To whom it may concern, When the vehicle came in there was damage all over the front bumperThe insurance company agreed to pay for the damage to the left side only, not rock chips, bug damage, delimitation ect, as per industry standardsThus we repaired what the insurance company paid to have
repairedSame with the fender, there were rock chips in the fender that were not loss relatedIf they would have been in the immediate area we would have had to repair them as well to make sure the repair was completeThe rock chips on the fender were not repaired because the insurance company did not pay for themThe rock chips would have been there pre-loss and in order to indemnify the customer the rock chips would not have been repairedAs per industry standards, we repaired the area of damage that the insurance company advised that they would be responsible forOur goal is to get a vehicle back to pre loss condition, working with the insurance companyWhen the customer called about issues with the bumper, even though there was preexisting damage to the bumper on the right side of the bumper, we decided to, as a customer courtesy, replace the bumper for the customerWe replaced the bumper with a new OEM bumperThe customer lives away from our area, so we even paid another shop to replace and paint the bumper for themWe have gone above and beyond for this customer and this situationIf this was a local customer we would have had them come back to the shop and repaired the peeling bumper, but with the customer living so far out of our area we absorbed the extra expense to replace this bumperThe only color match that the customer could have at this time would be from the bumper to the fender that we repaired, because another shop painted that new bumperI called the shop that the bumper was replaced at (Oaks Toyota) and they stated that they had no issues with the color and the customer has not contacted them about any of their workmanshipI spoke to the Parts Manager and the Body Shop Manager at Oaks Toyota, the two people that I was dealing, about these issuesThis is the customers’ shop of choiceWe cannot warranty any repair work completed at another shopIn our check in photos of the vehicle when it was dropped off on 05/17/2016, you can clearly see preexisting damage to the bumperThe damage that the customer advised was from the loss was shallow scratchesIf you have any questions please contact our office at ###-###-####
We apologize for your inconvenience. We delivered this vehicle, and the customer called back and advised there was a leak coming from somewhere under the hood. The customer also had issue with a broken hood latch release that is located in the vehicles cab. This was not noted as prior damage as...
per the hood latch release worked properly while the vehicle was in our care. The issue with the water pump leaking was a pinhole leak, did not appear to be accident related. As a shop, we reported issue to the insurance company, and after review they agreed to pay for the water pump. The second issue with the hood latch release being broken appeared to be a prior issue that someone repaired incorrectly. They apparently glued the part together prior to this issue. The glue that was used to put this part back together seemed to be aged. It took the insurance company a few days to approve the second part of the repairs. When they were approved the part that was agreed upon was ordered, it was the incorrect part and was sent back and the parts vender was contacted. The correct part was ordered. The part is on national back order and should be received by the end of the week or the beginning of the next. We are not in control of our vender’s shipping, receiving or on hand inventory, because this is not a part that would warrant replacement frequently. In this case, we are dealing with the dealership on all parts. As a shop, we in no way acted in bad faith at anytime. We have been in constant contact with the insurance company with these issues and concerns. With this being hidden damages (damages that would not have been seen without looking for that particular issue) we would not have been able to address it. We have also been in contact with the customer about the issues. The reason another contact person had been used when contacting the customer would have been per customer request. Allot of our email/text messaging are automated. We also have in the referal paperwork (from the insurance company) a primary phone number that is a prefered contact, that comes straight from the insurance company, and that tends to be the number that is the main contact number. The customer at no time has asked us about a rental vehicle. As the insurance company paying for the issues this would be something they would need to talk with their insurance company about coverage on their policy. If this were a warranty issue it would have been covered, by us. After review of the issues stated in this complaint, the customer was contacted, via the preferred contact from the insurance company (The secondary number went to voicemail). I spoke with the husband and he advised that he had received voicemails and was at work and just could not answer. I advised the customer that the water pump had already been replaced, and the hood was operable and safe to drive with as per there is no issues with the opening or closing for the part, it is just an issue with where the handle attaches. The hood opens and closes correctly. The customer thanked me for the call. The customer advised me that they did not need a rental because he and his family were going out of town this weekend and have another vehicle. I advised the customer about the delay with the part, he understood that the part is on national back order and will be shipped from manufacture (strait from Detroit, MI) and as soon as the part is received would be installed. The customer is ok with and understands the delay. The customer thanked me for my time.
