Monument Chevrolet

Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to the concern.We agree that we did install a lower control arm and ball joint in June of after customer requested an wheel alignment At that time, the vehicle did not pass the alignment due to apparent collision damage to the control arm Additionally, we have worked on the vehicle subsequent to that in November of and again in May of for customer requested maintenance.Currently, the lower sub-frame is damaged, including a torn front A-Arm mounting ear.My understanding is that the customer feels this was caused by a faulty installation of the A-Arm Also, my understanding that the customer has based this conclusion, at least in part, on the opinion of the insurance adjuster that has declined the repair on behalf of ***.Early last week, we had requested a meeting with the [redacted] adjuster, Annette, to understand her position My delay in responding to this claim was so that I could hopefully have her input in creating an action plan to resolve this matter Unfortunately, she has been unable to meet with us.Based on our inspection and the information we have available, the damage to the frame and associated repair is not our responsibility We base this decision on several factors:1) Neither maintenance visit after the repair, included any concern of the vehicle continuing to pull or make noise Incidentally, all three repair orders were written by different service advisors.2) The vehicle passed a Texas State Inspection at [redacted] on September of 2014, which includes a visual inspection and road test.3) Customer replaced brakes and/or tires at another shop after our maintenance visit in May 2015.3) All four wheels have severe and repeated impact damage, which indicates that the vehicle has been operated outside of its designed intent Specifically, the control arm and frame are not designed to withstand repeated curb impacts.4) Additionally, according to CarFax, the vehicle was involved in an accident early 2015.If you have additional questions or need pictures or supporting documents, please feel free to reach out to me via this system, email at [redacted] or phone at [redacted] .Respectfully, W.CS***Vice PresidentMonument Chevrolet

From: Danny B [redacted] @monumentchevrolet.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 8:AM To: drteam Subject: Complaint ID: [redacted] As far as the customer calling several times that day and being told the advisor was at lunch, she is somewhat correct, she did in fact call twice just minutes before but did not leave a messageOn her third attempt she reached Keith another advisor as stated on our first responseWe feel that we have supplied a time line of events of supporting documentation that should answer all of the customers concernsWe do understand the importance of an accurate estimate of repairs and we do our very best to educate our customers of needed repairs and the cost associated with themIn this case the customer drove the vehicle until the brake pad surface had worn down through the pad material causing damage to the rotor surfaceUnfortunately when this happens we have to attempt to re-machine the rotor surface in an attempt to smooth the surface for the new pads to be installedSometimes the rotors require machining that takes them below the minimum thickness for them to be safe and effectiveIn this case the customer was given an estimate for repairs needed along with the possibility of rotor replacement based on the initial free inspectionAgain, we are unable to find evidence that supports the refund the customer requestedWe understand everyone's time is valuable and appreciate your teams response in this matter

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint She said she just spoke with you and will be coming out as soon as a supplement is made.Regards,

