Memphis Collision

This company kept $500.00 of moneys issued to them for repairs on my vehicle, although there was no final agreement for them to do my repairs. This company successfully conspired to take, and took $500.00 (five-hundred) from me. Jeff, Jerry, and Susana, all three are the people involved.They are the people that you meet when you first go into the office. .... OK,here is my complaint. First, at no time did they have possession of my vehicle and they did not touch my vehicle. A check was made payable to them to repair my vehicle, but I had made plans to let another body shop do the repairs. The check was in the amount of $4731.93, I asked if they could cash the check and give me the money to pay the other body shop to pay for my truck, THEY SAID IN ORDER FOR ME TO GET THE MONEY THAT THEY WOULD take $500.00 (five-hundred) OF THE MONEY. They said that's the only way I would get it or they'd return the check to the paying company. This would create a hassle for me, so I reluctantly agreed after being BULLIED by Jeff, because I had to pay the other body shop for my vehicle. I ended up coming out of pocket to pay for some of my repairs because the kept $500.00 (five-hundred) of my repair money. According to Jerry, the supervisor "BOB", whom I believe is a made up name, OKed this transaction for them to keep $500.00. Susana made a check payable to me in the amount of $4231-93, which is $500.00 less the original amount of the check. JEFF, JERRY, AND SUSANA all conspired and took the money for themselves. I am now filing a complaint/claim with the Revdex.com.Desired SettlementFor the reason that Memphis Collision did not do any repairs to my vehicle, they should not have kept any money. I should possibly sign papers stating that they did not perform the repairs, and all monies, that they illegally kept, should be returned in the amount of $500.00.Business Response We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Mr. [redacted]'s complaint. On February 23rd, 2016, Mr. [redacted] came by our shop for an estimate on his vehicle. He informed us that he would be paying for the repairs out of his pocket because neither he, nor the person who hit him had insurance. This is important information for us because it changes the way we write the estimate. Generally for most insurance companies, they prefer shops to write only what they can see and/or photograph on the initial estimate. They do not want us to guess on any damage we cannot see with absolute certainty. Once the repairs begin and hidden damage is clearly visible, we do a supplemental estimate for the additional repairs. In Mr. [redacted]'s case, since it was a customer pay estimate, we take a different approach. We try to use every bit of knowledge and experience we have to write as thorough an estimate as possible to limit additional costs once repairs begin. Unfortunately, at times there is still hidden damage and the cost goes up. Now for an insurance company, that is part of doing business and they pay for what is necessary and move on. Sometimes for an individual paying out of pocket, it can be a bit more difficult to come up with more funds. So with that in mind, we wrote Mr. [redacted] an estimate to the best of our ability on what we thought it would cost to repair his vehicle. Our estimate ended up being higher than some of the other estimates he received. Of course at the time we wrote the estimate, we had no idea how much any of his other estimates were for. We provided Mr. [redacted] a copy of the estimate and he left our shop. We never heard back from Mr. [redacted] about repairing the vehicle until March 16, 2016. He called that day and spoke with Jeff at our shop about a company sending us payment to repair the vehicle. He of course never mentioned he had no intentions of letting us fix the vehicle. Jeff was unaware when he spoke to Mr. [redacted] that earlier in the day, Jerry spoke with someone about issuing payment to us and provided the company with a W-9 form for tax purposes. Once we received the check, we notified Mr. [redacted] and he informed us that he was going to have another shop repair the vehicle and just wanted us to cash the check and give him the money. We let him know that we could not do that because we would be liable for any taxes associated with the check. We informed him that he would just need to notify the company paying for the repairs that he had chosen another shop and they could issue another check to that company. Mr. [redacted] called back again later in the day and asked if we would cash the check and deduct any taxes or fees out of it and give him the rest. Jeff told him he would ask Bob, who is a real person and the owner of the company, and get back with him. Bob told him (Jeff) he really didn't want to do that as we are not a check cashing service and we already have a lot of time invested in the vehicle that we aren't even repairing. So he told Jeff to inform Mr. [redacted] that we would deposit the check and once it cleared we would write him a check for the total amount minus $500 for any potential taxes and the time we had in helping Mr. [redacted] or we could simply return the check to the issuing company (as he admits in his complaint) and they could reissue the payment to Mr. [redacted]. As Mr. [redacted] states in his complaint, he "agreed" to these terms knowing exactly what it would cost because he claims it would be a "hassle" for him. So for him to say he was "bullied" is absolutely absurd. We completed the transaction and issued a check to Mr. [redacted]. A few days later, Mr. [redacted] returned to our shop to threaten us with a Revdex.com complaint and a lawsuit. He told Jerry it was unfair for us to keep any of the money and if we did not refund him the rest of the funds we received, he would file a Revdex.com complaint, hire a lawyer and post our bank account information from the check on the internet. Jerry informed him that the terms of the deal were clear and he agreed to them but that if he was that unhappy about the agreement he could return the check we gave him to us and we would return the entire payment to the issuing company. They could then issue him the payment, relieving us of any tax liability. He refused that offer and that is when the truth came out and Mr. [redacted] inadvertently admitted to us why he was so intent on not letting us return the money to the issuing company. He said he found a place that would repair the vehicle cheaper than we would repair it. So if we returned the money to the issuing company, Mr. [redacted] would have to provide them with an invoice for the repairs from that shop and subsequently the next check they issued would be for less money. Mr. [redacted] told Jerry he allowed the other repair shop to repair the vehicle because their estimate was about $1000 less than our estimate. So obviously providing an invoice for the repair for the same amount as the original check would be a problem for Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] made a conscious decision to submit our estimate to the company paying for his repairs with the full intention of never having us repair the vehicle. He could have easily submitted the estimate he received from the shop he actually wanted to repair the vehicle and this entire situation would have been avoided. Mr. [redacted] was certainly entitled to be compensated for the damage to his vehicle whether he actually had it repaired or not. It is up to the vehicle owner if they want to actually repair any damage to their vehicle but by having the check issued to us, he made us liable for the taxes. In addition, by trying to submit an estimate from a company he had no intention of using, he created this situation. We offered on multiple occasions to just return the money to the issuing company and he declined to allow us to do that. Even after the transaction was completed and Mr. [redacted] was unhappy, we again offered to refund the entire payment and allow him to go an alternate route and he refused. I am not sure what else would could have done to make Mr. [redacted] happy. In addition to all of that, please keep in mind we are an auto body repair shop. Mr. [redacted]'s complaint is that we charged him too much to cash a check, a service that we do not even provide. Mr. [redacted]'s desired resolution is for us to refund his money. As we have stated multiple times, that was offered to him and remains an option. He simply needs to return the money we gave him to us and we will refund the entire amount to the issuing company. He may at that point work out payment for his repairs with them. Consumer Response (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)First and foremost most, what Memphis Collision did by keeping money for a vehicle that they did not repair is illegal. Second, the $500 amount that they stole/keep is way more than the taxes that they claim to have to pay. BULLIED, I was because of Jeff's tone, which "Bob", the real person did not hear. As to the posting their bank information on the Internet is a totally false statement. They should not have kept the money, keeping the money was an illegal action. I do not accept their response as a solution to the problem. I would like to be refunded the $500 that they took illegally.