Smog Stop

I am rejecting this response because: I am telling the truth as god as mt witness they did exactly what I am stating in my oroganal complaintI dont want this facility to be able to get away with what they did to me and my carAs he states in his rebuttle they do a HIGH VOLUME of carsthis was done to me due to my car being a and was going to slow them down,older cars take longer to smog! [redacted] took and admitted responsibility in the beggining and needs to take action! I will persue!

December 15, To: [redacted] Revdex.com Northeast California Beacon BlvdWest Sacramento, Ca From: [redacted] Smog Stop [redacted] Re: Response to Complaint ID # [redacted] Dear Mr [redacted] , This letter is in response to the complaint filed on 12/8/by the gentleman,whom I will call Mr*He has made a few general accusations regarding our business practices as well as specific accusations with regard to his own experience with our facilityI would like to respond to the general accusations first1) Mr [redacted] has claimed he was informed by a former technician of ours that we have a practice of rigging older cars so we can avoid testing themThis accusation is provably ridiculousFirst, let me explain, as I did to this particular customer, we are a Star Certified Station that tests at least two do*en pre year vehicles dailyIf his assumption were true I, as well as the Revdex.com, would be receiving several similar complaints about customer's vehicles dailyThis was the first such complaint I have received in over years of businessSecondarily, we would have lost such a substantial amount of business as to make it unprofitableI will simply state that we are and continue to be the highest volume testing facility in the state of California and welcome all vehicles at our facility2) Mr [redacted] also claimed this same technician had told him he experienced violence while working at our facilityThis is also a ridiculous chargeWe have never tolerated violence of any kind at our facilityIronically, the very technician who told him this was recently terminated for a wild unprovoked mood swing that ended in this same technician yelling and pushing another technician, and then wanting to fight with himLuckily, at the time, there was an off duty law enforcement officer at our facility who quelled the situation after he was terminatedI will simply state, in years there has never been an incident of violence by any employee of our facility other than with the technician whom Mr [redacted] uses as his sourceNow allow me to respond to the complaint specific to Mr*'s experience at our facilityWhen the time came to test Mr*'s vehicle, the technician had approached Mr [redacted] requesting he start his vehicle for him because it contained a breathaly*erMr [redacted] appeared to start the vehicle and turned it over to the technician and began to walk awayThe technician entered the drivers side seat, pulled the inside hood latch, and placed the vehicle in reverseThe vehicle immediately stammered and stalledHe attempted a few more times with no successUpon hearing this, Mr [redacted] walked back to the vehicle asking the tech what the problem wasThe technician explained the vehicle will not stay running steadily and therefore could not be tested unless he had this problem repairedSince we are a test only facility the technician stated Mr [redacted] would have to take the vehicle elsewhere for repairMr [redacted] immediately became suspicious of the technician but left the facilityLater, I received a phone call from Mr*He had told me that he had a friend look at the vehicle who discovered a disconnected sensorHe said his friend had reconnected the sensor and his vehicle ran fineHe then accused our technician of disconnecting the sensor in order to avoid testing the vehicleI explained that this was a very unusual complaint, one in which I had not ever before received regarding this technician or any technician in all my years in the businessI then tried to calm Mr [redacted] down so we could go over what exactly happenedCalmly, I then attempted to explain how highly unlikely that could have beenAfter all, I explained, you and your friend are claiming that in a brief second time period the technician got into the vehicle then immediately got out, lifted the hood, located the sensor, disconnected it, hurried back into the vehicle, and then pretended he could not keep it running steady all the while risking being seen by you in order to avoid testing the vehicleI explained to Mr [redacted] how I find that scenario highly unlikely,However, in the interest of good customer relations and wanting to find an amicable resolution, I offered to test his vehicle at no charge (a $dollar value)Further, I offered to have a different technician test the vehicle should he have any distrust of the original technicianHe agreed this was a sufficient resolution and went back to have his vehicle testedWhen the time came to test his vehicle the technician took the work order and began to walk toward the vehicleMr [redacted] immediately walked up to the technician and began making accusations about our shop and questioning the integrity of the technicianThe technician explained he would not test his vehicle if he continued this behaviorMr [redacted] then claimed he no longer wanted him to test the vehicleThe technician then went on to test another vehicle yet, Mr [redacted] did not leaveInstead, he continued berating the technician and claiming he threatened him with violenceBy the way, this particular technician has been employed with us for over ten years never having received a complaint regarding threats to a customerMy service writer then called me to explain what had happened and that Mr [redacted] was continuing to act irrationalAt that point, I told my service writer to explain to him that under those circumstances there was nothing more I could do for him and he must leaveIn summation, at both of our facilities we have always prided ourselves on quality customer serviceWe are well aware customers have many choices as to where they have their vehicle emission test performedAs such, it has always been our practice to bend over backwards to resolve any customer issues over the yearsI can confidently state, ninety nine percent of the time we are able to resolve issues with customers often going beyond their expectationsOur 'customer first' approach has allowed us the privilege of becoming the most highly successful testing facility in RosevilleUnfortunately, in this rare instance, due to the outrageous claims and equally outrageous behavior of Mr*, I regret we are unable to satisfy himRegards, [redacted] , President Auto-Emission Test Systems, IncDBA Smog Stop

