Scheanwald Roofing Company

The customer reported receiving the wrong itemTheir speculation did not help: they reported receiving Ford Racing part numbersHowever, Ford Racing does not manufacturer the sensorsWe asked for the Ford Motor Company part numbers on the sensorsThey were not providedThe information provided by the customer stated that the parts were installed and usedA photograph was shared showing the items had been taken apart When the customer realized that their claim could not be shown, and that they had self-incrimated that the parts are installed and in use, a [redacted] dispute was openedAfter realizing the [redacted] dispute required returning the order in its original condition for a full refund, which was not possible, a chargeback was opened in its placeCurrently, the customer has a chargeback stating both that they did not receive the order and the parts received are not as describedDespite the contradiction the chargeback will be reviewed and decided upon by the customer's credit card issuerThat process is out of the buyer and seller's handsRegistering complaints on review websites cannot change the processWithout sufficient information provided by the customer to provide service there was not a solution to provideBuyers seeking third and fourth-party dispute arbitration on review websites rarely are willing to cooperate furtherBy their own admission they willingly threatened our business for apparently asking too many questions

This order for TPMS sensors has arrived to the point where the buyer regrets not cooperating with our business when the opportunity was therePerhaps they simply regret that keeping the parts and getting their money back without a return didn't work out [redacted] disputes and credit card chargebacks require giving vendors and merchants a reasonable opportunity to solve a problem.A lack of information provided by the buyer is the reason for the dispute and its outcomeWhat little information was shared with Yates Performance was incriminating to this customerThese TPMS sensors had been installed and taken apart before reporting any problemThat itself would not be a problem if the buyer had shown us that they received the wrong item as claimedUnfortunately that did not happenYates Performance did not receive the cooperation of the buyer to provide the service they requested: parts & labor reimbursement for installation, prepaid return and a full refund [redacted] did not receive enough information from the buyer to accept their complaintThe credit card company of the buyer apparently has determined that Yates Performance and [redacted] were not given reaonable opportunity for a chargeback to be appropriateAll involved parties with exception of the buyer have investigated and consider the complaint settled

We can forward the information where it was found the customer bought the wrong item from our business, bought the correct one elsewhere, and returned a mix of leftover items from both purchases for a refund days after return eligibility expired [redacted] made the same determinationThe buyer resorted to a third party review site because the truth isn't necessary thereThe only mistake we made was allowing the return as an exemption from policy.I had the impression that the complaint is the anchor for Revdex.com regardless of accuracy or the consumer's intentThe buyer wants free moneyThis complaint would not change unless that happened right? This matter has already gone through our own process, the [redacted] process, and the A-to-Z claim processQuadruple jeopardy through an unassociated third party isn't reasonable

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThere was no solution offered by the business in their response, only accusation I did receive the incorrect parts from the business in question; that cannot be disputed regardless of how hard they try I was alerted to this issue first by [redacted] , and the disparity was then verified by a local branded dealership (when purchasing replacement parts) I did, despite the claims of the business, try in earnest to come to an affable conclusion prior to taking action No matter what information I provided to the business, it somehow still was not what they needed and they would request more Once it became quite clear that they were maneuvering toward a product abuse defense in denial of replacement I ceased communication and filed a [redacted] dispute Then and only then did I result to 3rd part arbitrationOnce the [redacted] dispute had been started, they continued with their slander and accusations of abuse in their rebuttal statements Were the parts as pictured after being handled and installed by a garage? Yes, they most certainly were As a consumer, I expect that when I order a part for a particular car that I would actually receive the part as described Why should I, as a consumer, check part numbers before installation if the business in question, selling a proscribed part, had any adeptness at their trade or moral fortitude to fact-check their listings? After their venomous response, I received an eventual offer to return the item AT MY OWN EXPENSE That offer was footnoted with the condition that “merchandise must be in the condition in which you received it” to receive a full refund With the statements already made by the business concerning my “abuse” of the product, why on earth would I return merchandise that I had paid for (correct or not) when THESE PEOPLE get to decide how much if any of my money I get back? [redacted] themselves verified this as a possibility, as did ACTUAL ACCOUNTS from the Revdex.com’s own website in other complaints filed against this businessIt is at this point that I opened a charge dispute with my credit card company [redacted] was not willing to further the dispute beyond the offer made by the company and I felt as though I had no other choice I will continue to exercise my rights as a consumer to voice my concerns with this business through the Revdex.com It was through the Revdex.com website that I learned of their deceptive tactics that saved me from making the same mistake as others, and if by sharing my account I help somebody in a similar situation I will consider the time spent filing the complaint as worthwhile Ultimately, wouldn’t it have been easier to send the correct parts in an even exchange than spend time finding ways to assassinate my character? Any decent and honest business owner would certainly think so

