Smoke House

I respect Mr. [redacted]'s position and please understand that this will be a "teachable moment" for us and his concerns about retraining are spot on and will occur.  If there is anything further that comes up please reach out to me.Respectfully-[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
It's Hall Bad, No Class, No Responsibility, Bad Reputation, More Problems its Hall Bad.  Monetary Deal Or No Deal Especially When You Have Banned Me From Hall.  Why don't you go see a doctor that bans you from their practice & hospital & let me know how that works out in the operating room.  Ding Ding Ding 
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I had a oil change done on a car that was not leaking oil. After driving the car home and several days later I noticed my car was leaking oil extremely and the business over filled my oil.  The owner's manual specifically cautions against overfilling and warns of engine damage.As to how much was over filled. It is impossible to measure all the oil that leaked onto the pavement traveling to and from the business and how much is on my garage floor.This business damaged my car due to their negelience. Their history in responding to this complaint demonstrated much about themTheir position seems to be. We overfilled your oil level. There is much damage to your car.Your car is 17 years old. A newer car might not have been so severely damaged. This is like a murder asking to change the charge because of the age of the person they killed.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
[redacted]
 
 I would first like to say that I am seriously offended that I am being portrayed as implying I would like a check or payment as my vocabulary is extensive enough to say I want payment, that simple. I believe that something has been misunderstood as to the problem I have so I will outline it step by step. After the purchase of the car I was often told how the drivers door was very heavy by all who rode in my car, I disregarded this and dismissed it as whining as I never use that side of the car but one day I did not feel like driving as I do not allow people to drive my car often I asked my girlfriend to drive. I opened the door and it was stiff and after sitting in the car had to pull very hard to close the door and my arms and the strength are pretty good. I then went to [redacted] to have them to look at the problem not expecting what would come back, well when the tech checked my car door he found that it was rusting in the door wells that is what prompted him to put the meter on the car. Upon inspection he relayed to me that the car most likely had been in a prior accident and he would have to have the Volkswagen area Rep look at the car to approve any work on the door. The Rep did approve work but it was on the drivers door of which would be covered under the warranty but as for the other side where the initial problem began they will not fix that being that it is not under the certified warranty because of the accident. I then took the car to an independent collision center to have the car inspected because Volkswagen would not release any paperwork to me concerning the matter and encouraged me to try and settle this with the dealer using them as a mediator. Well that did not work as we did not come to an agreement but as I sit here and type this I have a signed affidavit from [redacted] Mgr. [redacted] that states that after inspection the right front fender, right front and rear doors and right quarter have been repaired and refinished. Now again I state that this car was purchased certified pre-owned and one of the areas that qualifies this is no accidents so this car never fit that description and is validated by Volkswagen by the actions to repair one side of the car and not the other. I do understand the business side of this and many times these things have to go into a courtroom to decide and this is no problem. I was not asking for money but a swap for one of equal value with-in the same parameters i.e. certified pre-owned would have been sufficient but for some reason it seems that it is perceived that I want something for nothing and am unwilling to work with you but to tell me that what you perceive to be a fix is it is ludicrous. I respect the fact that you are dug in and so am I so I guess at this point we need to speak through Attornies and I am sure you will hear from mine soon and in case you would like to speak with them  they are [redacted], I will see you in court and you can pay them.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]It is unfortunate that I had to be a teaching tool at your dealership at the expense of professional customer service.  While you say that my experience is a "teachable moment" a teachable moment does me no good.  Perhaps it will benefit other customers?  Also, the fact remains that someone at your dealership lied to corporate.  On the last response I attached photos clearly showing the problem and what was truly broken.  I can't verify that you received the photos, but if you did, you'll see there are no "cut and broken" wires.  This aspect alone puts me in the position that I will not allow Hall to work on my car for any service.  I doubt I will ever set foot in your dealership again, even though it is the closet to me geographically.  I'd rather travel a bit further for professional customer service and to a honest dealership with integrity.
Regards,
[redacted]

While reasonable process is conducted to ensure the customer is getting what is expected, from time to time there are some cars that do not show signs of damage until later.  We run both auto history reports- Autocheck and Carfax of which I have recently run again and they still do not show any...

