Premier Subaru

Premier Subaru has been in busy for more than years - exceeding the expectations of our clientsWe have a very voluminous file in regards to Mr [redacted] Incorporated within are emails to myself, as well as Mr [redacted] that clearly denote the customer's intention to continue to use review sites, the Revdex.com and other sites, if a resolution deemed satisfactory to him wasn't madeMr [redacted] has made good on this threat and, has written comments bordering on unprofessional about our company This matter is clear - when Mr [redacted] brought his car for service, we diagnosed a tire pressure monitor light as the impact, in the tire, of a piece of metalAs indicated in other correspondence, we attempted to provide the customer with an accommodation for the tire replacementThe customer rejected same In my emails with the client, we also indicated that the customer had the opportunity, at the time of sale, to purchase tire/wheel insurance, but, the customer declined They had driven more than 2,miles since they picked up their vehicle Premier Subaru cannot be held responsible for road hazards To address the customer's other concerns: - All recalls were performed at the time the safety inspection and vehicle certification was doneSubaru announced a subsequent vin range that was included after the full certification was completed - The Tire Pressure Monitor Light illumination at the time of delivery - was simply related to low tire pressure in a different tireThe tire pressure wasn't significantly low, just slightly lowThat was largely due to the change in air temperature, as well We have attempted to make the customer happyWe offered a price concession on a new tire and goodwill funds - even though there is no warranty coverage for the sameThe customer rejected this and proceeded to make derogatory and unprofessional comments on line and in social media (we have all of the information) We have closed this matter at this time

Premier Subaru has been in business for more than years and recognized for customer excellenceIn addition, our service department is approved by the [redacted] for Automotive Repair and ServiceWe appreciate the concerns of the customerPremier Subaru has knowledge of the subject vehicleThis vehicle was sold to the original owner by our dealership and serviced by us, up until the vehicle was traded into another dealership, of which the current owner purchased it fromUnder the vehicle's second owner, Premier Subaru has seen this car twiceThe most recent time being on 02/11/During that visit (denoted by repair order # [redacted] , we completed a brake line recall, oil change service and a multipoint inspectionDuring this inspection, it was noted by the technician that the head gaskets are leaking oilOur technician also noted that the drive belts were cracked and four market light bulbs were outAs a part of this complimentary inspection, we also checked the alignment (all good) and the health of the battery (all good)The technician that completed the work on the vehicle and noted the potential issues is fully Subaru Master Certified and is [redacted] He is current with all Subaru factory training, as is all of our staffWe understand that [redacted] has different opinion from another mechanicWe would welcome [redacted] and, even her mechanic, to visit our facility and allow us to collectively view the vehicle and the deficiencies we notedAs a [redacted] Approved and Revdex.com A+ rated business, we are keenly concerned with our reputation and quality of serviceSo, we would welcome this opportunity to show [redacted] what we found - and, why we found itWe note that [redacted] is not a member of the Revdex.comPremier Subaru cares about our reputationOur owner is on site every dayWe don't ever jeopardize our reputation by selling needless services to customersWe stand open to inviting [redacted] and even her mechanic into our facility for a collective review of her vehicle

For more than years, Premier Subaru has worked hard to exceed the expectations of our clientsThis includes being attentive to MsColonWe worked with MsColon prior to her application with the Revdex.com in an effort to walk through her underlying issue and come to an agreementUpon the sale of a vehicle to MsColon, we had all of the documents in place perfecting a sale of the carBased on her indication that she, once she owned the vehicle, did not like the features/lack thereof, on the navigation system, [redacted] offered to provide an accommodation (this accommodation followed our company picking up the car and seeing if we could address the client's issues)Subsequent to this, [redacted] offered $to the customer as a policy adjustment to compensate for the navigation system that she didn't like, post saleThis provided for us removing the system, installing factory audio and providing her a check for $The customer filed with Revdex.comCompletely separate to that, and incorporated within our response, [redacted] increased the offer to $1,The increase in offer has no bearing on the Revdex.com complaint [redacted] was making an effort to satisfy the customerAs the customer knows, from the sale documents completed on her vehicle, there is no provision for Premier Subaru to do any of thisThis was a goodwill adjustment in an effort to satisfy the customer Our company has treated the customer with respectWhile she may disagree with the adjustment that we have offered, it is unfair and "outside the line" to call Premier Subaru "dishonest" and a "pack of crooks" Without any obligation, whatsoever, Premier Subaru had offered to provide the customer with a check for $1,and the original equipment radioWe stand by our business practices and our willingness to assist the customer