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I reviewed Yates performance reply to my complaintAbsolutely in no way am I looking for any kind of replacement product or warranty claimI would never want any of these substandard products anywhere near my $60,vehicleMy complaint is that their product does not hold up to less than wearTheir product basically fell apart from careful use yet they are blaming me for abusing their productEverything in my car is pampered so why would I choose their one product to abuseMakes no senseThe only logical answer is they sell junkI do not want any money from themI do not want any replacement anything from themI'm not making a warranty claimI do not want any "garbage" in my new corvetteMy complaint is they sell expensive junk and when called on it get abusive and rudeI have emails backing up my claims and witnesses as to how careful I am with everything in my car This place should not be in business and my issue will next be played out in the court system
Regards,
*** ***

We are responding to make it clear that the customer will NOT be enabled by our business to abuse a manufacturer's warrantyRevolving-door warranty replacement requests to replace mats NOT covered under warranty, accumulate spare sets for future use, or illegal resale is fraud Service
for this gentleman was suspended as soon as their warranty claims became sloppy and suspicious resulting in their warranty denialIt is a sad state where online reviews sites only seem to be populated by former customers retaliating for their behavior we would not excuse

Customer bought the wrong item from Yates Performance. Purchased the correct item elsewhere later. Months later, they were allowed to return the Yates Performance order "In Original Condition". However, the customer returned parts leftover from both purchases in the box purchased elsewhere that became damaged in shipping. Yates Performance, the [redacted] and the payment process made this determination unanimously. No offer of compensation is offered in cases of gross misconduct.

