Mercedes Benz of West Chester

January 23, Dear [redacted] ***, Please allow this letter to acknowledge the receipt of Complaint [redacted] filed against [redacted] of West ChesterIt is most unfortunate that our client has chosen this course of action against us, as we have tried to resolve the matter with integrity and reason.Our first service visit with the client occurred on July 19th, The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 96,milesHe stated his transmission was slipping between 1st and gearWe investigated the complaint and confirmed the slippage in the transmission during our initial road testUpon further investigation we found the transmission to be two quarts low on fluidWe added two quarts of transmission oilWe also hooked up our shop computer to retrieve any transmission diagnostic trouble codes that might be stored in his vehicle computer memoryThere were no stored fault codesWe road tested the vehicle a total of miles and experienced no further transmission slippageWe charged the client $for parts, labor and sales tax.The client returned to our dealership on December 19th, The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 104,milesThe client stated the transmission in his car started out in 3rd gearOur technician found the transmission to be two quarts low on fluidOur technician also found the Check Engine warning light to be onWe hooked up our shop computer and found a stored fault code for "Implausible gear ratio"The fault code was caused by severe slippage in first gearFor safety, the vehicle's Computer shut down [redacted] and gears to avoid complete transmission failureThe vehicle's computer, by design, turned on the Check Engine light and caused the vehicle to start out in 3" gear, or "Limp-Home" modeUpon further diagnosis the technician found a visible fluid leak at the front of the transmissionThe client was informed the transmission would have to be removed to determine the exact source of the leakThe client authorized removal of the transmissionThe technician found the front pump radial seal and the front pump o-ring to be leakingThe client authorized replacement of those two sealsAs a gesture of goodwill the dealership credited the client $for the repair visit in July, The client paid the balance of $for the repairThe client returned to our dealership on December 22nd, The mileage on the vehicle at that time was 104,milesHe complained his remote key would not lock or unlock his vehicleHe blamed the key failure on the dealership, even though there was no evidence of physical damage to the keyAs a gesture of goodwill the dealership absorbed the $cost of a replacement remote key, The client returned to our dealership on January 7", The mileage on the vehicle at that time was 105,milesThe client complained of a loose battery cable in the trunk and of a transmission leakWe secured the loose battery cable and placed the vehicle on a lift to check for a transmission leakWe found a leak from the front of the transmissionWe removed the transmission for further diagnosisWe found the front pump radial seal to be leakingWe had replaced this same seal during the December 19th, visitWe felt uncomfortable just replacing the radial seal again under the [redacted] spare parts warrantyWe investigated the matter further to find that someone else, other than [redacted] of West Chester, had already worked on the transmissionThe torque converter in the client's car had been replaced prior to any serving by our dealershipThe torque converter was the wrong one for his carThe torque converter is sealed by the radial seal in the front pumpThere is no way one would have known to look for a used replacement torque converter during a routine front pump radial seal replacementThe incorrect torque converter caused the seal to fail prematurelyThe torque converter was the reason the seal failed and precipitated the repair on December 19thThe client denied any knowledge of the prior repairAs a gesture of goodwill, we offered to sell the client a new and proper torque converter for his car at our dealership costWe also offered to absorb the labor on the entire repairThe client declined the repairHe said he was selling the car and did not want to put any more money into itWe warned the client the transmission would start leaking again after the used torque converter damaged the replacement sealThe client acknowledged the warning and said he was putting the vehicle up for sale on ***We installed a new front pump radial seal, reinstalled the transmission and returned the vehicle to the clientIt is not our intention at this point to offer this client any further assistanceAny previous offers are subsequently rescindedRespectfully submitted, Richard SService Director

