Monroeville Kia

Review: I made a purchare at this car dealership had the vecical a little over a month I had nothing but problems I am 20 years old the sales person told me he handled all me issues come to find out it have no warrentieson the veicle now I have to come out of pocket because the rep was trying to make a quick sale they take advantage of peep pole and need to be stoppedDesired Settlement: Warranty extension or return the veicle with no fault

Business

Response:

I am responding about a complaint, ID [redacted] filed by [redacted] on May 2, 2016. I spoke with Ms. [redacted] mom on Saturday April 30, 2016 at Monroeville Kia Sales Desk. Ms. [redacted] was with her mother when we spoke. She stated her daughter purchased a pre-owned Jeep off of us on March 7, 2016. She stated we took advantage of her daughter by selling her a car without a warranty and we should fix whatever is wrong. She stated the Jeep was making a noise but the were not interested in taking it to a Jeep dealership or paying to have it diagnosed here at Monroeville Kia. The vehicle was sold with a 30 day or 1000 mile power-train only warranty with the availability of purchasing an extended service contract to cover the vehicle longer or cover more items than just the power-train. When Ms. [redacted]'s mom asked her if she was offered an extended warranty, [redacted] replied she was not. We explained that all customers who purchase an eligible vehicle are given the opportunity to purchase an extended service contract when the are signing their paperwork in the Business Office. Being the vehicle was 1 month and 3 weeks from being purchased and not knowing the miles on the Jeep, it was out of the warranty that was included with the purchase. Even if the vehicle was still under warranty, the customer may have been responsible for a diagnostic fee to determine if the problem was covered by that warranty. To my knowledge, we were never given the opportunity to even diagnose the noise heard. I have enclosed the Bill of Sale, FTC Label,Monroeville Kia Due Bill and a copy of the Waiver of extended service contract for your review. Ms. [redacted] and her Mom did not understand that all vehicles, including those which are sold brand new, may have some defect or adjustment that may have to be made close to the time of sale. This is a normal cost of owning a vehicle. I believe we have followed through with the promises made with the sale to Ms. [redacted].

Review: On September 10, 2016 I took my vehicle to Monroeville Kia to get inspected. After the technician inspected my car, service advisor John B[redacted] informed me that my car failed inspection and needed front tires, rear brakes, front rotors, and front wiper blades along with a mid exhaust pipe to pass inspection. I was already aware of the mid exhaust pipe needing replaced. However, I questioned John Balogh on the other repairs he said my car needed to pass inspection. I questioned him many times. After the third time I questioned John about needing these repairs for inspection, he spoke to the technician. John then told me that those repairs, except for the mid exhaust pipe, were just suggestions and not needed for my car to pass inspection. I replied that I was not at Monroeville Kia’s Service Department for suggestions that I was there for a scheduled inspection and was only concerned about the repairs that were needed for my car to pass inspection.

I feel Monroeville Kia is in violation of “performing or indicating unnecessary repairs for the purpose of passing an inspection.” This violation is listed under the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation guidelines, Subchapter D, Category 4, Subcategory iii Monroeville Kia deliberately mislead me into thinking that I needed repairs (other than the exhaust pipe) for my car to pass inspection for their purpose of financial gain. I also feel they were taking advantage of me because I am a woman.Desired Settlement: At the very least, I want my vehicle re-inspected at no charge.

Business

Response:

In response to the enclosed complaint, I am attaching the correspondence form our Service Manager to myself. Even though we are not required to re-test for the state inspection at no-charge, we will honor Ms. [redacted]s request for a complimentary re-inspection. We will honor the complimentary re-inspection for 30 days from the original inspection date.This customer has also contacted the state; I got a call from them yesterday by a gentleman named [redacted]. He went over the customer’s concern and I explained to him what happened. There are no repercussions/reprimands, he simply provided me with information which I passed on to the advisors. John filled me in yesterday morning about this customer and the events that transpired on Saturday. Customer came in for an inspection, and Mat P[redacted] got the car. He went through the inspection process and annotated on the back of the repair order everything that he found. What he didn’t do was differentiate between what was needed and what was recommended. John took it as everything was needed and presented it to the customer. Customer complained about the cost of the exhaust and was told by another shop that it did not require replacement. Exhaust pipe was broken at the flange and would pull apart. When customer questioned vehicle faults, John went back to Mat to verify what was required and recommended. He learned that wipers and exhaust pipe were required, and tires and brakes were at passing minimum, but they did pass. He explained this to the customer and apologized for the miscommunication. At this point, customer became argumentative over the necessity of replacing exhaust pipe, which fails inspection as per Vehicle Equipment and Inspection Regulations, Section 175.80 (e)(6)(ii). He also explained that the brakes and tires needed replacement very soon, but they would pass inspection at this time. Customer declined repairs on the vehicle and was informed that she would be responsible for the inspection less sticker and also the cost for the passing emission inspection. Customer then paid for services rendered and took possession of her vehicle. John annotated on the repair order deficiencies for safety inspection and recommendations for future maintenance requirements.There was an initial lack of communication between advisor and technician with regard to the repairs needed to complete the safety inspection process. This matter has been addressed with the advisors to have clarity when talking with customers. Thank you,Michael P[redacted]General Manager

Consumer

Response:

Do NOT buy or get your vehicle from Monroeville Kia. I have a 2008 Kia Sorrento that was bought NEW. It takes a minimum of 2-3 hours just for an oil change. My vehicle has low mileage...shouldn't be a problem, right? WRONG. It's amazing how I've had my vehicle in there for service 4-5 times in the last 4 months, and everything I've asked to have checked (check engine light on, lights coming on inside when I turn left, ESB light coming on) amazingly could not be problem-solved until my warranty ran out. Now all of a sudden, they "found" the problem.....and thus far, I've put close to $2,000 into a car whose blue book value is about $7,000. But that's not the kicker. I brought it back today for inspection....big mistake. There's another problem, that they "didn't find" until now. A problem to the tune of $300.00. Oh, and the battery is low, and will cost close to $200.00 to be replaced. AND, my front wipers are streaking and won't pass inspection. Those wipers have no issue, and were replaced LESS than a year ago. How is it that KIA Monroeville only finds these problems or can duplicate them AFTER the warranty is out? Granted, the service advisor was wonderful, but that's their only redeeming quality. Needless to say, I have to wait until my paycheck clears tomorrow to get any of this so-called work that needs done completed, and my inspection is up tomorrow.
If you want completely screwed, go there. My next call will be to the Attorney General.

Review: Purchased 2015 Kia Optima on 3/5/16-vehicle was demo w/9,000 mi. checked vehicle over with salesman and my sister, vehicle was dirty inside and took 3 times to clean properly, one scratch noted in front that was accepted. However upon viewing cleaned vehicle it was the front passenger tire was severely scratched, I advised salesmen this had to be replaced or I would not purchase vehicle, salesmen checked and advised they would provide 4 wheel tires to cover wheel, he took me outside and showed me and my sister what they looked like, I agreed to accept these, he then checked inside and stated the cost was $100, I advised it was a deal breaker and I would not purchase if I had to pay for the covers. The salesperson went back in and a written agreement was given to me stating wheel covers would be provided (at no cost to me). I was advised it would take 1 week to receive I would need to drop off my car as it would take 1 day to put on covers. Note: I advised this salemen 3 times prior to purchase if the wheel covers were not provided the deal was off. After 1 week I did not hear from the salesmen I then made 3 calls between 3/5/16-3/24/16 each time the salesmen assured me that they were waiting for the covers to come in and he would call me. On 3/24/16 salesmen called and advised they did not have covers and I could take my vehicle to a business called [redacted] and they would take off my hubcap and repair it. I advised that was not promised and I wanted the wheelcovers. The salesmen then advised the covers cost $300 and they would not provide and the hubcap repair was better, again I reminded him this is not what was promised and I have a written promise advising the wheel covers would be provided and that is what I wanted. He then put another sales manager on the phone who also promoted [redacted], again I repeated I want what was promised. On this date I called and filed a complaint with the Home Office of Monroeville Kia. On or 4/9/16 I went to the Monroeville Showroom and spoke with Paul W[redacted] -Business Mgr. I explained everything to him, also they are a dealership my vehicles is only a 2015 IF covers were not available they should not have been promised - they should know what is and is not available. Paul said he receives vehicles weekly and would replace my front wheel-he gave me his business card and advised he would contact me in 1 week (I have a witness to the entire conversation). I called Paul W[redacted] on 4/21/16 and advised I was following up on our meeting and to get a status because I had not heard from anyone, Paul said he was not aware of the circumstances surrounding my call and asked who was the salesmen, I advised Robert C[redacted], but I did not want to speak with him because I met with you, you provided your business card and told me you would take care of everything. He said I will call you back, he did and advised he needed to speak with his manager-Dave P[redacted] to discuss the wheel replacement, Dave would be out until 4/22/16. I reminded Paul, I was not going to [redacted] and I want what was promised and if they could not honor their written promise they could have their car. I want Monroeville Kia to honor their written promises to provide wheel covers - IF THEY WERE NOT AVAILABLE THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PROMISED. I paid them my money in good faith and could very easily have gone to another Kia dealership in another part of town or to another dealership period. I feel have been given the run around for 1 month now. I want this issue corrected based on the promise.Desired Settlement: I want the wheel covers for my vehicle, or my money back with no adverse affects for cancelling the contract, or a new vehicle (purchased my vehicle with 9000mi-only 1 owner-demo)