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Thank you for contacting me to follow up on this complaint.I was unable to comment on the "rejection" due to using my cellular device. This response is the comments to supplement  that rejection as requested per our conversation.Sept. 23, 2017- ordered item # [redacted]                             F150 5.0L V8 Cold Air Intake Kit                              Roush. $379.99                           [redacted] order #[redacted]                                   [redacted]                           seller: Yates Performance [redacted] note[redacted] this was ordered to be a Bday giftSept.25, 2017- order was delivered. I opened and visually inspected parts/packages however I did not verify part numbers as I assumed my order would be filled accurately. I did notice, and thought it odd, that there was not any other materials included ie.,package slip, product  info, instruction/install manual...other than 1 sheet of paper labeled "Roush-Attention-info to download install manual". Again assumed it was an accurately  filled order so I wrapped it to gift.Nov. 11, 2017 Upon attempting  to install it was.                           realized it was the wrong kit. I.                                 received item #421981 2015-17.                             F150 3.5L & 2.7 L ecoboost V6                                 cold air intake Roush.I contacted the seller (Yates Performance) via email(no actual # available). Was told by [redacted] that I would have to correspond through [redacted]. This became  extremely lengthy  and cumbersome communication ordeal to resolve the simple matter of the wrong item being sent. [redacted] agreed exchange and to send a RMA so that I could return the wrong kit even though it had been past the return date. I took to [redacted] on Nov. 16, 2017,packaged it in it entirety in a new box and returned it signed receipt to be sure it made. It was received  and signed for on Nov.22 2017 at 10:08am( postal parcel #[redacted].I subsequently received  an email from [redacted] stating that the package was damage upon receipt and that I would only receive a partial refund and would also incurr restocking fees. Restocking fees for the wrong item that they sent me??? First and foremost I only wanted the right item, the one I ordered, to be sent in REPLACE of the wrong one they sent. I did not want my money back just the right kit. I did request from [redacted] a pic of the damage stamp that shows date and time on package he claimed was significantly  damaged. He couldn't  produce this and admitted there was no damage stamp. I contacted the Delivery Post Office [redacted] case # [redacted] ,for reference, for info./ damage stamp documentation  regarding this package. I was told that the package according ,to their records, did not receive  a damage stamp because  either there was none or not significant  enough to require one. [redacted] at Yates Performance then continued to make false claims and a laughable ficticious senerio of accounts. That is represented in his response "message from business" on your site.In response to his "message", the seller can not "forward" or produce "information  where it was found the customer bought the wrong item from our business,  bought the right correct one else where, and returned a mix of the left over items from both purchases for a refund..." because it is simply inaccurate,  false and a conjured up notion from a scam/ ripoff seller of said transaction. Furthermore he had blatantly  lied as he states In the same "message" that "[redacted] made the same determination". That couldn't  be more untrue. I spoke with a [redacted] rep on Jan. 5 2018 and the company stated that the refund granted( via A-Z claim) was determined valid and due to customer due to " receipt  of wrong item(s) from seller". I never did receive any refunds from seller.  On Nov.28th I received full refund of $409. 76 from [redacted]. $379.99 was the original  purchase price of the product  ordered and $27.77 was the costs incurred to return the wrong item(s) in which the seller originally  sent.  I have learned through this horrible experience to thoroughly investigate  any seller that if fulfilling an order I decide to place on [redacted]. I was under the assumption  that they regulate and vet their sellers, and I think they try to,  but apparently  some bad squeeze through the cracks. It is also worth mentioning that in my research  of Yates Performance aka Blue Oval Industries there is an abundance of negative reviews, complaints, ripoff reports, buyer beware...and as you know not the best Revdex.com rating.
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I received correspondence( 1-9-18) in regards to case/id# [redacted]. I have once again rejected the message and am replying  via this message as I am unable to respond on original/actual rejection notice due to my laptop being inoperable. Just as I did before I am having to respond with my cellular device and am asking that you attach to case file.So apparently  the business has responded again and still is making unfounded and false allegations. I have sent/submitted ample info to show that this seller is absolutely  incorrect and is making false accounts and blatantly  lying concerning this transaction. In addition to all the preceding documentation I have provided I am sending you info to support that his continuous ramble of false statements are just that.#1 In his message he continues to profess that I "bought the wrong item from Yates Performance". We own a 2017 F-150 4×4 5.0L V8 Ford Truck( included is proof of this).On Sept. 23 2017 I ordered item #[redacted] 2015-2017 F-150 5.0L V8 Cold Air Intake Kit from Yates Performance( this proof was previously  sent but will forward again). So his claim that I bought the wrong item is wrong.  He can't dispute  to the truck I own and the item I order from him. #2 He claims I made a purchase elsewhere which is false. My truck still has no cold air kit to this day.  I would be happy to take a pic with time and date stamp if the Revdex.com would like. This was a Bday gift for my husband but due to the horrible experience  with this seller he settled for dinner at our local steakhouse.#3  seller claims the return was "MONTHS LATER". WRONG!! The item was ordered on Sept. 23 2017 to allow ample time for processing, delivery... So that I could gift it on Oct. 23 2017. It was delivered  on on Sept. 25 2017. I have to say I was surprised by the quick  order process and delivery.  Again gifted on the 23rd of Oct and install set up for Nov. 11 2017. It was upon install that it was founded that we were sent the wrong kit. It was immediately  brought to the sellers attention and due to back and forth correspondence through [redacted], because seller was not willing not resolve directly, it took a few days for seller to provide RMA to return. Product was returned via this RMA in its "original  condition" and completely  just as it was received  with exception to outer shipping box on Nov. 16 2017. I had to purchase a new one due to discarding the one it was shipped in. To this, trashing the box, I can only say that I just assumed I received  what I had actually ordered. I don't think that constitutes  "months later" as he seems to try to infer  and exaggerate the time span. He also continues to  claim upon return the box and contents were damaged yet he can not provide proof of that via a delivery damage stamp which is protocol  if any package  sustains significant  damage to outer box... per [redacted]. Then seller charges a restocking fee??? Think about this. First he wants to charge a restocking fee on the wrong item he sent me. Really! Secondly if items were damaged as he claims one would think you could not restock them, resale...but he did charge restocking???#4  the seller claims [redacted] came to the same determination that he has outrageously made up. First and foremost [redacted] has been absolutely  wonderful  and very helpful in this matter. The seller is out right lying when he states that [redacted] came to this conclusion and I have no doubts that he can not prove it. [redacted] open a case claim on this transaction and within 2 days had refunded my money. I spoke with a rep after the sellers first claim that [redacted] "agreed" with him I was also told that  that was absolutely  inaccurate  and they had opened an inquiry through the department  within [redacted] that deals with sellers that have complaints, claims...#5 the only person/persons in this entire situation that has displayed gross misconduct is Yates Performance. Bottom line is the didn't  fulfill order with the correct item.  All I as a consumer  wanted was the item that I ordered. When I received  the wrong one I still just wanted it replaced with what I ordered. This seller  is the prime example of a unreputable fraudulent scheming predator out to take peoples money. If you research Yates Performance you will find an abundance of scam alerts, fraud notices, ripoff reports, bad reviews, unsatisfied  customers( victims), bad business ratings...if you delve even deeper you find many customers  just like me that he has taken advantage of and eerily similar  senerios/ circumstances. He has been doing this scam for years it appears and has somewhat perfected it. Yates Performance  is a scam. The person( [redacted]) I have had to deal with is nothing more than a fraud, liar...
Regards,
[redacted]