February 18, Dear [redacted] ***, Please allow this letter to acknowledge the receipt of a letter from the Bureau of Consumer Protection on January 27, 2015.I am frustrated with [redacted] 's complaint against our companyHe has repeatedly misstated the facts and spoke in mistruths about his service experiences with our companyAnyone reading and subsequently believing his original letter to the Revdex.com or his statement to the Bureau of Consumer Protection would draw the conclusion that our company did something wrongWe did notThere are always two sides to every storyJust because he says we did something wrong and tries to paint a picture to support his rhetoric, does not mean he is right [redacted] first visit to our dealership was on July 19, The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 96,milesHe stated his transmission was slipping between 1st and 2nd gearWe investigated the complaint and confirmed the slippage in the transmission during our initial road testUpon further investigation we found the transmission to be two quarts low on transmission fluidWe added two quarts of transmission fluidWe also hooked up our shop computer to retrieve any transmission diagnostic trouble codes that might be stored in his vehicle's computer memoryThere were no stored fault codesWe road tested the vehicle a total of miles and experienced no further transmission slippageWe charged the client $for parts, labor and sales tax.In [redacted] 's complaint to the Revdex.com and in his subsequent complaint to the Bureau of Consumer Protection, [redacted] states the problem of transmission slippage came back shortly after the first repair on July 19, For the record, the vehicle returned on December 19, 2014, months after the initial service visitIt is important to note the mileage on his vehicle when he returned to the shop for his second visit on December 19th was 104,miles [redacted] drove his car 8,miles from the first visit to the second visit without a complaintIt is important to note that we only added two quarts of transmission fluid at the first service visitWe did no repairs or diagnosis other than to check his computer for stored trouble codesThere were no codesFor the record, as a gesture of goodwill, we deducted $from the final bill for the transmission seal repairThis adjustment reflects the amount of money [redacted] spent for his first service visit with us on July 19, [redacted] does not acknowledge this adjustment of $in his lettersHe ignores itHe glosses over itThis matter has consumed too much of our time and energyIn that respect [redacted] winsIt is our intention to refund [redacted] the money he spent for the transmission repair on December 14, We will send him a check for $1,With the exception of not securing the battery cable properly, we admit no wrong doing in this entire matter, Respectfully, Richard S Service Director

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: They were paid dollars to diagnose the problems with the transmissionThey failed to do this, they simply looked for the first possibility rather than looking for what caused this failure in the first placeAfter my first service I was assured that the vehicle was all fixed which is not true or accurateIf paid to diagnose the problem, they should properly diagnose the problemIf charged for a service to fix the problem, the problem should be fixedThey misdiagnosed the problem the first time and after I had already paid over dollars I was asked to pay more for additional serviceHad I been quoted to begin with I would have never had any service doneThe only thing I should have been charged is to accurately diagnose the problem, which they did not doThey charged dollars to incorrectly fix the carThe key was under years old and I witnessed first hand their sales staff drop a keyAn electrical component can be damaged without showing physical damage, the key worked fine until the day I got it back from the dealershipThis dealership does subpar service and won't own up to their mistake, they simply want you to absorb an dollar misdiagnosis Regards, [redacted]

Revdex.com:Although my position remains the same in this matter, I find that this is a no win situation and that this company will not admit to the oversite related to the complaint. Upon accepting this agreement, I ask that the agreement amount be either forwarded to myself or to another agreed upon business for the amount stated in response. Regards, *** ***

April 18, 2014Dear ***:Enclosed are facts associated with *** and his vehicle.On 12/we did a thorough Certified inspection, including brake and tire measurements, road tests, state inspection, maintenance service, factory campaign, brake fluid flush, trim
repair, spark piug replacement, trans fluid flush, battery replacement, and air filter replacementAt that time the vehicle had 62,milesOn 1/*** took delivery with 62,miles.In March, *** made an appointment for those items listed in his complaintThe vehicle came into our service department w miles*** drove his car miles since delivery.The northeast area of the US has faced and still faces, something akin to a natural disaster with respect to pot holes and road conditionsIn regard to wheel and tire damage for all automobiles, has started with historic considerationsIn the 1st quarter of 2014, our two stores combined for total tire unit sales in excess of Horribly, hundreds of our customers have experienced multiple sets of damaged wheels and tiresIn some cases tire replacement and wheel repairs have happened w/in days of a prior replacement or repairWe believe that is it virtually impossible for someone to drive a vehicle miles in the last months and not hit substantial potholesMost likely over and over again.Wheel and tire damage typically occurs when the tire and wheel are driven into the forward lip of a pot holeThe degree of damage is determined by speed, vehicle weight, angle of impact, pot hole characteristics, and tire type and condition***'s *** weights ibsThat is considerable weight against historically bad road conditions.Because of Mercedes-Benz engineering, the severity of impact may not be easily recognized by the driverNo better example than in an *-class.We are confident that this vehicle was delivered to *** without wheel and tire damageWe are confident in our Certification and reconditioning process as a whole and in this caseMBWC strongly refutes ***s assertion that we misrepresented the truthWhile we feel that his sentiments regarding our integrity are disappointing, we understand his frustrationTo that end, will contribute $Goodwill, to help offset part of his expense