Business

Response:

From: Michael P[redacted]Date: Thu, May 5, 2016 at 3:38 PMSubject: Response for Complaint TD# [redacted]To: [redacted]Ms. [redacted] MS. [redacted] purchased a used 2015 Kia Optima from us with the standard aluminum wheels. During the negotiation process, Ms. [redacted] pointed out the was a scratch on one of the wheels. She was originally told that Monroeville Kia would be able to put a "wheel-skin" or a hubcap cover on all 4 wheels. During the ordering process of the wheel-skins, it was discovered they do not manufacture the covers for the 2015 Optima due to clearance issues with the breaking system. This issue could cause a potential safety issue while driving the car. There are several vehicles in stock at Monroeville Kia with these wheel-skins or hubcaps on the vehicles, although none are Optima's. The salesperson and sales manager informed the customer about the issue and offered to either repair or replace the scratched wheel. This option would cost Monroeville Kia additional monies versus just putting hubcaps over the factory aluminum wheels. This would also help retain resale value down the road by retaining the original equipment in good condition. The offer was made to Ms. [redacted] without any additional charges or cost. I believe the offer to Ms. [redacted] is an improved fix versus just covering the scratch on the vehicle as first stated. I would still like to extend the offer to Ms. [redacted] to replace the factory Kia wheel with a matching reconditioned factory wheel to preserve the appearance and functionality of her vehicle. Please let me know if Ms. [redacted] will accept our compromise.

Review: Driver Side front seat is wearing at only 1600 miles. Also right front mirror fell off bracket and hanging from the wire.Desired Settlement: Talked to dealership and they refuse to do anything about this matter. Also their telling me that my clothing I wear is wearing the seat. I feel this car used and mirror was glued back on. I've drove General Motors cars for 55 years and not a problem like this. If we can"t resolve this matter I'll go to the lemon law and report this matter.Paper wears better than this.

Business

Response:

I am writing in response to a complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]. on July 4, 2013. Mr. [redacted] a new 2013 Mazda3 sedan on February 26, 2013. Mr. [redacted] brought the vehicle into our service department for our service manager, [redacted], to review the customer's issues the week of May 20, 2012. Upon looking at the customers concern of the excessive wear on the seat and the mirror falling off of the vehicle, [redacted] pointed out the impact mark on the mirror of the vehicle and stated that physical damage is not covered under the manufacture's warranty. [redacted] also wanted to confer with our District Service and Parts Manager from Mazda Motors of America about the seat issue. Upon description of the seat issue with Mazda's representative, it was concluded the damage to the seat was not caused by manufacture's defect and therefore was not under warranty. Mr. [redacted] was not happy with that response and he contacted me about the issues. I stated to him I would review the concerns with him and we set an appointment to look at the vehicle at the dealership on Monday May 27, 2013. Upon arriving at the dealership, I looked at the concerns on Mr. [redacted] Mazda and came to the same conclusions as [redacted] and our Mazda representative. The passenger side mirror not only had an impact to the paint but also had a dent on the A-Pillar where the mirror had impacted the vehicle. The mirror would have had to be pushed upwards and towards the body of the vehicle and just not fallen downward. Mr. [redacted] did not agree with this even though there was a mark on the mirror and a dent on the vehicle. The seat on the interior of the vehicle looked more like the was excessive rubbing or friction that caused the wear pattern on the material. This appeared to be caused by some outside source rather than by a defect in the seating material. Being it was not a defect in material or workmanship, the seat was not covered under the Mazda factory warranty. I have enclosed pictures that I took when Mr. [redacted] brought the vehicle into the dealership on May 27.

