Sign in

Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge

Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge Reviews (3)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 9, 2015/12/09) */
We sincerely apologize for not responding earlier to this complaint.

This account was connected as a joint account, [redacted] and [redacted] (Members), on 8-1-2012. Furthermore, this account is set up as a prepay account only (...

different than a traditional post pay account), at the request of the member. Prepay account status is calculated daily, 365 days a year. Accounts are subject for disconnection and available to be reconnected 365 days a year as well. It is a completely automated system and is completely controlled by the member. Members are notified each day, via telephone, email or text, once their account balance has a 25.00 credit balance or below. This occurs every day at approximately 10:00 AM. Once the account is equal to a zero or debit balance (due to usage), it will automatically disconnect. This occurs every day at approximately 1:00 PM. Once a payment is remitted, the account will automatically reconnect.

Member(s) issue concerning medical situation. There is no medical alert letter on this account pertaining to health issue(s). However, our practice is to notate the account when we receive notice of such and to then place a medical tag on the meter as well. However, if this account would have had a medical alert notice attached, the confusion lies in the fact that it does not prevent an account from being disconnected due to the lack of funds (credit balance) on a prepay account. Furthermore, it does not prevent an account from being disconnected due to failure to keep payment arrangements on a traditional post pay account. With a prepay account, all activity happens automatically. With a traditional post pay account, if payment arrangements are not kept, then a billing information representative would attempt to contact the member prior to disconnection. This member did receive a message, via telephone, that the account was below the minimum balance required. This occurred at 10:04 am on July 5, 2015. The prepay system disconnected the account at 1:02 pm on July 5, 2015. Payment was received on July 6, 2015 at 11:17 am and the service was automatically reconnected at that time. Due to medical concerns, if this member would be better served to convert the account to a traditional post pay account, then we would certainly accommodate their request. The member would need to contact the following individual for assistance.

Lynne Campbell
Office Manager
[redacted]@whiteriver.org
XXX-XXX-XXXX

Member issue pertaining to obtaining meter readings. White River did indeed have an issue with its ability to read the meter, at this locations between XX-X-XXXX and 10-19-2015, however the meter was recording usage accurately. Once the issue was corrected, 10-20-2015, the member received automatic notice concerning the required balance on the account. Member did call WR at this time.

Given the fact that WR was in error and did not immediately make the proper correction to the system, and the member was certainly inconvenienced during this time, we apologize. Furthermore, I have instructed the proper department to issue a 50.00 credit to the account. We will certainly contact and communicate this information to the member as well.

If you need further assistance, please contact Lynne Campbell at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

[redacted] A [redacted]
COO

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2017/03/06) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@whiteriver.org
[redacted] disputes the language in our line extension policy in regard to the initial 1/2 mile distance that is allowed prior to being...