January 23, 2015
Dear [redacted],
Please allow this letter to acknowledge the receipt of Complaint [redacted] filed against [redacted] of West Chester. It is most unfortunate that our client has chosen this course of action against us, as we have tried to resolve the matter with...

integrity and reason.Our first service visit with the client occurred on July 19th, 2014. The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 96,148 miles. He stated his transmission was slipping between 1st and 2 gear. We investigated the complaint and confirmed the slippage in the transmission during our initial road test. Upon further investigation we found the transmission to be two quarts low on fluid. We added two quarts of transmission oil. We also hooked up our shop computer to retrieve any transmission diagnostic trouble codes that might be stored in his vehicle computer memory. There were no stored fault codes. We road tested the vehicle a total of 9 miles and experienced no further transmission slippage. We charged the client $164.30 for parts, labor and sales tax.The client returned to our dealership on December 19th, 2014. The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 104,825 miles. The client stated the transmission in his car started out in 3rd gear. Our technician found the transmission to be two quarts low on fluid. Our technician also found the Check Engine warning light to be on. We hooked up our shop computer and found a stored fault code for "Implausible gear ratio". The fault code was caused by severe slippage in first gear. For safety, the vehicle's Computer shut down 1* and 2 gears to avoid complete transmission failure. The vehicle's computer, by design, turned on the Check Engine light and caused the vehicle to start out in 3" gear, or "Limp-Home" mode. Upon further diagnosis the technician found a visible fluid leak at the front of the transmission. The client was informed the transmission would have to be removed to determine the exact source of the leak. The client authorized removal of the transmission. The technician found the front pump radial seal and the front pump o-ring to be leaking. The client authorized replacement of those two seals. As a gesture of goodwill the dealership credited the client $165.00 for the repair visit in July, 2014. The client paid the balance of $1885.23 for the repair.
The client returned to our dealership on December 22nd, 2014. The mileage on the vehicle at that time was 104,995 miles. He complained his remote key would not lock or unlock his vehicle. He blamed the key failure on the dealership, even though there was no evidence of physical damage to the key. As a gesture of goodwill the dealership absorbed the $216.00 cost of a replacement remote key,
The client returned to our dealership on January 7", 2014. The mileage on the vehicle at that time was 105,417 miles. The client complained of a loose battery cable in the trunk and of a transmission leak. We secured the loose battery cable and placed the vehicle on a lift to check for a transmission leak. We found a leak from the front of the transmission. We removed the transmission for further diagnosis. We found the front pump radial seal to be leaking. We had replaced this same seal during the December 19th, 2014 visit. We felt uncomfortable just replacing the radial seal again under the [redacted] spare parts warranty. We investigated the matter further to find that someone else, other than [redacted] of West Chester, had already worked on the transmission. The torque converter in the client's car had been replaced prior to any serving by our dealership. The torque converter was the wrong one for his car. The torque converter is sealed by the radial seal in the front pump. There is no way one would have known to look for a used replacement torque converter during a routine front pump radial seal replacement. The incorrect torque converter caused the seal to fail prematurely. The torque converter was the reason the seal failed and precipitated the repair on December 19th. The client denied any knowledge of the prior repair. As a gesture of goodwill, we offered to sell the client a new and proper torque converter for his car at our dealership cost. We also offered to absorb the labor on the entire repair. The client declined the repair. He said he was selling the car and did not want to put any more money into it. We warned the client the transmission would start leaking again after the used torque converter damaged the replacement seal. The client acknowledged the warning and said he was putting the vehicle up for sale on [redacted]. We installed a new front pump radial seal, reinstalled the transmission and returned the vehicle to the client.
It is not our intention at this point to offer this client any further assistance. Any previous offers are subsequently rescinded.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard SService Director

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
They were paid 160 dollars to diagnose the problems with the transmission. They failed to do this, they simply looked for the first possibility rather than looking for what caused this failure in the first place. After my first service I was assured that the vehicle was all fixed which is not true or accurate. If paid to diagnose the problem, they should properly diagnose the problem. If charged for a service to fix the problem, the problem should be fixed. They misdiagnosed the problem the first time and after I had already paid over 2000 dollars I was asked to pay 1800 more for additional service. Had I been quoted 3800 to begin with I would have never had any service done. The only thing I should have been charged is 160 to accurately diagnose the problem, which they did not do. They charged 2000 dollars to incorrectly fix the car. The key was under 2 years old and I witnessed first hand their sales staff drop a key. An electrical component can be damaged without showing physical damage, the key worked fine until the day I got it back from the dealership. This dealership does subpar service and won't own up to their mistake, they simply want you to absorb an 1800 dollar misdiagnosis. 
Regards,
[redacted]