Please have her call me directly at ***.We've been working to meet with her since the vehicle was dropped off here, but have only been able to get a return voicemail up to this pointHopefully, with your involvement they will be more willing to meet.W.CS***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint
I called several times the day I dropped off my car. I was told everyone was out to lunch and that "they" were still looking at my car. When I was told they were still looking at my car it was already or PM CST. Additionally, I asked several times how much the work would cost. Dawn advised that they did not know and that until "they" looked at my car, she would be unable to give me an actual cost. She did, however, provide an approximation of $(no where near the amount that I was originally asked to pay which was nearly $if I got everything they suggested done, nor was it the amount that I paid). The document provided by the dealership alleges that Dawn told me at 14:26, that all repairs may not be completed on August 4. That is a lie. Dawn never mentioned that my car would not be ready when I would arrive after work to pick it up. The note is right that I did not authorize or decline repairs when I spoke with Dawn because I wanted to know the actual amount--not an estimation. Dawn said she would determine the exact amount and call me back. Dawn failed to do so. It was only when I arrived to the dealership after work that I was advised that the actual amount was $and something dollars with taxes. I was quoted a price according the dealership documents at approximately 18:(nearly 6:PM). Plus according to their notes, at 16:Dawn said the night technicians would be able to investigate my brakes. Why did that need to be done again if it had been done during the vehicle inspection?When I expressed to Dawn my concerns about how long the dealership had my car and how long it was taking, Dawn expressed that "they" had been working on the recalls. I dropped my car off on August 4, at 7:AM. According to the document that was attached to the dealer's response (which by the way is missing a part B and C), they performed work beyond an oil change which I acknowledged. However, the recalls that were completed took hardly any time. The brake lamp malfunction took less than minutes to complete considering the parts request was made at 12:PM. The second recall for the safety belt lap anchor tensioner cable was ordered at 15:and from 15:to 17:I am not sure what was being done. Let's say they were working on that particular recall during that time block, it still only took approximately hours. That is me giving them the benefit of the doubt, but of course, I cannot be sure based on the notes they provided. I have no idea when the actual inspection was done. The earliest time of work being done was for the brake lamp recall at 12:08. Once it was completed at 12:24, there is a gap of time not accounted for from 12:to 12:(i.eminutes). From 12:to 13:13, I'm assuming this was the actual inspection time (again, notes are not clear). If that is the case, the inspection took minutes. According to my paperwork, lines A and B are the multi point vehicle inspection (time) and the lof/tire rotate/mpvi promotion - dexos oil (time) respectively. According to dealership records, at 13:"a b done". Again, from 12:to 13:is minutes. The labor reported on my paperwork took approximately hour and minutes to complete which is the antithesis to the numbers reflected on the documented the dealership provided.From 13:to 15:(over 1/hours), nothing was done to my car. From 17:to 18:(over minutes later), my brakes finally became a focus. I have no idea what was being done for those minutes prior to that.From 7:AM to 12:PM what was being done to my car? From 13:to
15:46, what was being done to my car? From 15:to 17:38, what was
being done (I assume it was the second recall, but I don't know)? From 17:to 18:19, what was being done. According to their notes, the price for the brakes was given to me at 18:23. At 18:clearly after talking with the tech, I declined the repairs (minutes of dialogue). Approximately minutes later, 18:41, I authorized the work. Per the dealership document and their response, I approved the brake job at the estimated $amount which Dawn quoted me at 16:49. Not true. The price I was charged was $for the brake job minus taxes--not $as their response notes. Hence the reason for knowing the actual amount. It's not difficult to understand. The dealership has made it seem that they worked on my car diligently the entire time it was there, they did an amazing job of completing the work in one day as if I was told it may not be completed all on 8/4, and that I took FOREVER to authorize any work. That is not the case. I requested to know the exact cost of the work to be performed. This is not an alien idea. The dealership does not know anything about my finances or my ability/inability to pay. Had I allowed them to do the work and then not have been able to pay, now what? My question is a valid and acceptable question to ask. People make decisions on the actual cost of the work like decline the work or go somewhere else. The mere fact that Dawn in her inadvertent malfeasance failed to provide me with the exact amount is not my fault. I called several times and was not given any assistance with that even after speaking to a manager or advisor in the service department. Additionally, the time from 18:to 18:when I authorized the repairs for the brakes was merely minutes as compared to the dealership having my car nearly hours. As such, my resolution request stands as is"I want a full refund for the labor which cost $tax not included
returned back to my *** endng in ***Additionally, I want half
of the parts cost $plus tax returned as wellThe total cost for
parts was $However, I believe that due to the inconvenience,
the length of time I was there, the lack of customer service and empathy
is worth half of the parts being refundedI have been a loyal Chevrolet customer, but this experience has left at best a sour taste in my mouth."
Best Regards,S***

From: Danny B[redacted]@monumentchevrolet.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:20 AM To: drteam <[email protected]> Subject: Complaint ID: [redacted]   As far as the customer calling several times that day and being told the advisor was at lunch, she is somewhat correct, she did in fact call twice just minutes before but did not leave a message. On her third attempt she reached Keith another advisor as stated on our first response. We feel that we have supplied a time line of events of supporting documentation that should answer all of the customers concerns. We do understand the importance of an accurate estimate of repairs and we do our very best to educate our customers of needed repairs and the cost associated with them. In this case the customer drove the vehicle until the brake pad surface had worn down through the pad material causing damage to the rotor surface. Unfortunately when this happens we have to attempt to re-machine the rotor surface in an attempt to smooth the surface for the new pads to be installed. Sometimes the rotors require machining that takes them below the minimum thickness for them to be safe and effective. In this case the customer was given an estimate for repairs needed along with the possibility of rotor replacement based on the initial free inspection. Again, we are unable to find evidence that supports the refund the customer requested. We understand everyone's time is valuable and appreciate your teams response in this matter.

We appreciate the Revdex.com's involvement in resolving this customer's concern.We understand that when we have a customer's vehicle for repairs, we have their freedom of mobility.  So completing repairs in a timely manner is very important to us.  We regret that we did not meet her expectations...