Please feel free to contact me if there are any additional questions or information needed.

Review: I purchased my new car on Feb. 14, 2015 salesman was outstanding... I was trading in a car which would have to be paid off by the dealership. (which they stated would happen within 7-10 days). I received a phone call from the dealership a few days later stating that I had to return to sign papers that they forgot to get signed. I had to then make a special trip to the dealership to sign papers. A few days after that I received another call from the dealership to return to sign additional paper that they forgot to get signed. Now this is the second trip out of my way to sign papers that should have been signed on the purchase date.

I called my credit union (after the 10 days) where my car I traded in was financed to see if they received the payoff for my 2008 car. They had not received a payoff nor did they receive any information for my new car for the financing. I called the dealership and they said that they had sent a check to payoff my 2008 car.. Nothing had been received at the credit union. I called the dealership and spoke the the Sales Manager to see if and when the payoff check was sent or when it was going to be sent. He said that he would check with the title person and give me a call first thing the following morning (which would have been a Tuesday.) I never heard back from him, I returned a call to him twice and left detailed messages of my ongoing issue.. He NEVER called me back to give me any type of answers. I check every day to see if my credit union received the payoff for my 2008 car. NOTHING!!! I call and talked to my salesman and he said that he would speak with the General Manager and get back to me. Which he did and he said that they were putting a call into the Credit Union. Now into the second week of March, my 2008 car still has not been paid off. Now my credit is jeopardy due the 2008 car not being paid and now my 2015 car payment is due. The week of the 9th of March I was told by the dealership that an check was processed and being sent overnight to the Credit Union, I called the Credit Union the following day to see if they received a check from the dealership and they did, however it was unsigned... I called the dealership to let them know that they had sent an unsigned check to the Credit Union, left a message. Received a call back from the dealership stating that they again were going to send another check overnight for the payoff. Still that Friday, March 13,2015 the Credit Union had not received the check. Finally on March 16, 2015 I called the dealership and spoke with the title person, I asked her about the check that was sent to the Credit Union that they did not receive it. She stated that she knew nothing about them sending a second check out. She said that she would find out and send a check out that day. I requested that she call me back to let me know what exactly was going on plus give me the tracking number so I had proof that they did send the check to payoff my 2008 car. It took the dealership over 1 month to payoff my 2008 car which they stated that it would be 7-10 days.. In the meantime, 3 days after I traded my 2008 car in on a 2015 they sold my 2008 car. Not quite how they would be able to sell a car that they had no title to since they had not paid my car off.

Not only did they take that long to pay my 2008 car off, they never sent the paper work to process my new car loan until the month later.

Also, I received my new owners card and stated on there is that they received the information on March 17, 2015 so they did NOTHING with my paperwork, loan, payoff for over 1 month..

I think that is a bit unacceptable..

The managers did not return any of my multiple calls that I had left for them with detailed messages.

Beside the point of making me come back twice to sign papers that they had failed to have me sign on the date of purchase.

This was my second time of purchasing a car from this dealership and believe me, it will be my last..

I will make sure that everyone that I know does not go there to purchase a car. Word of mouth can be the worst thing for your business..

It's a shame that the Salesman did just an outstanding job and he was doing everything that he could to rectify the problem, which I appreciated.Desired Settlement: If the dealership would like to do something that is fine.. I am not requesting a thing, I just want it to be on record for others to see..