We are confused by the receipt of this complaintWe acknowledge that the customer picked up her new car on Saturday, February 15, She contacted us around 11:30am regarding a problem with her vehicle and spoke with *** ***Our Management team was involved to ascertain the extent of the
problemWe immediately contacted *** *** *** in both *** and *** in order to facilitate alternative transportation (these facilities are proximate to the customer's home)The customer has *** and we also indicated that, as we typically do in a warranty situation, we would cover any additional dollars over and above the customers *** in order to have the car brought to us*** ***, from our office spoke with both the customer, ***, and her father
The car was test driven by our company for more than miles before the delivery of the car to the customer, so, we are equally interested in ascertaining why the customer had a problem with the car
As of today, we continue to await receipt of the vehicle, via *** towing, so that we can determine the problem the customer had
I am not sure why this matter has resulted in a complaint since, we immediately worked with the customer upon learning of an issue and worked to provide a tow of the vehicle to our dealership and alternative transportation, since the customer does not live proximate to the dealership
I am also clearly confused by the customer's use of the word "shady dealership"The client purchased a car, with a limited *** warranty in effect, and we have immediately acted upon the provisions of the warrantyOnce the vehicle has arrived at our dealership we will be able to ascertain the reason for the vehicle problem and complete a strategy for repair

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: my issue is with the lack of professionalism, customer care, and customer follow upI have never denied I had a small crack in my windshieldI am not asking for them to take responsibility for my windshieldI want it on record that their customer service is sub par If they noticed a crack in my windshield upon doing a degree inspection of the car prior to service, they should have called to notify me and I would have rescheduled the service until after it was repaired the next day He posted "it was noted and acknowledged by all parties." Not all parties, not meAgain, why was I not notified? This is standard practice with much more professional service departments my family has delt with in the pastThey were responsible for doing this.
When I paid for the service, NO ONE let me know my windshield was dangerously shatteredThey were responsible for doing this It was severe enough that shards of glass were on the outside of the windshieldWhen I brought it to the service manager's attention, he said acted "surprised" and said maybe it happened when the car was washed or when it was sitting in the parking lot after the service I was and still am, under the impression they were trying to hide something.
They state in this rebuttal that "we indicated to the customer, and, through the client's execution of the repair order...." They drew a vague black line on the windshield on a black picture of a car on the repair order I did not see this nor was it brought to my attention until I called the following day.
At the end of my conversation with the service manager in Friday morning, I asked for a call back from the ownerHours later, I had no responseThat is when I posted a negative review regarding their customer serviceThe owner posted his response backIn the time it took him to do this he could have called me and this situation would not have escalated.
I asked to view this video they have referred to, in one of his last posts, in response to my asking to view the video, the owner stated "As you continue to unfairly comment about this matter, we needn't pursue it further." In other words, they are denying a viewing of the video.
Again, this is a complaint about poor customer serviceSo poor that I feel the need to contact the Revdex.com
Sincerely,
*** ***