February 18, 2014
Dear [redacted],
Please allow this letter to acknowledge the receipt of a letter from the Bureau of Consumer Protection on January 27, 2015.I am frustrated with [redacted]'s complaint against our company. He has repeatedly misstated the facts and spoke in mistruths about his service experiences with our company. Anyone reading and subsequently believing his original letter to the Revdex.com or his statement to the Bureau of Consumer Protection would draw the conclusion that our company did something wrong. We did not. There are always two sides to every story. Just because he says we did something wrong and tries to paint a picture to support his rhetoric, does not mean he is right.
[redacted] first visit to our dealership was on July 19, 2015. The mileage on his vehicle at that time was 96,168 miles. He stated his transmission was slipping between 1st and 2nd gear. We investigated the complaint and confirmed the slippage in the transmission during our initial road test. Upon further investigation we found the transmission to be two quarts low on transmission fluid. We added two quarts of transmission fluid. We also hooked up our shop computer to retrieve any transmission diagnostic trouble codes that might be stored in his vehicle's computer memory. There were no stored fault codes. We road tested the vehicle a total of 9 miles and experienced no further transmission slippage. We charged the client $164.30 for parts, labor and sales tax.In [redacted]'s complaint to the Revdex.com and in his subsequent complaint to the Bureau of Consumer Protection, [redacted] states the problem of transmission slippage came back shortly after the first repair on July 19, 2014. For the record, the vehicle returned on December 19, 2014, 5 months after the initial service visit. It is important to note the mileage on his vehicle when he returned to the shop for his second visit on December 19th was 104,825 miles. [redacted] drove his car 8,657 miles from the first visit to the second visit without a complaint. It is important to note that we only added two quarts of transmission fluid at the first service visit. We did no repairs or diagnosis other than to check his computer for stored trouble codes. There were no codes. For the record, as a gesture of goodwill, we deducted $165.00 from the final bill for the transmission seal repair. This adjustment reflects the amount of money [redacted] spent for his first service visit with us on July 19, 2014. [redacted] does not acknowledge this adjustment of $165.00 in his letters. He ignores it. He glosses over it.
This matter has consumed too much of our time and energy. In that respect [redacted] wins. It is our intention to refund [redacted] the money he spent for the transmission repair on December 14, 2014. We will send him a check for $1,885.23. With the exception of not securing the battery cable properly, we admit no wrong doing in this entire matter,
Respectfully,
Richard S
Service Director

Review: I purchased a certified $40,000 + vehicle from west chester mercedes benz and I am sure that they misrepresented the truth as to the condition of the vehicles certification. I purchased the vehicle in january and when I test drove the vehicle the weather conditions were not optimal, so from the test drive I did perform the vehicle felt ok. once I purchased the vehicle and took it home, I, started to hear a few squeaks from the brakes and from the engine compartment. initially, because of the weather, I did not take the vehicle on the road for a long drive, however once the roads were in driveable condition, I did take the car out and once I got to a certain speed the vehicle started to vibrate. I went to the dealer drop off some license plates and once there I also stopped at the service department to wager a complaint and to make an appointment to have the service department take a look at the issues that I had with the vehicle. once I took the vehicle to the service department, they call me about 2 days afterwards and told me what the issue were and what that would and would not handle. They said they changed a belt and fixed the squeaking issue with the brakes, however and this is my major complaint, they said that I have to bent rims on the passenger side and a bad tire on the drivers side and that they would not pay for this. I replied that they must have sold me the car with with the rims bent and they replied that they go thru a certification process and that they would never sell a car with bent rims. I replied that if that were the case then they would have found the other issues when they went thru their certification process, however they didn't. I asked if I could trade the car because I felt that they would not take responsibility for not actually certifying the car. the trade did not work out to my benefit so I again asked if they would repair the bent rims and they declined. Eventually I went to pick up the car and when I received the service receipt and read it over, it said that all the rims were bent, but the passenger side rims were bent the most and they recommended that those passenger side rims be fixed. when I received the phone call about the repairs that were needed, they never stated to me that all of the rims were bent. That pretty much solidified my disbelief in thier certification process and fueled my taking this issue to another level.Desired Settlement: My desired outcome would be an apology from this business for misrepresentation of a service and for accusing me of doing something which I did not and could not do, which is driving into a pothole and bending the rims. Also, I would like this business to handle the cost of repairing the rims and wheel alignment.