Business

Response:

I am writing in regards to a complaint filed by Ms. [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] purchased a new 2015 Kia Sorento from us on February 14, 2015. As part of her transaction, Monroeville Kia agreed to payoff her trade-in at [redacted] credit union. As part of our normal standard business procedure, we do not pay off a trade-in until the new vehicle bank contract is funded from the lending institution. The new finance company was also [redacted] and their policy is to not release funds for a new purchase until the old loan is paid off. By the time I personally was involved, many calls were placed back and forth and the payoff quote amount was expired. Monroeville Kia paid the extra interest that was charges to the account as it was our reprehensibility to make sure it was handled. There was an error made on the paperwork by a newer Finance Manager that needed re signed and it slowed the process down. We value the future business of Ms. [redacted] and would like to extend to her a complimentary vehicle detail and a full tank of gas when she comes in for her first complimentary oil change. I can truly understand how Ms. [redacted] feels, I would probably feel the same if I was in her position. Ms. [redacted], please accept this as a formal apology from myself and my management team for the inconveniences we may have caused. Enclosed is a copy of the cashed payoff check to [redacted] credit union.Sincerely,[redacted]General ManagerMonroeville Kia[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

I appreciate the response from Kia and for the apology and complimentary services they offered.

Regards,

Review: I purchased a vehicle, made some agreements with the company to pay the deposit for 1000.00. I made a A payment to the company of 500.00, to be owed the rest. On Sept 1 monroeville Kia took it upon themselves to take the additional 500.00 off of my debit card without my consent.Desired Settlement: Fraud charges, filed against the company for taking money without my permission, unauthorized.

Consumer

Response:

Compensation/refund

Business

Response:

Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am writing in response to a complaint filed by Ms. [redacted], ID #[redacted]. On June 20, 2015 Ms. [redacted] purchased a 2015 Kia Optima. During her transaction, she wrote us a check for $1000 and financed the balance through [redacted] Auto Finance. That check was deposited on a date agreed by Ms. [redacted] and Monroeville Kia. The check was returned to the dealership for a stop payment from the customer. On August 3, 2015 Monroeville Kia was finally able to get a hold of Ms. [redacted] and the debit card information and authorization was given to David P[redacted], Sales Manager. Mr. P[redacted] agreed to charge $500 to the card on August 3, 2015 and the remaining balance on August 13, 2015. On August 13, Ms. [redacted]'s card was declined by the card processing company. Paul W[redacted], Finance Manager for Monroeville Kia, and David P[redacted] made numerous attempts to contact Ms. [redacted] concerning the balance still due from her vehicle purchase/check. There were no returned calls until after payment was posted to Ms. [redacted]'s debit card. We were given the authorization and debit card information to collect payment for the returned check. Without MS. [redacted]'s consent, Monroeville Kia would have not had the information to process her card. Attached is the copy of the returned check to verify that the funds collected were actually the same that were owed as part of Ms. [redacted]'s transaction. Please do not hesitate to call me if you need any additional information.Thank you,Michael P[redacted]General ManagerMonroeville Kia

Consumer

Response:

Review: Normally I’m not the type of person to pursue something like this but I believe that Monroeville Kia knowing and intentionally engaged in a “Bait and Switch” ad tactic. On their website they had an advertisement that they were selling 2016 AWD Sorentos for $21,998. I saw the ad last Friday 4-1-2016 and thought it was a good deal. I wasn’t able to make it out Friday but that afternoon I called the dealer around 4:30-5 o’clock and asked to speak to a sales associate. I was transferred to an “Internet Sales” associate. She asked what I was looking for and I told her that I saw an ad on their website advertising the 2016 AWD Sorento for $21,998. I said I wouldn’t be able to make it until the next day but wanted to know if they would honor that price. She told me that they absolutely would and proceeded to tell me about the fact that they had a large inventory they were trying to get rid of so I would even have a pick of colors. I told her I would make it out and she scheduled an appointment for 10:30am the next day (4-2-2016). I got there and met with a sales associate who was very nice. We talked about what I was looking for and he showed me a 2016 AWD Sorento that we test drove. After the test drive we decided to discuss numbers. I had a trade in (which at first they offered me $1800 less than any other dealership) so after the appraisal my associate brought me the numbers. To my surprise the cost of the car wasn’t $21,998 but rather $30,000. I told my associate that the website said $21,998 and I was told the price would be honored when I came in. I even brought it up on their mobile site (I have a time/date stamped screenshot to prove it was still up on Saturday at 11:54). He took my phone back and the sales mangers (Mike and BJ) told him to tell me that they would not honor the advertised price I was promised (they later told me in person they wouldn’t honor it). They then tried to sell me a FWD version for the price on the ad. They said it was a “typo” but how was I the only person to inquire about such a good price the whole time the ad was up?? They then tried to sell me a used vehicle for the same $21,998. This is a clear cut case of bait and switch since they advertised one car/price but when you get there it’s a different car or a different price. I think they pulled an absolutely shady move and should honor the price they advertised and promised to a customer. At this point I have not consulted local media or legal representation but instead am giving KIA the chance to correct a wrong on their own.Desired Settlement: I want KIA to honor the price they advertised and promised me which was $21,998 for a brand new, 2016 All Wheel Drive Sorento