accident history.  Then when the car arrives it is given a visual inspection for any repaired frame damage or substandard body repairs.  This car at the time of sale was 3 years old with 63K miles, so it it not out of the question for a previous repair to have taken place.  It is now 5 years old with, I'm guessing somewhere around 80K miles. Buying a used car comes with inherent risks for both the dealer and consumer buyer and therefore has a considerable price concession over new.  Part of this benefit of lower price includes the risk of a situation like this.  The only reasonable remedy I can think of is when the time comes for Mr. [redacted] to trade the car off, we would provide him with a full trade value of the CC in what ever condition it may be in at that time and not deduct for any previous body work like he fears in his complaint.

The answers I sent you on 1/26 and the documents sent on 1/29 are what I sent to State. I will contact you to see if anything else is needed. Thanks. [redacted].

I understand that the vehicle is still doing the same thing but that does not change the fact that the part replaced was proven to be malfunctioning.  We can continue to work on the car but it will not be for free.  However, I would proceed with caution based on the vehicles history of being rebuilt.  I can offer this further work to be done at the same rate that we charge our own employees but there will be a charge.

A monetary settlement is not an option at this time.  If Mr. [redacted] feels the alternator is the issue than we will remedy that issue but there is no way to definitively say that is the cause for $6K in problems.  The items listed (cooling fans, crankshaft pos. sensor etc) are very common items to be replaced in that vintage Jetta regardless of what alternator is in the car.  We have extensive sales history on all of these parts suggesting failure of these items is not uncommon and cannot be directly attributed to the alternator, if in fact it's wrong.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:59 AM, [redacted] wrote:They have solved the issue.Thank You,[redacted]

The "free estimates" applies to body estimates only and that is why it is only available for view on milwaukeeautobody.com and not our main page of hallcars.com and in no way does it refer to any mechanical work.  I apologize there were no night drop envelops available as this form would have...

cleared up any confusion about the diagnosis charge.  Based on this technicality, I will gladly refund the $114.53 in question.  There will be a check cut shorty and sent to the listed address.

As stated with the conversation with the ** back in August electrical problems can be very hard to diagnose.  It is common to start with the known problems and work backwards to uncover the root issues as there may be more than one.  We feel this case is no...

different.  We had cause to replace the junction box because we proved that by removing fuses we could diagnose the module to be drawing 220-390 milliamps that would cause undue wear on the battery causing is to fail and/or drain prematurely.  Also a contributing factor to the complications of this repair is the vehicle history, this car is titled as a rebuilt/ salvage meaning that at some point it was considered a total loss and rebuilt and may or may not have used original manufacture parts and proper repair techniques.  This makes diagnosis very difficult because the technician is dealing with so many unknowns.  This is an inherent risk in purchasing a salvage title vehicle and therefore why they usually come with a significant price concession over clean title vehicles.  It remains our position that the junction box was a contributing factor to the battery draw but admit that our diagnosis may not have gone far enough to uncover all problems that may exist.  For that reason I would offer Mrs. [redacted] 2 free oil changes for her inconvenience and frustration.

After meeting with Mr. [redacted] and discussing the situation, examining the car, taking a look at the picture he provided, speaking with several technicians with varying levels of experience and researching the topic online I cannot find reason to repair the vehicle to the extent that he is asking for free of chrge.  It is Hall's position that to provide so much crankcase pressure to cause multiple gasket and seal failures simultaneously there would have had to be an amount of oil that far exceeded what Mr. [redacted] showed on his picture of the dipstick or what is remotely possible in this situation.  Further, when the car was first brought back to verify the concern, we could not  verify that the oil level was higher than spec.  We also believe there would be further evidence of an extreme overfill condition such as oil plugging the cat. converter, engine lights, rough running conditions or even signs of oil around the tailpipe among other signs that were not present on any of the at least two inspections of the vehicle after the complaint was first brought up.  As offered previously, we are willing to work with Mr. [redacted] to repair this common condition on a 17 year old vehicle but it will not be free of charge.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I met with Mr [redacted] on May 16. He considered my complaint and admitted to some responsibility. He feels the damage to my car was more extensive due to the age of my car. A newer car would have been  more capable to withstand the abuse they caused. Mr [redacted] told me he would be researching this situation and would be  getting back to me. When asked for a timetable he seemed frustrated and only told me he would be out of the office untilFridaythat week. I have not heard from Mr [redacted].  Please do not close this complaint until it is resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