This order for TPMS sensors has arrived to the point where the buyer regrets not cooperating with our business when the opportunity was there. Perhaps they simply regret that keeping the parts and getting their money back without a return didn't work out. [redacted] disputes and credit card chargebacks require giving vendors and merchants a reasonable opportunity to solve a problem.A lack of information provided by the buyer is the reason for the dispute and its outcome. What little information was shared with Yates Performance was incriminating to this customer. These TPMS sensors had been installed and taken apart before reporting any problem. That itself would not be a problem if the buyer had shown us that they received the wrong item as claimed. Unfortunately that did not happen. Yates Performance did not receive the cooperation of the buyer to provide the service they requested: parts & labor reimbursement for installation, prepaid return and a full refund. [redacted] did not receive enough information from the buyer to accept their complaint. The credit card company of the buyer apparently has determined that Yates Performance and [redacted] were not given reaonable opportunity for a chargeback to be appropriate. All involved parties with exception of the buyer have investigated and consider the complaint settled.

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
For the company to contine to state that I am asking for special treatment is highly upseting and disrespectful. The company intially made mistakes with how they handle their busniess and offered a partial refund for the item No kind of specail treatment was even given other then the refund that would be expected for the mistake. Coming for a company that I work with, [redacted], you should treat every customer with the up most respect and assit them in any way possible. This comapny is far from doing that for me as a customer when they are at fault for me not needing the product any longer and being unable to return it for their delay in the process. I have never worked with any company that can't make an excapetion for their mistake and treat their customer how they have treated me.
Regards,
[redacted]

Special exception to [redacted] marketplace policy & Yates Performance's return policy will not be dispensed. This is regardless of any newly-conjured complaint about the product months after this person took ownership.

The customer reported receiving the wrong item. Their speculation did not help: they reported receiving Ford Racing part numbers. However, Ford Racing does not manufacturer the sensors. We asked for the Ford Motor Company part numbers on the sensors. They were not provided. The information provided...

by the customer stated that the parts were installed and used. A photograph was shared showing the items had been taken apart.  When the customer realized that their claim could not be shown, and that they had self-incrimated that the parts are installed and in use, a [redacted] dispute was opened. After realizing the [redacted] dispute required returning the order in its original condition for a full refund, which was not possible, a chargeback was opened in its place. Currently, the customer has a chargeback stating both that they did not receive the order and the parts received are not as described. Despite the contradiction the chargeback will be reviewed and decided upon by the customer's credit card issuer. That process is out of the buyer and seller's hands. Registering complaints on review websites cannot change the process. Without sufficient information provided by the customer to provide service there was not a solution to provide. Buyers seeking third and fourth-party dispute arbitration on review websites rarely are willing to cooperate further. By their own admission they willingly threatened our business for apparently asking too many questions.

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I
still do not accept anything from what the business responds with other then a
refund. Nowhere on the website where it is sold through [redacted] and where Yates
sells their product does it disclose any kind of refund or return date. If
there is no refund or return date posted then how can you make one up on the product?
This is highly un professional and should re-consider how they do business.
Regards,
[redacted]

Buyer bought the wrong item, fought eBay and PayPal tooth and nail to get a refund without a return because it was too expensive to send back. The return was not shipped back on time because the buyer refused to follow the rules. Invalid tracking numbers and fraudulent statements over and over....