and apologize that she feels mistreated.Ms. [redacted] did drop the vehicle off that morning.  Unfortunately, with a travel time of 10 minutes, leaving 5 minutes to meet with an advisor and coordinate for the shuttle is not enough time for us to get her to work on time.She mentions in the details that she was not kept informed of the repairs and that work was not begun until she arrived at 5:30.  That's simply not the case.  Her repair requests and notable information is as follows:A) No Charge InspectionB) Oil change and Tire rotationC) Internal information line - No repair concern.D) Customer States Brakes Making Grinding NoiseE) Recall #15031 (Seat Belt Tensioner)F) Recall #13036 (Brake Lamp Malfunction)Timeline (from attached notes):12:24 Brake lamp recall completed.12:54 Our records indicate the technician updated oil changed also noting 1) front air dam damaged from impact and 2) oil leak was found and 3) recommended alignment based on uneven front tire wear.13:03 Technician added front brakes were metal to metal (completely worn).13:15 Customer called in and spoke with Service Advisor Keith.  He advised customer that the brake lamp recall and oil change had been completed.  Additional discussion regarding return shuttle.  Keith committed that we would send someone to pick her up once the vehicle was completed.  Additionally, he would have Dawn (the service advisor) call her after she returned from lunch.14:26 Service Advisor Dawn called customer with update and estimate for front brakes ($450.00).  Recommended $69.95 alignment for tire wear.  She advised her of the oil leak and the charge associated with the necessary further investigation.  Discussion regarding $99 brake pricing.  Customer did not authorize or decline repairs. The front brake estimate was based on the No Charge Inspection, but that the rear brakes had not failed a visual inspection.  Customer was advised that if she chose to have all repairs completed, it may not be completed today.  16:37 Service Advisor and customer discuss extent of damage to rotors and that the night technicians would diagnose the rear brake condition.  Dawn mentions again that all repairs may not be able to be completed today.  Customer expressed concern that she did not live in the area, but only works here and that work ended for her at 5:00.  Dawn mentions that that the timing of the shuttle may be difficult, but would investigate.16:49 Dawn calls customer and confirms shuttle service and gets address to dispatch the shuttle.  She additionally confirms that the night technicians would be able to investigate the rear brakes.17:30 Customer arrives (per customer)18:19 Technician completed diagnosis of rear brakes.18:23 Parts department completes price and availability.18:30 Night manager adds notes: Customer declines repairs.18:41 Night manager adds notes: Customer approves front brakes per 14:26 estimate and rear brakes special.22:07 All work completed.We agree the vehicle was here 15 hours. However, there were more services requested and provided beyond an oil change as implied in the details. Furthermore, 3.4 hours of repair was completed in 3.43 clock hours (22:07-18:41); 2.5 hours of work was completed prior to her arrival.  The overall duration of the repair could have been substantially shortened as 4 hours were not productive awaiting customer authorization.  Clearly, there wasn't confusion regarding the authorization status at 14:26, because when the customer arrived, she initially declined the repair.  Fortunately, since we are the only Chevrolet dealership in the Houston area open until midnight, we were able to complete a nearly 4 hour repair authorized at 6:41pm.Based on the quality assurance features in our phone system and internal tracking data, we are unable to find evidence that supports the refund the customer requested.If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us.  Please advise if there are any next setps.Respectfully,W.C. S[redacted]Monument Chevrolet

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  She said she just spoke with you and will be coming out as soon as a supplement is made.Regards,

Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to the concern.We agree that we did install a lower control arm and ball joint in June of 2014 after customer requested an wheel alignment.  At that time, the vehicle did not pass the alignment due to apparent collision damage to the control...

arm.  Additionally, we have worked on the vehicle subsequent to that in November of 2014 and again in May of 2015 for customer requested maintenance.Currently, the lower sub-frame is damaged, including a torn front A-Arm mounting ear.My understanding is that the customer feels this was caused by a faulty installation of the A-Arm.  Also, my understanding that the customer has based this conclusion, at least in part,  on the opinion of the insurance adjuster that has declined the repair on behalf of [redacted].Early last week, we had requested a meeting with the [redacted] adjuster, Annette, to understand her position.  My delay in responding to this claim was so that I could hopefully have her input in creating an action plan to resolve this matter.   Unfortunately, she has been unable to meet with us.Based on our inspection and the information we have available, the damage to the frame and associated repair is not our responsibility.  We base this decision on several factors:1) Neither maintenance visit after the repair, included any concern of the vehicle continuing to pull or make noise.  Incidentally, all three repair orders were written by different service advisors.2) The vehicle passed a Texas State Inspection at [redacted] on September of 2014, which includes a visual inspection and road test.3) Customer replaced brakes and/or tires at another shop after our maintenance visit in May 2015.3) All four wheels have severe and repeated impact damage, which indicates that the vehicle has been operated outside of its designed intent.  Specifically, the control arm and frame are not designed to withstand repeated curb impacts.4) Additionally, according to CarFax, the vehicle was involved in an accident early 2015.If you have additional questions or need pictures or supporting documents, please feel free to reach out to me via this system, email at [redacted] or phone at [redacted].Respectfully, W.C. S[redacted]Vice PresidentMonument Chevrolet