Business

Response:

I am writing in response to a complaint filed by [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] visited Monroeville Kia on Saturday April 2, 2016 to look at a vehicle advertised on the our mobile website. Several thing occurred to get us to this point. First of all, a misprint on the mobile site stated that stock #K17053 with vin: [redacted] was a2016 All Wheel Drive Sorento. when you click on the special link, you were redirected to the vehicle for sale. I enclosed a screen shot showing the same stock number and vin as the car in question clearly showing it is a front wheel drive Sorento. Second mistake we made was one of our incoming phone representatives stated we would honor the advertised price 2 days after the special expired. I told Mr. [redacted] we would honor the price on the said vehicle in the ad but there was a misprint in production of the website slide. He insisted and argued that he should be able to purchase the car he wanted, a specific all wheel drive Sorento Lx for the Base L model that was advertised. The website slide was proofread by several people but somehow the heading was not corrected before it went live to the website. Thirdly, when we deleted the expired ad at the end of last month, the ad should have deleted off the mobile site also. Mr. [redacted] was able to view the expired ad for almost 2 days before it finally came down off the mobile site. When I spoke with Mr. [redacted] after the incident the following weak on the phone, he stated we intentionally lied and we should honor the price. He also stated we did not even offer him any pricing on the All Wheel Drive LX Sorento he was looking for. I pulled the records and that was an untrue statement. Both a buy and a lease offer was extended to Mr. [redacted] but he chose not to purchase the vehicle. Before the conversation ended, Mr. [redacted] stated he worked for a major bank in the area and he knew numbers. He stated that unless we did the deal he wanted for the car he would blast us on every review site he could. When he state this, I told him he was not going to hold us hostage over reviews and we could agree to disagree on the situation. I tried to talk to Mr. [redacted] when he was here, along with one of our Sales-managers, and on the phone, and Mr. [redacted] was unable to be reasoned with. As far as an intentional lie, As Mr. [redacted] had stated, somehow a misprinted ad headline was not removed when it should have been. If there are any additional questions I can answer for you, please do not hesitate to contact me.Thank you,Michael P[redacted]General Manager Monroeville Kia

Consumer

Response:

Review: I brought my vehicle to my dealer for an oil change and tire rotation. Part of their advertised service is to check and fill all fluids and check and inflate tires to manufacturers specs. Prior to giving my car to them, I removed the left front air valve cap as a way to check that they actually rotated my tires. ( my previous trip to this dealer they did not rotate my tires, claimed that the tech forgot)When I got my car back, the tire that I removed the cap from was still in the same spot, the tread was the same because I measured that also, the rear tires had the most tread when I dropped it off and they were still on the rear after the rotation. I went back and the mgr had the tech redo my rotation. when I left the dealer, about a mile down the road I went to use my wiper fluid and it was empty, they failed to check and fill the fluid. When I got home I checked my tire pressure, it was at 29 psi, the spec calls for 34psi.I sent an email to this dealership but have not heard back from anyone. Basically, they do not perform the services that you pay for.Desired Settlement: refund my cost of the tire rotation since the service was to include the fluid check and tire inflation check, and cost me an additional 30 minute wait/. Explain why this is the second consecutive time they have pulled this stunt. They still owe me two free oil changes as part of the package when I purchased this, my second vehicle from them in as many years.

Business

Response:

I have looked into the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]. After speaking with my Service Manager, [redacted], He assured me that the tires on the vehicle were rotated. The technician that preformed the service removed all of the valve stem caps and placed them back on the same spot on the vehicle where they were originally located. I value our customers and did a one time goodwill reimbursement to Mr. [redacted]. I have attached a copy of the reimbursement check we sent to the customer. If there is any additional information please contact me.

Thank you,