After lying to eBay, PayPal, and Yates Performance the buyer realizes that threats and fraud attempts were not working. Used expired return information to return their order anyway and has been harrassing Yates Performance multiple times daily for a refund before the return has been checked in or inspected.There's nothing more or less to this. The Revdex.com remains to be a last-resort shot-in-the-dark for the <1% of online shoppers that cause problems for everyone else. The Revdex.com has no knowledge of this complaint and will hold it against the merchant even if the buyer lit their order on fire. The buyer will receive nothing and will not be treated any differently. They dug their own hole.

Customer wished to return an opened & unsealed [redacted] Performance product over sixty days after delivery. Yates Performance & [redacted] Buyer Support both denied the return request for this reason. [redacted] denied the buyer's A-to-Z claim. The customer's violation of marketplace policy by...

attempting to extort better return terms was documented. The customer entered into an enforceable ,and subsequently enforced, agreement. A final decision has been made by the merchant and marketplace. It will not be reversed. Using the Revdex.com as a way to retaliate for not receiving special treatment does not change the terms of this sale.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I read the business's response and was quite surprised to learn they were claiming that my credit card company has already decided the dispute in their favor.  I decided to check that "fact" by calling the credit company directly.  Not surprisingly, this was a BLATANT LIE.  The credit card company is still evaluating the situation and has only recently even received the business's rebuttal statement.  Again, just another example of Yate Performance's inability to conduct honest business.

We can forward the information where it was found the customer bought the wrong item from our business, bought the correct one elsewhere, and returned a mix of leftover items from both purchases for a refund 60 days after return eligibility expired. [redacted] made the same determination. The buyer...

resorted to a third party review site because the truth isn't necessary there. The only mistake we made was allowing the return as an exemption from policy.I had the impression that the complaint is the anchor for Revdex.com regardless of accuracy or the consumer's intent. The buyer wants free money. This complaint would not change unless that happened right? This matter has already gone through our own process, the [redacted] process, and the A-to-Z claim process. Quadruple jeopardy through an unassociated third party isn't reasonable.

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. There was no solution offered by the business in their response, only accusation.  I did receive the incorrect parts from the business in question; that cannot be disputed regardless of how hard they try.  I was alerted to this issue first by [redacted], and the disparity was then verified by a local branded dealership (when purchasing replacement parts).  I did, despite the claims of the business, try in earnest to come to an affable conclusion prior to taking action.  No matter what information I provided to the business, it somehow still was not what they needed and they would request more.  Once it became quite clear that they were maneuvering toward a product abuse defense in denial of replacement I ceased communication and filed a [redacted] dispute.  Then and only then did I result to 3rd part arbitration. Once the [redacted] dispute had been started, they continued with their slander and accusations of abuse in their rebuttal statements.  Were the parts as pictured after being handled and installed by a garage?  Yes, they most certainly were.  As a consumer, I expect that when I order a part for a particular car that I would actually receive the part as described.  Why should I, as a consumer, check part numbers before installation if the business in question, selling a proscribed part, had any adeptness at their trade or moral fortitude to fact-check their listings?  After their venomous response, I received an eventual offer to return the item AT MY OWN EXPENSE.  That offer was footnoted with the condition that “merchandise must be in the condition in which you received it” to receive a full refund.  With the statements already made by the business concerning my “abuse” of the product, why on earth would I return merchandise that I had paid for (correct or not) when THESE PEOPLE get to decide how much if any of my money I get back?  [redacted] themselves verified this as a possibility, as did ACTUAL ACCOUNTS from the Revdex.com’s own website in other complaints filed against this business. It is at this point that I opened a charge dispute with my credit card company.  [redacted] was not willing to further the dispute beyond the offer made by the company and I felt as though I had no other choice.  I will continue to exercise my rights as a consumer to voice my concerns with this business through the Revdex.com.  It was through the Revdex.com website that I learned of their deceptive tactics that saved me from making the same mistake as others, and if by sharing my account I help somebody in a similar situation I will consider the time spent filing the complaint as worthwhile.  Ultimately, wouldn’t it have been easier to send the correct parts in an even exchange than spend time finding ways to assassinate my character?  Any decent and honest business owner would certainly think so.