I am rejecting this response because: I am telling the truth as god as mt witness they did exactly what I am stating in my oroganal complaint. I dont want this facility to be able to get away with what they did to me and my car. As he states in his rebuttle they do a HIGH VOLUME of cars. this was done to me due to my car being a 1992 and was going to slow them down,older cars take longer to smog! [redacted] took and admitted responsibility in the beggining and needs to take action! I will persue!

75% of the rebuttals is not true! After [redacted] offered me a free smog for thier wrong doing, the gentleman in the office told me it would be another 30 minute wait,I said find and waited. When the tech got back I asked him.if I was next ? He cursed at me, I then told him as he was getting into my car to get out! I don't want anyone angery with me working on my car! I feel he was angry with me because he got stuck having to smog my car.I also feel the reason the first tech unclipped the clip is because older cars such as my 1992 take longer to smog,clipping the clip would've saved him time on smogging my car,little did he know when he did what he did my car wouldn't run! I did not leave right away due to my car not starting,I firs went to the [redacted] station in thier parking lot and I spoke to the manager,Manuel, I then made it to [redacted] a half mile down the road and spoke to store manager [redacted] about what was going on with my car from what smog stop had done, the both wanted 98 dollar diognostic fee, I did not have that,I then called a frien mechanic to come help me,he noticed the clip unclipped right away.I paid him 50$ for his time. I feel this whole thing was caused by thier tech not wanting to take the extra time to smog my older car. I would lime 500$ in compilation for what I went through. Also for this not to happen to anyone else! Hos employees need to be disciplined too.Action taken upon this request would be appreciated. I went to speedy smog the same day and my car passed with flying colors,they didn't mind taking the extra time to smog my car.

Very word of my first response was truthful.  I am sorry Mr. * feels otherwise and his photos neither show nor prove absolutely anything.  Yes we are a busy shop. As I stated in my original response, our Roseville shop is the single highest volume testing facility in the entire state of California (verifiable).  We are grateful for the continued support of our customers over the years and never take them for granted.  i can assure you we have not become a very busy shop by making a habit of upsetting customers or finding reasons to turn them away.  That is not a recipe for long term success (24 years in business).  Once again, we are a STAR faculty and test many older vehicles daily (also verifiable).  Moreover, if one were to read Mr. *'s follow up responses carefully you will note he is unable to refute the simple logic I possed concerning his initial accusation.  He simply chooses to say we are lying. This is an example of the same irrational behavior we experienced from him at our facility.  Unfortunately, every once in a great while there exists a customer who we are unable to please or who make demands that we cannot accomidate.  In 24 years of business I am proud to say I have had very few such customers. Mr. * is one of those few.  As such, there is nothing more I can do for Mr. *.  My best recommendation is, in the future, for Mr. * to have his vehicle tested at one of the many other testing facilities available to him.