I would like to apologize to Mr. [redacted] because based on his complaint we really did not give him the right impression on the decision maker on the repair and process.  As a franchise dealer it is our responsibility to act as the customer advocate to the manufacturer to get their problems...

handled appropriately, it sounds like we did not successfully do this in this case and we are sorry for that.  What should have happened is we should have advised Mr. [redacted] that with there being aftermarket parts in the car there is a possibility that the repair will not be covered but will go to bat on his behalf to get the repair covered by VW.  The dealership stands to benefit to from this as well because VW pays the dealership to do the repair so this is a lose-lose for Mr. [redacted] and Hall VW.  Then, we should have presented VW with all required documentation and pictures and let them be the one to decide, and I do not think we did this to the best of our ability.  Ultimately, the answer may have been the same as the other VW dealer he took it to which was not a warranty repair but none the less we should have at least tried.  It sounds like in the end Mr. [redacted] still had to pay out of pocket for the repair but did incur the cost of a tow to the other dealer.  For this I would like to offer him two free oil changes as I anticipate this is roughly the cost of the tow.Best-[redacted]Hall VW

shortly after the complaint surfaced, the car was brought in and we checked the oil and it was not found to be excessively high, if at all. There would have to have been quarts of oil on the garage floor and clear signs of oil all over the bottom of the car from "blowback" of oil while travelling for enough oil to have left the car if we overfilled the vehicle to that extent.  I'm sorry but the pieces that I have seen do not equate up to the accusation he is alleging.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  I just need to know who to ask to speak to when I arrive at Hall Mazda so there is no confusion. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Mrs. [redacted] and I spent several phone calls and emails trying to come to an amicable solution, her last email is in an exert below- "Dear [redacted], After much
consideration, I have come to the following conclusion.At this time according
to your quote, I am looking at spending a total...

amount of $3773.00 . This
includes the original repair of $1146/= ( $519 actual work and the extra of
$696 I paid. ) and the $2627 - current repair out of which $383 goes towards
the parts of something that was totally unrelated to this engine work, which I
should not even be paying for.If I am to leave the
vehicle at your dealership to complete the said work, I would only be willing
to pay  $3000/=(inclusive of tax)IN TOTAL out of which $1146/= has already
been charged.If this is acceptable
to you, please let me know today 09/24/2015 so I can come to a decision as I
need to get the vehicle out today if the work will not be carried out at the
your dealership." I was willing to meet Mrs. [redacted] in all of her request of completing the entire repair for $3,000 on 9/24/15.  The only request I could not guarantee is that once this is completed that the car will be in excellent working condition and if not we, Hall would assume responsibility.  I cannot reasonably agree to this request because we have never seen this vehicle in proper working condition to evaluate it.  I cannot agree to something that I have no prior knowledge of.  If whatever may be wrong, if any would, be related to our workmanship or parts than we would absolutely stand behind it, however we have not been able to determine the prior condition of the vehicle because she just bought it and we have not been able to evaluate it in good working condition.  We would certainly still be able to honor her original requests but cannot unconditionally guarantee the entire car will be right. thanks-[redacted]