Business

Response:

April 18, 2014Dear **. [redacted]:Enclosed are facts associated with **. [redacted] and his vehicle.On 12/19 we did a thorough Certified inspection, including brake and tire measurements, road tests, state inspection, maintenance service, factory campaign, brake fluid flush, trim repair, spark piug replacement, trans fluid flush, battery replacement, and air filter replacement. At that time the vehicle had 62,940 milesOn 1/14 **. [redacted] took delivery with 62,993 miles.In March, **. [redacted] made an appointment for those items listed in his complaint. The vehicle came into our service department w 65746 miles. **. [redacted] drove his car 2753 miles since delivery.The northeast area of the US has faced and still faces, something akin to a natural disaster with respect to pot holes and road conditions. In regard to wheel and tire damage for all automobiles, 2014 has started with historic considerations. In the 1st quarter of 2014, our two stores combined for total tire unit sales in excess of 3600. Horribly, hundreds of our customers have experienced multiple sets of damaged wheels and tires. In some cases tire replacement and wheel repairs have happened w/in days of a prior replacement or repair. We believe that is it virtually impossible for someone to drive a vehicle 2700 miles in the last 3 months and not hit substantial potholes. Most likely over and over again.Wheel and tire damage typically occurs when the tire and wheel are driven into the forward lip of a pot hole. The degree of damage is determined by speed, vehicle weight, angle of impact, pot hole characteristics, and tire type and condition. **. [redacted]'s 2009 [redacted] weights 4630 ibs. That is considerable weight against historically bad road conditions.Because of Mercedes-Benz engineering, the severity of impact may not be easily recognized by the driver. No better example than in an *-class.We are confident that this vehicle was delivered to **. [redacted] without wheel and tire damage. We are confident in our Certification and reconditioning process as a whole and in this case. MBWC strongly refutes **. [redacted]s assertion that we misrepresented the truth. While we feel that his sentiments regarding our integrity are disappointing, we understand his frustration. To that end, will contribute $450.00 Goodwill, to help offset part of his expense.

Consumer

Response:

Although my position remains the same in this matter, I find that this is a no win situation and that this company will not admit to the oversite related to the complaint. Upon accepting this agreement, I ask that the agreement amount be either forwarded to myself or to another agreed upon business for the amount stated in response. Regards, [redacted]

Review: I bought a vehicle from this dealer for my wife on November 29th 2013. We live in Ohio and they are located in Pennsylvania. They were sending us a check for $1076.63 dated December 13th for the taxes so we could switch the title over to Ohio. The finance manager [redacted] called a few days after we had singed the paper work and brought the vehicle home and left a message saying that he did the paper work wrong on the taxes because he didn't know the laws for Ohio and that the taxes would be more than the check they were sending. I called back 2 times and left messages for him to call me back but he never responded. When I went to the title department to transfer everything over they said I owed $685.12 on top of the check the dealer sent. I called the finance manager back and left several messages and when he finally did return my call he acted as if I never responded to his first call. After I told him I left him 2 messages he then told me that the remaining money was my responsibility. I told him that if I knew I had to put down that much more on top of the $421.58 I already had, that I would have had to walk away because I couldn't afford to put that much down and also that it wasn't in my purchase agreement. So we agreed upon them sending me an additional $350 for the taxes and I would pay the rest. He sent an email on December 27th agreeing to this and I responded the same day to the email and they would send out the check. My wife can't drive the vehicle until this is taken care of because the temporary tags expired on December 28th. I have been trying to get ahold of them for several days. I have left messages for the finance manager [redacted], general manager and the accounting department and none of them will respond and I'm just wanting to ask if the check has been sent out. I believe I have been done wrong and would like for it to be known.Desired Settlement: I want what was promised to me to help pay for the taxes still owed where [redacted] the finance manager did the paper work wrong. I will accept the $350.00 and walk away from his mistake even though it leaves me to come up with $335.12 to get this taken care of.