December 15, 2014 To: [redacted] Revdex.com Northeast California 3075 Beacon Blvd. West Sacramento, Ca 95691 From: [redacted] Smog Stop [redacted] Re: Response to Complaint ID # [redacted] Dear Mr. [redacted], This letter is in response to the...

complaint filed on 12/8/2014 by the gentleman,whom I will call Mr. *. He has made a few general accusations regarding our business practices as well as specific accusations with regard to his own experience with our facility. I would like to respond to the general accusations first. 1) Mr. * has claimed he was informed by a former technician of ours that we have a practice of rigging older cars so we can avoid testing them. This accusation is provably ridiculous. First, let me explain, as I did to this particular customer, we are a Star Certified Station that tests at least two do*en pre 2000 year vehicles daily. If his assumption were true I, as well as the Revdex.com, would be receiving several similar complaints about customer's vehicles daily. This was the first such complaint I have received in over 24 years of business. Secondarily, we would have lost such a substantial amount of business as to make it unprofitable. I will simply state that we are and continue to be the highest volume testing facility in the state of California and welcome all vehicles at our facility. 2) Mr. * also claimed this same technician had told him he experienced violence while working at our facility. This is also a ridiculous charge. We have never tolerated violence of any kind at our facility. Ironically, the very technician who told him this was recently terminated for a wild unprovoked mood swing that ended in this same technician yelling and pushing another technician, and then wanting to fight with him. Luckily, at the time, there was an off duty law enforcement officer at our facility who quelled the situation after he was terminated. I will simply state, in 24 years there has never been an incident of violence by any employee of our facility other than with the technician whom Mr. * uses as his source. Now allow me to respond to the complaint specific to Mr. *'s experience at our facility. When the time came to test Mr. *'s vehicle, the technician had approached Mr. * requesting he start his vehicle for him because it contained a breathaly*er. Mr. * appeared to start the vehicle and turned it over to the technician and began to walk away. The technician entered the drivers side seat, pulled the inside hood latch, and placed the vehicle in reverse. The vehicle immediately stammered and stalled. He attempted a few more times with no success. Upon hearing this, Mr. * walked back to the vehicle asking the tech what the problem was. The technician explained the vehicle will not stay running steadily and therefore could not be tested unless he had this problem repaired. Since we are a test only facility the technician stated Mr. * would have to take the vehicle elsewhere for repair. Mr. * immediately became suspicious of the technician but left the facility. Later, I received a phone call from Mr. *. He had told me that he had a friend look at the vehicle who discovered a disconnected sensor. He said his friend had reconnected the sensor and his vehicle ran fine. He then accused our technician of disconnecting the sensor in order to avoid testing the vehicle. I explained that this was a very unusual complaint, one in which I had not ever before received regarding this technician or any technician in all my years in the business. I then tried to calm Mr. * down so we could go over what exactly happened. Calmly, I then attempted to explain how highly unlikely that could have been. After all, I explained, you and your friend are claiming that in a brief 30 second time period the technician got into the vehicle then immediately got out, lifted the hood, located the sensor, disconnected it, hurried back into the vehicle, and then pretended he could not keep it running steady all the while risking being seen by you in order to avoid testing the vehicle. I explained to Mr. * how I find that scenario highly unlikely,. However, in the interest of good customer relations and wanting to find an amicable resolution, I offered to test his vehicle at no charge (a $58 dollar value). Further, I offered to have a different technician test the vehicle should he have any distrust of the original technician. He agreed this was a sufficient resolution and went back to have his vehicle tested. When the time came to test his vehicle the technician took the work order and began to walk toward the vehicle. Mr. * immediately walked up to the technician and began making accusations about our shop and questioning the integrity of the technician. The technician explained he would not test his vehicle if he continued this behavior. Mr. * then claimed he no longer wanted him to test the vehicle. The technician then went on to test another vehicle yet, Mr. * did not leave. Instead, he continued berating the technician and claiming he threatened him with violence. By the way, this particular technician has been employed with us for over ten years never having received a complaint regarding threats to a customer. My service writer then called me to explain what had happened and that Mr. * was continuing to act irrational. At that point, I told my service writer to explain to him that under those circumstances there was nothing more I could do for him and he must leave. In summation, at both of our facilities we have always prided ourselves on quality customer service. We are well aware customers have many choices as to where they have their vehicle emission test performed. As such, it has always been our practice to bend over backwards to resolve any customer issues over the years. I can confidently state, ninety nine percent of the time we are able to resolve issues with customers often going beyond their expectations. Our 'customer first' approach has allowed us the privilege of becoming the most highly successful testing facility in Roseville. Unfortunately, in this rare instance, due to the outrageous claims and equally outrageous behavior of Mr. *, I regret we are unable to satisfy him. Regards, [redacted], President Auto-Emission Test Systems, Inc. DBA Smog Stop