this complaint has moved to the state level, here is what I provided to the state. December 8, 2015 Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection[redacted] RE: File [redacted]  Hall Imports[redacted]  Dear Sir/Madam-I am writing in response to the above complaint and the suggestions that we violated the following Wis Admin Codes: No Shop may alter a person’s motor vehicle with intent to create a condition requiring repairs.Response to this claim:  I can only assume that this suggestion arises from Mrs. [redacted]’s dispute of a $402 charge to repair a creaking noise when going over bumps.  This charge was to repair a bearing and strut mount that failed on the VW Tiguan.  It is worth noting that this part fails over time due to dirt, debris and water intrusion and unfortunalty is a part with a high failure rate.  At our dealership alone, this repair has been done with this exact part at least 15 times YTD.  Being that the Tiguan is not a high volume vehicle this number could be considered high.  In addition, this failure is in no way related to the work that we performed on the prior repair order closed on 9/4/15 as we all of our work was in the engine area and not suspension related.  In a car with over 96K miles this is not an uncommon failure.  This repair was completed for Mrs. [redacted] with no additional labor charged, this is normally a 6.7 hour job at our posted rate of $116.00 per hour, plus alignment and she was charged only for the parts. The customer was falsely told repairs were needed for the sale or effective operation of their vehicle.   When the vehicle initially came in with a check engine light on and initial codes ([redacted] and [redacted]) were stored, the diagnosis was to replace the cam adjuster valve with was authorized by Mrs [redacted].  On completion of this repair and new fault was discovered through quality check, this fault was not visible prior to completing the cam adjuster valve.  When the cam adjuster valve was repaired the engine was able to store a new code because it was now running in a different condition than before the new valve was installed.  When the new code was discovered, our diagnosis took us deeper into the engine and discovered the screen from the cam bridge was missing.  Enclosed is a photo of Mrs. [redacted]s Cam Bridge with the service advisor pointing to the area where the screen should be but is not.  There is another picture enclosed of a new part showing how it should look.  When it was discovered the screen was missing a proper repair was quoted as per common VW repair practices.  This condition is not uncommon and we have seen numerous cases where the metal screen shreds into microscopic pieces and causes damage in the internal engine.  What we recommended is absolutely the best way to fix this condition, there are ways to fix it cheaper but these methods come with significant risk of future failures due to screen damage.   On 9/24/15 I thought Mrs. [redacted] and I had come to an agreement on how to proceed amicably- see enclosed email.  I had agreed to all her requests but the following - “ I also need in writing that IF any further damage,( with further error codes you may discover) is caused during repair to this vehicle that you will fix them at no cost to me, parts and labor.” This I simply could not agree to for this reason- Mrs. [redacted] purchased this car sometime on or around 7/30/15 with approximately 95K miles and we saw the vehicle for the first time on 8/31/15 with 96,607 miles with a check engine light and never had the opportunity to fix the car to our standards.  Therefore we have never seen this car in a healthy condition to determine the extent or lack of damage to the engine.  There are many cases, as above in which fixing one problem revels another because the vehicle in that one area is now operating correctly.  I cannot in good faith guarantee everything will be ok when I don’t know it will.  Our best information at the time is from a car in less than optimum condition, we don’t know if we are getting the correct information from this car or not because there are still codes present.  In no way was I preparing to walk away from her as proven by previously waiving a 6.7 hour labor charge, providing additional diagnosis at no charge and meeting her demands in the 9/24/15 email but I just could not guarantee something that is not in a fully diagnosable state. Our Position concerning resolution:  Mrs. [redacted] has three items she is disputing, the first is $402 charge that covered the parts of the repair to the strut mounts and bearings.  We have already waived the labor charges because we understand the perception that it was in our custody when the sound started.  However, this is a very common failure in this vehicle at that age through no fault of the Hall or Mrs. [redacted].  The second item is the additional $696 charged to tear down the engine to the point of failure at which time we discovered the screen on the cam bridge was missing. The third is a complete refund for “all the unnecessary work that I have had to pay” I’m not sure what this is because the additional work was declined and the vehicle was towed away.  In conclusion, I feel we have already spent a significant amount of time and money on this vehicle only to find ourselves at a standstill.  What is more troubling is the owner of this car has a very short history with it, about 1 month, and is very quick to blame us for all of its problems.  Isn’t there a possibility that some of these may have been pre-existing in a high mileage used vehicle?  We would gladly be able to settle this for some type of refund but not to the extent Mrs. [redacted] is talking.  I look forward to hearing from you, I can be reached at ###-###-####. Respectfully-  [redacted]Hall Imports LLc

I am left to assume that what Mr. [redacted] is asking for is a check to compensate him for the repairs that he feels are necessary on his vehicle.  I am sorry to inform him that we would also perform the work but our dealership paying another dealership to do it is out of the question.  I realize that coming this far to have the work done is highly inconvenient, but I feel is the only reasonable remedy in addition to the one I offered in the previous response.