon inspection, we found a broken trans cooler lineand a loose starter bolt. We fixed these items at no charge to him. These were not areas of the truckwe had previously worked on or even inspected. At this time he indicated that we should have checkedthe entire truck over for him while it was there. We didn't have a conversation about a new purchase inspection or any other safety inspection. It was initially brought in for poor running condition, possiblycarburetor related. His daughter's boyfriend picked up the truck and I explained to him what we haddone and that it was not anything related to the work we had done. We took care of it as a courtesy. Ialso explained we were done working with Mr. [redacted]. I explained that we cannot be responsiblefor problems on his truck that we did not perform repairs on. It is also a [redacted] and there willlikely be problems due to the age of the vehicle.
Mr. [redacted] called back a couple of days later to say he couldn't start the truck properly. I againexplained to him how to start it.
We receive this complaint and some of information provided in it is incorrect. Someone named [redacted] said we didn't replace the intake gasket. This is incorrect. It was replaced. We did not replacethe plug wires or the distributor cap as we determined it was not necessary at that time it was in forrepair. I told his daughter and her boyfriend that the exhaust manifold was cracked. It is very typical of20R & 22R engines. We contacted [redacted], assuming we could get additional informationfrom their repair orders. I was told it was never serviced in their facility and that [redacted] worked inthe parts department and was no longer employed at the [redacted]
I have attached a copy of the original work order and invoices. We are sorry he was unhappy with therepair; however we did the work it needed. We cannot be responsible for other areas of the vehicle wedid not inspect, make any recommendation or perform work on. The vehicle is 36 years old. It willinherently have problems due to the age and mileage.
We have been in business since 1969. We are a reputable business and stand behind our quality ofwork. We specialize in high performance, vintage vehicles and special interest vehicles. I appreciateyour consideration of our information and the opportunity to provide it. If you have any questions,please contact me.
 
[redacted]Please see attached[redacted]

To: [redacted]From: Bruce M[redacted]RE: [redacted] Dispute #[redacted]I am responding to your letter and response from [redacted].
This appears to be a futile process. We could go back and forth forever with no outcome. Both of usdisagree on what occurred at our shop. We stand by what we said happened and provided supportinginformation to that fact. I am sure he stands by what he says occurred. We have not had a history ofRevdex.com disputes in our 46 years of business. Ironically, [redacted] came by our business to apologize forwhat has taken place. He did not intend for the information he stated to be used as it was relayed inthis matter.
The funds have been taken out of our account.
Bruce M[redacted]