To whom it may concern, When the vehicle came in there was damage all over the front bumperThe insurance company agreed to pay for the damage to the left side only, not rock chips, bug damage, delimitation ect, as per industry standardsThus we repaired what the insurance company paid to have
repairedSame with the fender, there were rock chips in the fender that were not loss relatedIf they would have been in the immediate area we would have had to repair them as well to make sure the repair was completeThe rock chips on the fender were not repaired because the insurance company did not pay for themThe rock chips would have been there pre-loss and in order to indemnify the customer the rock chips would not have been repairedAs per industry standards, we repaired the area of damage that the insurance company advised that they would be responsible forOur goal is to get a vehicle back to pre loss condition, working with the insurance companyWhen the customer called about issues with the bumper, even though there was preexisting damage to the bumper on the right side of the bumper, we decided to, as a customer courtesy, replace the bumper for the customerWe replaced the bumper with a new OEM bumperThe customer lives away from our area, so we even paid another shop to replace and paint the bumper for themWe have gone above and beyond for this customer and this situationIf this was a local customer we would have had them come back to the shop and repaired the peeling bumper, but with the customer living so far out of our area we absorbed the extra expense to replace this bumperThe only color match that the customer could have at this time would be from the bumper to the fender that we repaired, because another shop painted that new bumperI called the shop that the bumper was replaced at (Oaks Toyota) and they stated that they had no issues with the color and the customer has not contacted them about any of their workmanshipI spoke to the Parts Manager and the Body Shop Manager at Oaks Toyota, the two people that I was dealing, about these issuesThis is the customers’ shop of choiceWe cannot warranty any repair work completed at another shopIn our check in photos of the vehicle when it was dropped off on 05/17/2016, you can clearly see preexisting damage to the bumperThe damage that the customer advised was from the loss was shallow scratchesIf you have any questions please contact our office at ###-###-####
We apologize for your inconvenience. We delivered this vehicle, and the customer called back and advised there was a leak coming from somewhere under the hood. The customer also had issue with a broken hood latch release that is located in the vehicles cab. This was not noted as prior damage as...
per the hood latch release worked properly while the vehicle was in our care. The issue with the water pump leaking was a pinhole leak, did not appear to be accident related. As a shop, we reported issue to the insurance company, and after review they agreed to pay for the water pump. The second issue with the hood latch release being broken appeared to be a prior issue that someone repaired incorrectly. They apparently glued the part together prior to this issue. The glue that was used to put this part back together seemed to be aged. It took the insurance company a few days to approve the second part of the repairs. When they were approved the part that was agreed upon was ordered, it was the incorrect part and was sent back and the parts vender was contacted. The correct part was ordered. The part is on national back order and should be received by the end of the week or the beginning of the next. We are not in control of our vender’s shipping, receiving or on hand inventory, because this is not a part that would warrant replacement frequently. In this case, we are dealing with the dealership on all parts. As a shop, we in no way acted in bad faith at anytime. We have been in constant contact with the insurance company with these issues and concerns. With this being hidden damages (damages that would not have been seen without looking for that particular issue) we would not have been able to address it. We have also been in contact with the customer about the issues. The reason another contact person had been used when contacting the customer would have been per customer request. Allot of our email/text messaging are automated. We also have in the referal paperwork (from the insurance company) a primary phone number that is a prefered contact, that comes straight from the insurance company, and that tends to be the number that is the main contact number. The customer at no time has asked us about a rental vehicle. As the insurance company paying for the issues this would be something they would need to talk with their insurance company about coverage on their policy. If this were a warranty issue it would have been covered, by us. After review of the issues stated in this complaint, the customer was contacted, via the preferred contact from the insurance company (The secondary number went to voicemail). I spoke with the husband and he advised that he had received voicemails and was at work and just could not answer. I advised the customer that the water pump had already been replaced, and the hood was operable and safe to drive with as per there is no issues with the opening or closing for the part, it is just an issue with where the handle attaches. The hood opens and closes correctly. The customer thanked me for the call. The customer advised me that they did not need a rental because he and his family were going out of town this weekend and have another vehicle. I advised the customer about the delay with the part, he understood that the part is on national back order and will be shipped from manufacture (strait from Detroit, MI) and as soon as the part is received would be installed. The customer is ok with and understands the delay. The customer thanked me for my time.