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because:
Unfortunately, as I stated before this company is the epitomy of unfair practices and no accountabilityThe fact that he’s lying about my response, since I didn’t respond to his email, is more than indicative of their lack of honesty and integrityHe states it’s impossible to determine how much was paid for the navigation system, I believe it is simple math (you divide; you learn to do this in elementary school)This complaint was not about the money as he wants to make it lookI bought a product and paid for it, and as such expected it to workAfter waiting for over a month for a response I told them that since I had already paid for this, all I wanted was for them to replace with a system that workedTheir response was that they could put me in another car but I would have to pay a difference of $moreSince I said that was not going to happen, he came up with the $deal The added features that he mentioned in his response are more liesThis is the email I received from premier when I asked about the price breakdown: $nav system, $leather seats and other features were already included in the price of the car (see email below in red)After I made this complaint online with Revdex.com he came back with an offer of $1225.00, yet another arbitrary number that clearly demonstrates their dishonesty and lack of math skills, not sure how you work with numbers all day but when it is convenient you can’t make a simple subtraction and division
At this point I don’t want anything from this unscrupulous company, their lack of integrity is appallingI will keep the system the way it is, even when some features have no functionalityI could not bring my car back to them because there is no amount of money that could make me trust this pack of crooksThis complaint should remain unresolved, but rest assured I will make others aware of your practices in the hopes that others are not taken advantage of
From: Michael Corthell [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2:PM
To:
Subject: RE: Premier Subaru
This has the Navigation ($1600.00) and leather seats ($as well and leather which were added after the factThese were on the addendum which does not show on the sticker you haveThat makes the MSRP $30,
Mike
Sincerely,
Nora Colon

Premier Subaru has worked hard in order to satisfy this customer. The customer executed a full finance menu at the time of delivery which, identified all costs and expenses associated with this vehicle. In addition, the documents executed by the customer do indicate that
"vehicles are sold cosmetically as-is". Obviously, we cannot be held responsible for physical damage once a vehicle is picked up by a customer. The customer is a former dealership employee - and, her boyfriend currently works at another dealership, and they have made erroneous allegations throughout the process. Please note:aThe illumination of the check engine light was due to a loose gas cap. Certainly, our employees filled the tank of the car prior to delivery. We accepted responsibility and, cleared the code and provided the customer with a set of "all weather mats" valued at more than $for their inconveniencebIt was a full two weeks after delivery of the vehicle before the customer brought to our attention the "inside door frame scratches". No such marks were ever identified on the car during our pre-delivery inspection, new car damage receipt or lot inspections. The customer called *** *** Sales Manager - as well as the customer's boyfriend and mother to notify us. We had a body shop look at the door frame to find damage - which appeared to be an attempted break in into the vehicle. The vehicle was inspected prior to delivery by the customer and her mother for more than minutes when they picked up the car - and, this was brought to our attention a full two weeks later. While Premier firmly believes, based on all of the information we had on the vehicle, and, inspections thereto, that this occurred during the customer's ownership of the car - we agreed to have our body shop repair this damage at NO COST to the customer - as a matter of customer good willThe customer was requested to call us, on a Monday, to confirm the body shop appointment. She never called until that Tuesday afternoon - further complicating the scheduling. We provided the customer with a loaner vehicle. Since the customer was unable to get to our dealership to duly execute the required loaner car paperwork - we dropped the loaner car off at her homeThere are numerous inaccuracies in the customer's portrayal of the scheduling of this matter. Repairs to the vehicle were made, at our cost, to the vehicle in spite of the legal documents executed by the customer denoting "vehicles are sold cosmetically as is", and a comprehensive inspection being done by our dealership, the customer and her mother, prior to pick up. We made a decision to do what we could in an attempt to satisfy the customerPremier Subaru re-delivered the completed vehicle to the customers home, to ensure maximum convenience to the customer. The customer looked at the repair work and indicated that it was "all good". The customer sent an email to *** *** GSM, at 4:on the Saturday after redelivery, indicating that there were further issues with the car - and/or the body work. She also sent a notation to the dealership - through our customer follow up system - that indicated that she, again, wasn't satisfiedWe instructed the body shop to contact the customer directly in order to identify and issues and remedy them. The body shop called the customer several times thereafter to try to speak/discuss the matter with the customerIn the interim, the customer took to email and social media (*** ** *** ** ** * *** *** ***) and made highly disparaging comments regarding the management of Premier Subaru - very personal attacks - and, completely uncalled forPremier Subaru has worked as best as possible with this customer and, paid for a repair that we firmly believe, the damage occurred within the possession of the customer. At all times, we attempted to make the process easy for the customer - providing alternative transportation, picking up/dropping off a loaner vehicle, etc. We welcomed the customer to speak directly with the body shop on any issues associated with the repair that we did - even after they signed off on it. At this time, the customer remains able to speak with the body shop on the repairs - if there is an issue. Due to the nature of the customer's social media commentary, we did indicate to the customer that we no longer would want to pursue a business relationship with them upon conclusion of the repairs there ended

To whom it may concern;
I received MsColon's complaint and sincerely tried to resolve the problem. Unfortunately this customer became argumentative and insisted on talking over me when she wasn't hearing what she wanted to hear. She feels she paid $for
the Navigation system and that would be correct if she paid full sticker price. Sticker was $30,and she paid $28,251, so determining how much of that discount was for navigation is fairly impossible. Also of note is the fact that we installed a full leather interior , all weather floor mats and remote start, all included in the purchase price. It is therefore impossible to determine how much was paid toward the navigation system as the discount applied to the car was for the car and the entire package. I thought my original offer of $plus tax was equitable considering that exceeds the total profit we received for this transaction. I then offered to increase this offer to $and Ms Colon still "scoffed."
I will extend this offer through the week ending Friday 4/4/2014. If she accepts this offer I will go to her place of business or home, drop off a loaner vehicle and bring her Forester here to make the exchange. When completed, I will return the car to her with the check for $1225. If Ms Colon does not accept my offer by the end of business (6PM) on Friday, 4/4/2014, this offer will be retracted
Richard Johnson
General Sales Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Let me correct a few items that Premier Subaru states in their responses.First off, I resent the accusation of threatening the business. I informed Premier that I would be taking to other options afforded to me as a consumer, such as this Revdex.com complaint, could my matter not be resolved. This was after multiple discussions with [redacted] to try and find a resolution to the problem. Calling this a threat and using that to discredit my claim is, in my opinion, an attempt at misdirection.Second, the proclamation that [redacted] closed the matter without adjustment is also false, as I stated in my original submission that [redacted] addressed our concerns directly with us, and were more than helpful in the matter. It was with their help that, not only was my tire repaired at no cost to us, but I came across two other pieces of damning evidence that have yet to been addressed by Premier: the CPO checklist that Premier filled out indicates the TPMS light was illuminated back in June 2014, and the fact that our car was sold to us with an outstanding recall on the brake lines. I would appreciate these two bits of information, which came to light after the emails that Mr. [redacted] forwarded along to the Revdex.com, be addressed.I would also like to hear an explanation of why a different dealership would inspect the car just days later and discover no metal in the tire, and instead find a leaky patch in our tire. This was maybe the single piece of information that pushed us over the edge. I could accept that a 3rd party investigates the car and finds a hole only and no metal, as it could of course fall out during driving the vehicle, but to find a failed tire patch as the cause of the leak indicates that we were flat out lied to by the service department at Premier. It is our contention that Subaru attempted to the tire with the hole in long before we accepted delivery of the vehicle, maybe even as far back as June 2014, and lied to us when we were purchasing the car on their lot that there were no problems with the tires only to have us take the car home, and then dodge any responsibility for the "road hazard" should we bring the car back to the dealership.Last, I have two issues with the Premier Subaru service department that have also yet to be addressed. Mr. [redacted] indicates in his previous response that their service department identified my left rear tire as causing the TPMS light to illuminate in early October. I have asked well over 2 dozen times, of multiple people, on the phone, through emails, and through messages such as this, to be provided the service records for the vehicle at that time that indicate the left rear tire was culprit of the light, and every time I ask, the request is dodged. How can I believe Premier that a different tire caused the light to come on when they cannot even produce a single piece of paper that states this is the case. Furthermore, when I pressed them about this, there is no computer readout or digital records at all of this claim, and it is simply noted by the service technician. This is troubling to me to say the least. I also find it very disingenuous of the service department that they have no records of the vehicle being serviced on the date of purchase, 10/04/2014, when we asked for the tires to be inspected again, since the light was on, and the mirror to be fixed. Mr. [redacted] acknowledges that the mirror was fixed in his previous response, but when I spoke with the service department to try and acquire those records, they informed me that there is no record of the car in the service bays on the day we purchased the vehicle. How then, can they be believed when they state the cause of the light was the left rear when they never even looked at the tire on the we requested them to.I will go back to my closing sentence of my original complaint..  As consumers, we cannot get under the car and make sure that every detail is in line with what is being promised to us, and can only rely on finding a trusted partner to deal with who will be honest about the condition of the tires they were asked to inspect, and we feel this is where Premier Subaru of [redacted] let us down.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

I was having problems with my Blue tooth. So I went to this dealer since I moved into this area. My [redacted] is a 2014, and they replaced my whole communcations unit. My son discovery that instead of having a 2014 unit, They put in a worst functioning unit with a 2012 sim card.[2012 UNIT] I worked with Gary, and he found that the blue hung up repeatedly, and the blue would get struck in "please repeat". However, he would not replace the radio,blue tooth, GPS unit{ all in one]. So now I have no blue tooth, and I work all over the state. Called [redacted] corp number, and they did nothing too. Losing faith in [redacted]. I got screwed, as I don't have time to Keep going their, 2 years old car with no blue tooth.

[redacted] stands by it's position, as follows:
1. The vehicle was dropped off with a crack in the windshield. This is a pre-existing condition, and, [redacted] cannot be held responsible for such a crack or, the continued advancement of a crack. A glass crack occurs due to an original event of impact under the customer's control.
2. The vehicle was redelivered to the customer a crack in the windshield. The windshield was not "shattered", which would be the result of an additional impact. The original crack in the windshield apparently continued to grow during it's stay with the dealership.
3. The dealership completed the vehicle walk-around, which is noted in the customer's commentary, which acknowledges the crack in the windshield at arrival.
4. For more than 15 years, [redacted] has worked to have happy and "more than satisfied clients". The customer is correct - she asked for the owner to become involved and provide a phone call. She refers to "hours later" after he request. The owner wasn't on property or available for most of the day on Friday. In the late afternoon, the Service Manager met with the owner for the discussion of possible assistance for a client. Unfortunately, the customer, before we could get back to her, posted negative commentary on social media. The company called [redacted] on Friday, as well. Before the [redacted] representative could get back to the customer, she continued to post negative reviews. The social media policy of the companies is to respond, but, not engage via social media.
Our client concierge has reached out to the customer via telephone.
This matter should be closed as there is no question of workmanship, or service quality at hand. The vehicle was dropped off with a pre-existing crack in the windshield and, returned with a crack in the windshield. [redacted] cannot be held responsible for the crack worsening during the vehicle's duration at the dealership.
This isn't an example of poor customer service. This is an example of a customer attempting to derive payment towards a matter of pre-existing condition. [redacted] provided excellent service work quality and, that matter isn't in dispute.

Complai[redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
MMy past experience is damage to vehicle and or lack of successful repair...I want another authorized dealer to fix issues  ....I lost faith in PremierSubaru  they can not do it so another dealer is in order...premier should reimburse me 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: 
Let me correct a few items that Premier Subaru states in their responses.
First off, I resent the accusation of threatening the business. I informed Premier that I would be taking to other options afforded to me as a consumer, such as this Revdex.com complaint, could my matter not be resolved. This was after multiple discussions with [redacted] to try and find a resolution to the problem. Calling this a threat and using that to discredit my claim is, in my opinion, an attempt at misdirection.
Second, the proclamation that [redacted] closed the matter without adjustment is also false, as I stated in my original submission that [redacted] addressed our concerns directly with us, and were more than helpful in the matter. It was with their help that, not only was my tire repaired at no cost to us, but I came across two other pieces of damning evidence that have yet to been addressed by Premier: the CPO checklist that Premier filled out indicates the TPMS light was illuminated back in June 2014, and the fact that our car was sold to us with an outstanding recall on the brake lines. I would appreciate these two bits of information, which came to light after the emails that Mr. [redacted] forwarded along to the Revdex.com, be addressed.
I would also like to hear an explanation of why a different dealership would inspect the car just days later and discover no metal in the tire, and instead find a leaky patch in our tire. This was maybe the single piece of information that pushed us over the edge. I could accept that a 3rd party investigates the car and finds a hole only and no metal, as it could of course fall out during driving the vehicle, but to find a failed tire patch as the cause of the leak indicates that we were flat out lied to by the service department at Premier. It is our contention that Subaru attempted to the tire with the hole in long before we accepted delivery of the vehicle, maybe even as far back as June 2014, and lied to us when we were purchasing the car on their lot that there were no problems with the tires only to have us take the car home, and then dodge any responsibility for the "road hazard" should we bring the car back to the dealership.
Last, I have two issues with the Premier Subaru service department that have also yet to be addressed. Mr. [redacted] indicates in his previous response that their service department identified my left rear tire as causing the TPMS light to illuminate in early October. I have asked well over 2 dozen times, of multiple people, on the phone, through emails, and through messages such as this, to be provided the service records for the vehicle at that time that indicate the left rear tire was culprit of the light, and every time I ask, the request is dodged. How can I believe Premier that a different tire caused the light to come on when they cannot even produce a single piece of paper that states this is the case. Furthermore, when I pressed them about this, there is no computer readout or digital records at all of this claim, and it is simply noted by the service technician. This is troubling to me to say the least. I also find it very disingenuous of the service department that they have no records of the vehicle being serviced on the date of purchase, 10/04/2014, when we asked for the tires to be inspected again, since the light was on, and the mirror to be fixed. Mr. [redacted] acknowledges that the mirror was fixed in his previous response, but when I spoke with the service department to try and acquire those records, they informed me that there is no record of the car in the service bays on the day we purchased the vehicle. How then, can they be believed when they state the cause of the light was the left rear when they never even looked at the tire on the we requested them to.
I will go back to my closing sentence of my original complaint..  As consumers, we cannot get under the car and make sure that every detail is in line with what is being promised to us, and can only rely on finding a trusted partner to deal with who will be honest about the condition of the tires they were asked to inspect, and we feel this is where Premier Subaru of [redacted] let us down.
Sincerely,[redacted]

For more than 14 years, Premier Subaru has worked hard to exceed the expectations of our clients. This includes being attentive to Ms. Colon. We worked with Ms. Colon prior to her application with the Revdex.com in an effort to walk through her underlying issue and come to an agreement. Upon the sale of a vehicle to Ms. Colon, we had all of the documents in place perfecting a sale of the car. Based on her indication that she, once she owned the vehicle, did not like the features/lack thereof, on the navigation system, [redacted] offered to provide an accommodation (this accommodation followed our company picking up the car and seeing if we could address the client's issues). Subsequent to this, [redacted] offered $875.00 to the customer as a policy adjustment to compensate for the navigation system that she didn't like, post sale. This provided for us removing the system, installing factory audio and providing her a check for $875.00. The customer filed with Revdex.com. Completely separate to that, and incorporated within our response, [redacted] increased the offer to $1,225. The increase in offer has no bearing on the Revdex.com complaint. [redacted] was making an effort to satisfy the customer. As the customer knows, from the sale documents completed on her vehicle, there is no provision for Premier Subaru to do any of this. This was a goodwill adjustment in an effort to satisfy the customer.
Our company has treated the customer with respect. While she may disagree with the adjustment that we have offered, it is unfair and "outside the line" to call Premier Subaru "dishonest" and a "pack of crooks".
Without any obligation, whatsoever, Premier Subaru had offered to provide the customer with a check for $1,225 and the original equipment radio. We stand by our business practices and our willingness to assist the customer.

We conversed with [redacted] this morning and requested that he bring the vehicle back to us and we will look at his vehicle for any issues he may have.We provided him with all of the information and, offered to help him with his repairs.   He declined.  There is nothing further that we can do for this customer without him being willing to return to our dealership.

Customer has been explained regarding coupon on several occasions. Vehicle arrived and service workorder was written up on 06/16/2015 as the vehicle was towed into the dealership. On 06/18/2015, customer called in for an insurance claim and adjustor was to be dispatched. Original estimate was on...

06/20/2015. On 06/22/2015, the job was reviewed with the adjustor and work was authorized.
On July 1, 2015, in the ordinary course of business, Premier sent coupons to all customers indicating that coupon needed to be presented at the time of "write up" and cannot be combined.
Clients vehicle was written up on 06/16/2015 and pre-dated coupon. As a consideration to the customer, a courtesy 10% discount was provided to him on all labor and parts, even though this matter was passed through to his insurance company.
Since the vehicle write up occurred when the work order was opened on 06/16/2015 and, the coupon issued on 07/01/2015 indicated "must be presented at the time of vehicle write up", the coupon is not valid nor applicable. As a courtesy, Premier Subaru provided the customer with a discount of 10% off of parts and labor.

Premier Subaru has been in busy for more than 14 years - exceeding the expectations of our clients. We have a very voluminous file in regards to Mr. [redacted]. Incorporated within are emails to myself, as well as Mr. [redacted] that clearly denote the customer's intention to continue to use review sites, the Revdex.com and other sites, if a resolution deemed satisfactory to him wasn't made. Mr. [redacted] has made good on this threat and, has written comments bordering on unprofessional about our company.
This matter is clear - when Mr. [redacted] brought his car for service, we diagnosed a tire pressure monitor light as the impact, in the tire, of a piece of metal. As indicated in other correspondence, we attempted to provide the customer with an accommodation for the tire replacement. The customer rejected same.
In my emails with the client, we also indicated that the customer had the opportunity, at the time of sale, to purchase tire/wheel insurance, but, the customer declined.
They had driven more than 2,000 miles since they picked up their vehicle.
Premier Subaru cannot be held responsible for road hazards.
To address the customer's other concerns:
- All recalls were performed at the time the safety inspection and vehicle certification was done. Subaru announced a subsequent vin range that was included after the full certification was completed.
- The Tire Pressure Monitor Light illumination at the time of delivery - was simply related to low tire pressure in a different tire. The tire pressure wasn't significantly low, just slightly low. That was largely due to the change in air temperature, as well.
We have attempted to make the customer happy. We offered a price concession on a new tire and goodwill funds - even though there is no warranty coverage for the same. The customer rejected this and proceeded to make derogatory and unprofessional comments on line and in social media (we have all of the information).
We have closed this matter at this time.

Premier Subaru has worked hard in order to satisfy this customer.   The customer executed a full finance menu at the time of delivery which, identified all costs and expenses associated with this vehicle.  In addition, the documents executed by the customer do indicate that...

"vehicles are sold cosmetically as-is".  Obviously, we cannot be held responsible for physical damage once a vehicle is picked up by a customer.   The customer is a former dealership employee - and, her boyfriend currently works at another dealership, and they have made erroneous allegations throughout the process.  Please note:a. The illumination of the check engine light was due to a loose gas cap.  Certainly, our employees filled the tank of the car prior to delivery.  We accepted responsibility and, cleared the code and provided the customer with a set of "all weather mats" valued at more than $50.00 for their inconvenience.b. It was a full two weeks after delivery of the vehicle before the customer brought to our attention the "inside door frame scratches".  No such marks were ever identified on the car during our pre-delivery inspection, new car damage receipt or lot inspections.  The customer called [redacted] Sales Manager - as well as the customer's boyfriend and mother to notify us.  We had a body shop look at the door frame to find damage - which appeared to be an attempted break in into the vehicle.  The vehicle was inspected prior to delivery by the customer and her mother for more than 15 minutes when they picked up the car - and, this was brought to our attention a full two weeks later.  While Premier firmly believes, based on all of the information we had on the vehicle, and, inspections thereto, that this occurred during the customer's ownership of the car - we agreed to have our body shop repair this damage at NO COST to the customer - as a matter of customer good will.The customer was requested to call us, on a Monday, to confirm the body shop appointment.  She never called until that Tuesday afternoon - further complicating the scheduling.  We provided the customer with a loaner vehicle.  Since the customer was unable to get to our dealership to duly execute the required loaner car paperwork - we dropped the loaner car off at her home.There are numerous inaccuracies in the customer's portrayal of the scheduling of this matter.   Repairs to the vehicle were made, at our cost, to the vehicle in spite of the legal documents executed by the customer denoting "vehicles are sold cosmetically as is", and a comprehensive inspection being done by our dealership, the customer and her mother, prior to pick up.   We made a decision to do what we could in an attempt to satisfy the customer.Premier Subaru re-delivered the completed vehicle to the customers home, to ensure maximum convenience to the customer.   The customer looked at the repair work and indicated that it was "all good".   The customer sent an email to [redacted] GSM, at 4:57 on the Saturday after redelivery, indicating that there were further issues with the car - and/or the body work.  She also sent a notation to the dealership - through our normal customer follow up system - that indicated that she, again, wasn't satisfied.We instructed the body shop to contact the customer directly in order to identify and issues and remedy them.   The body shop called the customer several times thereafter to try to speak/discuss the matter with the customer.In the interim, the customer took to email and social media ([redacted] [redacted]) and made highly disparaging comments regarding the management of Premier Subaru - very personal attacks - and, completely uncalled for.Premier Subaru has worked as best as possible with this customer and, paid for a repair that we firmly believe, the damage occurred within the possession of the customer.  At all times, we attempted to make the process easy for the customer - providing alternative transportation, picking up/dropping off a loaner vehicle, etc.  We welcomed the customer to speak directly with the body shop on any issues associated with the repair that we did - even after they signed off on it.  At this time, the customer remains able to speak with the body shop on the repairs - if there is an issue.   Due to the nature of the customer's social media commentary, we did indicate to the customer that we no longer would want to pursue a business relationship with them upon conclusion of the repairs there ended.

The client purchased a car on 10/01/2013 at 95,501 miles. While the State of Connecticut requires a 3 month,3,000 mile powertrain warranty, Premier Subaru provided the customer with a 6 month/6,000 mile nationwide powertrain warranty through [redacted] for additional piece of mind. At the time of sale,...

On 11/18/2013 at 97,873 miles, the customer dropped off the vehicle with the complaint that the car had a drivability issue and that the check engine light/cruise control light was on. (Repair order attached). The Certified Subaru technician diagnosed that the #3 ignition wire had come loose. The technician re-connected the wire and cleared the check engine light and no problems surfaced.
The customer (per the CarFax) took their car to [redacted] on 01/30/2014 @ 101,361 miles for a routine oil change.
On 07/07/2014 at 108,548 miles, the customer dropped the vehicle off for a check engine light. Our technician diagnosed that the vehicle has a head gasket failure. This is an unrelated problem to the issue that the client had at 97,873 miles.
The car is outside of the 6 month/6,000 mile warranty. Premier Subaru had offered the customer a 15% discount on any work performed, including any of the maintenance work required at the current miles. The client spoke with our service department, as well as [redacted], a manager at the dealership.
We have been awaiting the customers direction on this at this time. Should the customer decide not to proceed with the work, the vehicle is available for pick up. The customer does need to make a decision since the vehicle needs to be picked up at this juncture if the customer doesn't authorize the repairs, as we have quoted to the client, with the 15% discount.

Premier Subaru has been in business for more than 14 years and recognized for customer excellence. In addition, our service department is approved by the [redacted] for Automotive Repair and Service. We appreciate the concerns of the customer. Premier Subaru has knowledge of the subject vehicle. This...

vehicle was sold to the original owner by our dealership and serviced by us, up until the vehicle was traded into another dealership, of which the current owner purchased it from. Under the vehicle's second owner, Premier Subaru has seen this car twice. The most recent time being on 02/11/2015. During that visit (denoted by repair order #[redacted], we completed a brake line recall, oil change service and a multipoint inspection. During this inspection, it was noted by the technician that the head gaskets are leaking oil. Our technician also noted that the drive belts were cracked and four market light bulbs were out. As a part of this complimentary inspection, we also checked the alignment (all good) and the health of the battery (all good). The technician that completed the work on the vehicle and noted the potential issues is fully Subaru Master Certified and is [redacted]. He is current with all Subaru factory training, as is all of our staff. We understand that [redacted] has different opinion from another mechanic. We would welcome [redacted] and, even her mechanic, to visit our facility and allow us to collectively view the vehicle and the deficiencies we noted. As a [redacted] Approved and Revdex.com A+ rated business, we are keenly concerned with our reputation and quality of service. So, we would welcome this opportunity to show [redacted] what we found - and, why we found it. We note that [redacted] is not a member of the Revdex.com. Premier Subaru cares about our reputation. Our owner is on site every day. We don't ever jeopardize our reputation by selling needless services to customers. We stand open to inviting [redacted] and even her mechanic into our facility for a collective review of her vehicle.