charged a fee. The 1/2 mile distance is measured from the takeoff pole (where the line extension begins), not after the first three poles that are no cost to the member (1/2 mile). The 1/2 mile distance refereed to in the policy has always began at the take off point, no exceptions granted.
[redacted]'s line extension requires 14 poles after the right-of-way was cleared. The right-of-way path was chosen by [redacted]. WRVEC does not determine the final aid to construction amount until the right-of-way is cleared and all poles are staked. We often see where a home site location and right-of-way routes deviate from the initial plans.
The amount according to line extension policy to proceed with receiving service is 4,800.00. According to our records, [redacted] was never promised or received an invoice for a lessor amount. The staking engineer did mistakenly count 11 poles, his computer screen was zoomed in too far on the staking map when requesting that that an invoice be prepared, however he discovered his error prior to sending out the invoice. The invoice for 4,800.00 was sent along with the easements required to be signed and recorded. Our records show that the easements were signed and properly recorded.
We have reached back out to [redacted] (form of a letter) indicating our position and to request an additional phone conference or meeting with the Engineering Manager and staking engineer for the job. From our perspective and by policy, the line extension rules must be applied fairly and consistently for all members. There was never any attempt on our part to misrepresent any information regarding the aid to construction fee (4,800.00) and the line extension policy.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2017/03/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
[redacted] has never contacted me by any means so I don't know who he is nor where he has received any of his alleged facts.
Taken from the above letter given in response to my Revdex.com complaint.
First, [redacted] states that an engineer had made a mistake. I agree, [redacted] Staking Engineer had made a mistake. I feel this "mistake" is one of misrepresentation, false promises, concealment, suppression and omission of material facts.
I asked [redacted] to give me an accurate estimate to bring electric power to the home site that I showed [redacted]
[redacted] came out to property on 9/6/16 to measure and set GPS points and we walked the property. After using his computer/GPS, [redacted] gave us an accurate estimate of costs that we did indeed need 9 poles to reach our home site which equates to $1800. [redacted] also stated that there will be no board approval needed, per [redacted] and that WRVEC had received the utility easements from the neighbor.
[redacted] made a promise as to the accurate estimate that we requested from him and that he gave to us on 9/6/16. [redacted] assured me of the accuracy of the estimate after further scrutiny of the estimate he had given of $1800 as we needed to plan financially and logistically. [redacted] affirmed his estimate of $1800 and we concluded from his professional response as an engineer and as a representative of White River Valley Electric Cooperative that his accurate estimate was true and correct and we had no reason to doubt or distrust [redacted]
The rest of the letter from [redacted] goes on about the "engineers mistake" (paraphrased), and [redacted] goes on further to explain with a detailed set of words that is CLEARLY lacking in a policy of White River, the "line extension policy".
I have found that White River Valley Electric Cooperative is not regulated and there is no oversight for their actions, policies and business practices. I feel that White River is trying to omit facts, avoid truth, and to deceive, or in other words, I believe that White River is committing "misrepresentation, false promises, concealment, suppression and omission of material facts."
Nothing in the letter from [redacted] addresses the facts in their entirety and therefore I believe he is being deceptive and at least complicit in the deception given me.
Lastly, [redacted] has made no statement of any investigation into this matter.
I need to know who should be held responsible.
Regards,
[redacted]
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 13, 2017/03/15) */
I wanted to let you know that White River Valley Electric Cooperative, via [redacted] met me at the property Friday the 10th to discuss their position, why they believe the "mistake" was made and that they are now willing to settle the matter with the language and amount that I originally offered them.
Therefor, I am no longer needing the Revdex.com services and I appreciate your time and the earnest of the Revdex.com.
Best Regards,
[redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/14) */
I've spoken to [redacted] and agreed to replace her front and rear brakes and a cost of $100. She was satisfied. Thank you, [redacted]
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/12/18) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the...

response from the business.)
I am unhappy that ive been a loyal customer and they keep making damages to my car and expect me to keep bringing my vehicle for them to figure out what wrong with it. I think this is not good being that they are specialists.I do not feel safe driving this car. after last servicing brakes were still not functioning properly and my car spun out when it was raining. guess im stuck with this car that im not sure if its safe or not.They will not file a complaint with chrysler because manager said this wasnt chryslers problem nor is it a lemon.They are admiting that one of the techs made this mistake when they were doing brake inspections .Why should I have to keep a car that they have damaged over and over and it isnt safe I transport small children everyday to san francisco and I am scared to drive them in this car.After I voiced my concerns the only this the manager offered me was a extended warranty .That wont cover me and my childrens life.I do not want to have to find out the hard way if this issue is resolved.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/12/23) */
The vehicle is safe and in good condition. the vehicle has 31,000 miles on it, therefore the brakes are out of warranty. We've replaced front and rear brakes on the vehicle at no cost to the customer, which was a total goodwill gesture. Brakes are a wear item and are covered for one year or 12,000 miles from the manufacturer. The vehicle is safe. I made a generous offer to take car of the brakes and to add a service contract, but it's unappreciated. The customer is welcome to file any complaint they desire with Chrysler Corporation, this is not handled by the Dealership.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2015/12/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I will seek a legal approach because the sensor is still coming on

Check fields!

Write a review of Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 3291 Auto Plaza, Richmond, Massachusetts, United States, 94806-1931

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

www.steadauto.com

This site can’t be reached

Shady, yet now dead: once upon a time this website was reported to be associated with Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge, but after several inspections we’ve come to the conclusion that this domain is no longer active.



Add contact information for Michael Stead's Hilltop Chrysler Jeep Dodge

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated