Stapp Interstate Toyota-Scion

See Attached Response May 13, 2016Revdex.com Response ID# [redacted] Second Response: A concise thorough summary of the Business’s position regarding this matter.Said vehicle was brought into the Dealership for a diagnosis of a check engine light It was diagnosed by a Toyota Master Diagnostic Technician, MDT, who has been a Toyota technician for approximately fifteen years, and through his Toyota education has earned the MDT level of certification As requested an estimate to repair the cause of the check engine light coming on was given to the customer The customer then left the Dealership and had the vehicle inspected by another service shop The customer then inquired at the Dealership about trading the vehicle in on another vehicle The veteran sales consultant provided her with the resultant monthly payment on a vehicle she had chosen At her request he also explained what the service department warranty work would cover and he explained to her that it covers only the work performed At that time she informed him that she was currently unemployed and thought it an inappropriate time to trade the car in.The customer then returned to the service department and spoke to the Service Manger, a twenty year Toyota employeeHe explained to her that there is no guaranty that after the check engine light is repaired that other issues might not arise after the repair was doneCustomers who are repairing older, high mileage vehicles will always be cautioned when spending a substantial amount of money on a repairThe customer requested and approved the work to be done.The additional current issues that the customer has referred to are not due to the failure of the Dealership’s repairs They are different matters that would require additional work for them to be corrected The customer did not inform the Service Manger or the Service Advisor of any other concerns other than the check engine light The customer confirmed this in discussion with the Service Manger and Fixed Operations Manger on May 2, The Dealership followed the correct least expensive orderly protocol in the repairs that were requested, approved, and received by the customer It is the position of the Dealership that nothing further is owed to the customer There is no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly The month or 12,mile Parts and labor warranty for the work performed can be honored at any USA Toyota DealershipRegards,Loren R [redacted] Dealership Fixed Operations Manger

See Attached ResponseMay 13, 2016Revdex.com Response ID# [redacted] Second Response: A concise thorough summary of the Business’s position regarding this matter.Said vehicle was brought into the Dealership for a diagnosis of a check engine light It was diagnosed by a Toyota Master Diagnostic Technician, MDT, who has been a Toyota technician for approximately fifteen years, and through his Toyota education has earned the MDT level of certification As requested an estimate to repair the cause of the check engine light coming on was given to the customer The customer then left the Dealership and had the vehicle inspected by another service shop The customer then inquired at the Dealership about trading the vehicle in on another vehicle The veteran sales consultant provided her with the resultant monthly payment on a vehicle she had chosen At her request he also explained what the service department warranty work would cover and he explained to her that it covers only the work performed At that time she informed him that she was currently unemployed and thought it an inappropriate time to trade the car in.The customer then returned to the service department and spoke to the Service Manger, a twenty year Toyota employeeHe explained to her that there is no guaranty that after the check engine light is repaired that other issues might not arise after the repair was doneCustomers who are repairing older, high mileage vehicles will always be cautioned when spending a substantial amount of money on a repairThe customer requested and approved the work to be done.The additional current issues that the customer has referred to are not due to the failure of the Dealership’s repairs They are different matters that would require additional work for them to be corrected The customer did not inform the Service Manger or the Service Advisor of any other concerns other than the check engine light The customer confirmed this in discussion with the Service Manger and Fixed Operations Manger on May 2, The Dealership followed the correct least expensive orderly protocol in the repairs that were requested, approved, and received by the customer It is the position of the Dealership that nothing further is owed to the customer There is no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly The month or 12,mile Parts and labor warranty for the work performed can be honored at any USA Toyota DealershipRegards,Loren R [redacted] Dealership Fixed Operations Manger

[redacted] Dear Mr. [redacted] ,RE: ID [redacted] On July 2, 2016 our... customer purchased a pre-owned 2013 ***.Stapp Interstate [redacted] detailed the 2013 [redacted] for delivery; however the detail did not pass our customers inspection. In the interest of taking care of our customers we explained that we would detail the vehicle once again to her satisfaction. She made an appointment with her salesperson to bring the vehicle back so that we could detail the vehicle a second time. We explained that we did not have a loaner vehicle available on the day that she chose and that the detail would take approximately half the day, thus the 5 hour wait. We offered the courtesy shuttle to take her home and back to the dealership however she declined that service.Once again, upon inspection of the detailing of her vehicle, she felt it did not meet her expectations. At that time our General Manager, Clint Stapp, made the decision to reimburse her for a 3rd detail at the shop of her choice to a limit of $150.00. Our customer chose to purchase a $300.00 detail, which in the interest of customer satisfaction we reimbursed the full amount of $300.00. Please note the statement in the letter "The execution of this check constitutes your agreement that the amount paid is a complete satisfaction of any controversy regarding the sale thereof."The vehicle has now been detailed three times, twice at Stapp Interstate [redacted] and a third time at an independent location of our customer's direction at the expense of Stapp Interstate [redacted] .I have attached copies of the letter and the check that was given to our customer. In addition I have attached copies of the receipt from [redacted] plus a copy of the check showing that it has been cashed at her bank.Jacquelyn J**Customer Relations ManagerStapp Interstate [redacted] ***

Complaint: [redacted] On February 23rd my check engine light came on and so I brought my car in to Stapp Toyota for a diagnostic I was taken back to my residence by a very nice shuttle driver I waited for a call for the diagnostic and there was no phone call, I know this because I had no other means of transportation so I was waiting to get my carso I called Toyota and they said it would be ready by 6:p.mat which point a shuttle was sent for me to be picked up On his way to my residence a different shuttle driver got lost and then brought me back to Toyota that same day It was not the next day and as a result of the time frame of when they got the diagnostic finished they waived the diagnostic fee because most people had left for the evening, Perhaps that is why the invoice is dated the 24th On my original quote there was no indication or record of a compression test?? It is stated that cylinders ##and #(in their response for this report) did not have compression however it is not on the quote it just says gasket (cylinder head) and I believe those results are very important Please see invoice [redacted] , my quote does not reflect this readingOn April 12th I did talk to the service manager and at that point was told that there could be additional problems with the car (starter, transmission etcas routine wear and tear on the vehicle and miles), and there may certainly be additional issues UNRELATED to this specific repair” that may LATER occur It is stated that the repairs have a month or 12,mile warranty So that means they will back their work Of course there could be other issue but my intent was to get a vehicle with a check engine light repaired and that the work would be backed up I had explored the idea of trading in the vehicle but that is when I was told to talk to the service department and was told that they believed they could repair it, and that is why I later made the decision to trust them to work on my vehicle.I brought the vehicle in on April 13th to have it serviced and was told the vehicle would be ready on Friday the 25th at which point is was NOT This indicated to me that perhaps they were in over their head So that theywere not inconvenienced (in their time frame to fix the car), they accommodated themselvesto avoid a potential angry customer and I was given a loaner car because I had no other means of transportation It’s a dealer they have plenty of loaner cars and they did not have the car ready.When I called to find out when my car was going to be ready I was told it needed an additional part and it was brought to my attention so I approved it(Please see invoice # [redacted] for $+ $(the original quote), which would have brought my bill up to 1, There was no communication during the duration of the time the car was being repaired other than this additional part.Due to the duration of the repairs I was still driving their vehicle on the highway and a rock or something hit the windshield of their car I was told that they would have it replaced at cost so I had agreed to pay $for the windshield Please see invoice # If you add When I called and asked how much I would need to pay for the car I was informed it would be so I asked if that quote included the windshield and the additional part and I was s told it did If you add (from above) + for the windshield that brought my bill to $not which I was quoted over the phone.I picked up the car and found out that I was going to be charged in addition to the $for the windshieldI was upset so I went to visit MrS [redacted] and he said that Toyota would refund the second charge for the windshield Remember it was included in the final quote over the phone and if you look at the above math it would be close to the amount that was owed with the windshield and the extra part I was told the windshield and the additional part were included in my final bill of $ It was an error in their math and had nothing to do with the additional part that they stated Also Mr S [redacted] started talking about how the car could have additional problems which I thought was strange because unless it was related to their work why was it brought up The conversation seem to be a way of saying that if anything was wrong with the vehicle after they worked on it that it was because of an unrelated issues??Please read the part that the repairs included a month OR 12,mile warranty I left Toyota and the car was not running correctly it was rattling when I was in line at [redacted] and when I had to accelerate more to get power and at the traffic light the engine was humming up and down and was not sounding right That weekend I was with my son and he drove the car and it was not running properly I went to check my oil and it was all gone?? I almost burned up the engine.Both my son and others said I needed to bring it back in to Toyota I brought the car back on May 2nd because it was NOT running right I had driven it less than two hundred miles not the 12,which is what is warranted for the work It was not determined that the car needed work on the lower engine as they did not even have the car long enough to determine that Perhaps they knew that before and went ahead and did the work They put a stethoscope up to a part and I listened in and it was agreed that it yet again another part was needed I asked if they could fix it and they said they did not have the part but that it was not crucial that I get it fixed that day Again this is unrelated to the performance of the car.In response to what was written about the cars history I discontinued to have work done on my Toyota at any Toyota dealer because the work was done incorrectly on numerous occasions where I had to bring it back for insufficient work I have records of every repair that was done on my car including the accident that occurred in The reason the car was repaired is because when it only had 90,and I have been driving ever since with no problems? Also it was a fender bender in none of which are related to the work done on the engine You can talk to the people who did the repairs, it was body work not engine work so if the accidents had anything to do with the car engine it would not have not have over 170,and I had no major issuesIf Toyota did not think they could fix it they should NOT have touched the vehicle After all Toyota's are known to get over 250,miles and I see the same car on the road everywhere I go I do not believe the mileage is a factor otherwise why would a decision to work on the vehicle be made I believe it is because Toyota made an error in judgment and now I am out the money with a vehicle that is not running properly.It must be nice to have the power and find all kinds of excuses to blame it on other issues to protect the insufficient repairsWho on earth would agree to pay $for something and not have the work backed up Do the right thing and honor YOUR work!

*** *** *** ***
*** *** ***
*** ***
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** **
*** ** *** ***
Dear Mr***,RE: ID
***On July 2, our customer purchased a pre-owned ***.Stapp Interstate *** detailed the *** for delivery; however the detail did not pass our customers inspection In the interest of taking care of our customers we explained that we would detail the vehicle once again to her satisfaction She made an appointment with her salesperson to bring the vehicle back so that we could detail the vehicle a second time We explained that we did not have a loaner vehicle available on the day that she chose and that the detail would take approximately half the day, thus the hour wait We offered the courtesy shuttle to take her home and back to the dealership however she declined that service.Once again, upon inspection of the detailing of her vehicle, she felt it did not meet her expectations At that time our General Manager, Clint Stapp, made the decision to reimburse her for a 3rd detail at the shop of her choice to a limit of $ Our customer chose to purchase a $detail, which in the interest of customer satisfaction we reimbursed the full amount of $ Please note the statement in the letter "The execution of this check constitutes your agreement that the amount paid is a complete satisfaction of any controversy regarding the sale thereof."The vehicle has now been detailed three times, twice at Stapp Interstate *** and a third time at an independent location of our customer's direction at the expense of Stapp Interstate ***.I have attached copies of the letter and the check that was given to our customer In addition I have attached copies of the receipt from *** *** *** *** *** plus a copy of the check showing that it has been cashed at her bank.Jacquelyn J**Customer Relations ManagerStapp Interstate *** *** *** *** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
On February 23rd my check engine light came on and so I brought my car in to Stapp Toyota for a diagnostic I was taken back to my residence by a very nice shuttle driver I waited for a call for the diagnostic and there was no phone call, I know this because I had no other means of transportation so I was waiting to get my carso I called Toyota and they said it would be ready by 6:p.mat which point a shuttle was sent for me to be picked up. On his way to my residence a different shuttle driver got lost and then brought me back to Toyota that same day It was not the next day and as a result of the time frame of when they got the diagnostic finished they waived the diagnostic fee because most people had left for the evening, Perhaps that is why the invoice is dated the 24th. On my original quote there was no indication or record of a compression test?? It is stated that cylinders ##and #(in their response for this report) did not have compression however it is not on the quote it just says gasket (cylinder head) and I believe those results are very important. Please see invoice ***, my quote does not reflect this reading
On April 12th I did talk to the service manager and at that point was told that there could be additional problems with the car (starter, transmission etcas routine wear and tear on the vehicle and miles), and there may certainly be additional issues UNRELATED to this specific repair” that may LATER occur. It is stated that the repairs have a month or 12,mile warranty. So that means they will back their work. Of course there could be other issue but my intent was to get a vehicle with a check engine light repaired and that the work would be backed up. I had explored the idea of trading in the vehicle but that is when I was told to talk to the service department and was told that they believed they could repair it, and that is why I later made the decision to trust them to work on my vehicleI brought the vehicle in on April 13th to have it serviced and was told the vehicle would be ready on Friday the 25th at which point is was NOT This indicated to me that perhaps they were in over their head. So that theywere not inconvenienced (in their time frame to fix the car), they accommodated themselvesto avoid a potential angry customer and I was given a loaner car because I had no other means of transportation. It’s a dealer they have plenty of loaner cars and they did not have the car readyWhen I called to find out when my car was going to be ready I was told it needed an additional part and it was brought to my attention so I approved it(Please see invoice #*** for $+ $(the original quote), which would have brought my bill up to 1,477.38. There was no communication during the duration of the time the car was being repaired other than this additional part.Due to the duration of the repairs I was still driving their vehicle on the highway and a rock or something hit the windshield of their car I was told that they would have it replaced at cost so I had agreed to pay $for the windshield Please see invoice #219344. If you add When I called and asked how much I would need to pay for the car I was informed it would be so I asked if that quote included the windshield and the additional part and I was s told it did If you add (from above) + for the windshield that brought my bill to $not which I was quoted over the phoneI picked up the car and found out that I was going to be charged in addition to the $for the windshield. I was upset so I went to visit MrS*** and he said that Toyota would refund the second charge for the windshield. Remember it was included in the final quote over the phone and if you look at the above math it would be close to the amount that was owed with the windshield and the extra part . I was told the windshield and the additional part were included in my final bill of $ It was an error in their math and had nothing to do with the additional part that they stated. Also Mr S*** started talking about how the car could have additional problems which I thought was strange because unless it was related to their work why was it brought up. The conversation seem to be a way of saying that if anything was wrong with the vehicle after they worked on it that it was because of an unrelated issues??
Please read the part that the repairs included a month OR 12,mile warranty. I left Toyota and the car was not running correctly it was rattling when I was in line at *** and when I had to accelerate more to get power and at the traffic light the engine was humming up and down and was not sounding right. That weekend I was with my son and he drove the car and it was not running properly. I went to check my oil and it was all gone?? I almost burned up the engineBoth my son and others said I needed to bring it back in to Toyota I brought the car back on May 2nd because it was NOT running right. I had driven it less than two hundred miles not the 12,which is what is warranted for the work. . It was not determined that the car needed work on the lower engine as they did not even have the car long enough to determine that. Perhaps they knew that before and went ahead and did the work. They put a stethoscope up to a part and I listened in and it was agreed that it yet again another part was needed I asked if they could fix it and they said they did not have the part but that it was not crucial that I get it fixed that day. Again this is unrelated to the performance of the carIn response to what was written about the cars history I discontinued to have work done on my Toyota at any Toyota dealer because the work was done incorrectly on numerous occasions where I had to bring it back for insufficient work. I have records of every repair that was done on my car including the accident that occurred in The reason the car was repaired is because when it only had 90,and I have been driving ever since with no problems? Also it was a fender bender in none of which are related to the work done on the engine. You can talk to the people who did the repairs, it was body work not engine work so if the accidents had anything to do with the car engine it would not have not have over 170,and I had no major issues If Toyota did not think they could fix it they should NOT have touched the vehicle. After all Toyota's are known to get over 250,miles and I see the same car on the road everywhere I go I do not believe the mileage is a factor otherwise why would a decision to work on the vehicle be made. I believe it is because Toyota made an error in judgment and now I am out the money with a vehicle that is not running properlyIt must be nice to have the power and find all kinds of excuses to blame it on other issues to protect the insufficient repairs. Who on earth would agree to pay $for something and not have the work backed up
Do the right thing and honor YOUR work!

see attached if questions p[lease call: Art S*** ***May 8, 2016As per the Revdex.com’s guidelines: “Please do not include any information that personally identifies your customer.”Revdex.com Response ID# ***Statement of events:The said vehicle had never been to the S***
Interstate Toyota Service Department prior to February 23, On February 23, S*** Interstate Toyota received the complainant’s Toyota *** with 167,miles The complaint was for “Check Engine Light Was on.” The customer agreed to the $diagnostic fee The Toyota Certified Technician diagnosed the Check Engine Light as an engine misfire Further diagnostics by the technician identified three of the four cylinders with none to minimal compression; the cylinders were #1, #2, and # It was further discovered the cause of this was a failed head gasket, and the intake and exhaust valvesThe customer was contacted by the service advisor at the customer provided phone number There was no answer by the customer however a voicemail was left asking that the service advisor be called back That evening after the Service Department had closed at 6:PM the customer arrived at the Dealership and was provided a quote for the work and the diagnostic fee was waived.On April 12, the customer called and spoke with the Service Manger regarding the diagnostics performed The customer asked if the repair would correct the check engine light issue and was told by the Service Manger that it would correct that issue, but the Manger cautioned that this vehicle with its condition and high miles may certainly have additional issues unrelated to this specific repair that may later occur The customer then informed the Service Manger that the vehicle had been to another shop for another opinion after the February 23rd visit to S*** Interstate Toyota The customer also informed the Service Manger that she had also explored the possibility of trading the vehicle in at S*** Interstate Toyota but had chosen to have the vehicle repaired instead because of the customer’s current financial position.On April 13, the vehicle was received to have the repairs done Since the repairs were taking longer than expected, and so that the customer would not be inconvenienced, the customer was provided a Toyota Rental Car at no charge for the duration of the repairs During the repairs of said vehicle, it was discovered that another part was needed that was not part of the original quote The customer was contacted and approved the cost of the additional part Sometime during this time a rock cracked the windshield of the rental car .The customer had agreed and had signed a standard rental car agreement that states the customer is responsible for any damage to the car while they have it in their possession When the cracked windshield was reported by the customer they were informed that they would have to bear the cost of the windshield.On April 23, the customer arrived at the Dealership to return the Rental car and take delivery of their car The customer asked to speak to MrS*** MrS*** immediately invited her into his office and along with MrZ*** listened to the misunderstanding regarding the additional charges to her invoice above the original quote It appeared that the customer had not added the approved additional part into the original quote As part of goodwill gesture MrS*** approved not to charge the customer for the cracked windshield and MrZ*** then discounted the invoice further to accommodate the additional part that was authorized by the customer During this discussion, MrS*** specifically cautioned the customer regarding the possibility that additional unrelated items may need to be repaired on a vehicle that is fifteen years old and has 170,milesThe customer went on to tell him that she had looked at a different vehicle as a possible trade but had decided at this time against the purchase of a new vehicle. On April 27, the customer returned to the Dealership with a noise complaint from the engine area It was diagnosed as the belt tensioner The customer was informed that the tensioner bearings were bad and told that if not replaced will eventually result in a seizure A quote was provided and it was determined that the noise was not associated with the earlier performed repairs The customer declined the repair at the time. On May 2, the customer returned again to the Dealership with another complaint of oil consumption It was determined that that the lower end of the motor would require a major repair including new rings Again it was determined that this issue was not in any way related to the earlier repair that was performed The Service Manger and Director of Fixed Operations met with the customer to discuss the issue and to provide a quoteDuring this conversation it was discovered that the customer had a prior oil consumption issue that was never previously presented to the service advisor or to the Service Manger Since there was no prior history regarding the maintenance or repairs of this vehicle we were unaware of this concern until the customer brought the vehicle to us again on May 2nd Both the Toyota National Service History Report and the Auto Check Report both indicate minimal service performed during the car’s life Some other type of owner service or independent service could have been performed but there is no way to ascertain that The Auto Check Report indicates the vehicle was in an accident in and in 2015.It is concluded that the above additional issues that have been discovered are not related to the repair that was performed at S*** Interstate Toyota The performed repairs have a month or 12,mile warranty Even prior to the initial repair the customer was informed by the Service Manger that there is no way to insure that a fifteen year old vehicle with 170,miles on it will not have additional issues The customer had even explored other options prior to the customer’s decision to move forward with the repair The Dealership had even already made further unrequired concessions to the customer by providing a rental car at no cost to the customer, discounting a part that was authorized by the customer, and not charging the customer for a broken windshield on the rental car while it was in the customer’s possession It is determined that the new problems discovered are not related to the performed repairs and are not related to any defective parts installed during that repair There exists no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly and certainly no basis for a partial refund of the money as was requested

See Attached Response
May 13, 2016Revdex.com Response ID# [redacted]Second Response:  A concise thorough summary of the Business’s position regarding this matter.Said vehicle was brought into the Dealership for a diagnosis of a check engine light.  It was diagnosed by a Toyota Master Diagnostic Technician, MDT, who has been a Toyota technician for approximately fifteen years, and through his Toyota education has earned the MDT level of certification.  As requested an estimate to repair the cause of the check engine light coming on was given to the customer.  The customer then left the Dealership and had the vehicle inspected by another service shop.  The customer then inquired at the Dealership about trading the vehicle in on another vehicle.  The veteran sales consultant provided her with the resultant monthly payment on a vehicle she had chosen.  At her request he also explained what the service department warranty work would cover and he explained to her that it covers only the work performed.  At that time she informed him that she was currently unemployed and thought it an inappropriate time to trade the car in.The customer then returned to the service department and spoke to the Service Manger, a twenty year Toyota employee. He explained to her that there is no guaranty that after the check engine light is repaired that other issues might not arise after the repair was done. Customers who are repairing older, high mileage vehicles will always be cautioned when spending a substantial amount of money on a repair. The customer requested and approved the work to be done.The additional current issues that the customer has referred to are not due to the failure of the Dealership’s repairs.  They are different matters that would require additional work for them to be corrected.  The customer did not inform the Service Manger or the Service Advisor of any other concerns other than the check engine light.  The customer confirmed this in discussion with the Service Manger and Fixed Operations Manger on May 2, 2016.  The Dealership followed the correct least expensive orderly protocol in the repairs that were requested, approved, and received by the customer.  It is the position of the Dealership that nothing further is owed to the customer.  There is no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly.  The 12 month or 12,000 mile Parts and labor warranty for the work performed can be honored at any USA Toyota DealershipRegards,Loren R[redacted]Dealership Fixed Operations Manger

Stapp Interstate Toyota[redacted]To Whom it May Concern:RE: Claim#[redacted] - [redacted]In the interest of excellent customer service, Stapp Interstate Toyota has taken care of Mr. [redacted] concern.  Please see attached RO#[redacted] with the...

cost of the new engine.  Also,  Stapp Interstate Toyota has reimbursed Mr. [redacted] out of pocket expenses for the oil and filter change totaling $100.01.  Please see attached check number [redacted].Stapp Interstate Toyota has made sure that Mr. [redacted] vehicle is as good or better than when he brought his vehicle to us for service.  We have taken all steps to completely satisfy Mr. [redacted].Sincerely,Stapp Interstate Toyota    Sincerely,Stapp Interstate Toyota

[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
Dear Mr. [redacted],RE: ID [redacted]On July 2, 2016 our...

customer purchased a pre-owned 2013 [redacted].Stapp Interstate [redacted] detailed the 2013 [redacted] for delivery; however the detail did not pass our customers inspection.  In the interest of taking care of our customers we explained that we would detail the vehicle once again to her satisfaction.    She made an appointment with her salesperson to bring the vehicle back so that we could detail the vehicle a second time.  We explained that we did not have a loaner vehicle available on the day that she chose and that the detail would take approximately half the day, thus the 5 hour wait.  We offered the courtesy shuttle to take her home and back to the dealership however she declined that service.Once again, upon inspection of the detailing of her vehicle, she felt it did not meet her expectations.  At that time our General Manager, Clint Stapp, made the decision to reimburse her for a 3rd detail at the shop of her choice to a limit of $150.00.  Our customer chose to purchase a $300.00 detail, which in the interest of customer satisfaction we reimbursed the full amount of $300.00.  Please note the statement in the letter "The execution of this check constitutes your agreement that the amount paid is a complete satisfaction of any controversy regarding the sale thereof."The vehicle has now been detailed three times, twice at Stapp Interstate [redacted] and a third time at an independent location of our customer's direction at the expense of Stapp Interstate [redacted].I have attached copies of the letter and the check that was given to our customer.  In addition I have attached copies of the receipt from [redacted] plus a copy of the check showing that it has been cashed at her bank.Jacquelyn J**Customer Relations ManagerStapp Interstate [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]On February 23rd my check engine light came on and so I brought my car in to Stapp Toyota for a diagnostic.   I was taken back to my residence by a very nice shuttle driver.  I waited for a call for the diagnostic and there was no phone call, I know this because I had no other means of transportation so I was waiting to get my car. so  I called Toyota and they said it would be ready by 6:00 p.m. at which point a shuttle was sent for me to be picked up.  On his way to my residence a different shuttle driver got lost and then brought me back to Toyota that same day.  It was not the next day and as a result of the time frame of when they got the diagnostic finished they waived the diagnostic fee because most people had left for the evening,  Perhaps that is why the invoice is dated the 24th.   On my original quote there was no indication or record of a compression test?? It is stated that cylinders #1 #2 and #3 (in their response for this report) did not have compression however it is not on the quote it just says gasket (cylinder head) and I believe those results are very important.  Please see invoice [redacted], my quote does not reflect this readingOn April 12th I did talk to the service manager and at that point was told that there could be additional problems with the car (starter, transmission etc. as routine wear and tear on the vehicle and miles),  and there may certainly be additional issues UNRELATED to this specific repair” that may LATER occur.  It is stated that the repairs have a 12 month or 12,000.00 mile warranty.  So that means they will back their work.   Of course there could be other issue but my intent was to get a vehicle with a check engine light repaired and that the work would be backed up.   I had explored the idea of trading in the vehicle but that is when I was told to talk to the service department and was told that they believed they could repair it, and that is why I later made the decision to trust them to work on my vehicle.I brought the vehicle in on April 13th to have it serviced  and was told the vehicle would be ready on Friday the 25th at which point is was NOT.   This indicated to me that perhaps they were in over their head.  So that theywere not inconvenienced (in their time frame to fix the car), they accommodated themselvesto avoid a potential angry customer and I was given a loaner car because I had no other means of transportation.  It’s a dealer they have plenty of loaner cars and they did not have the car ready.When I called to find out when my car was going to be ready I was told it needed an additional part and it was brought to my attention so I approved it. (Please see invoice #[redacted] for $113.21 + $1364.17 (the original quote), which would have brought my bill up to 1,477.38.  There was no communication during the duration of the time the car was being repaired other than this additional part.Due to the duration of the repairs I was still driving their vehicle  on the highway and a rock or something hit the windshield of their car.   I was told that they would have it replaced  at cost so I had agreed to pay  $154.95 for the windshield.  Please see invoice #219344.  If you add  When I called and asked how much I would need to pay for the car I was informed it would be 1634.11 so I asked if that quote included the windshield and the additional part and I was s told it did.  If you add 1477.38 (from above) + 154.95 for the windshield that brought my bill to $1632.33 not 1634.11 which I was quoted over the phone.I picked up the car and found out that I was going to be charged in addition to the $1634.11 for the windshield. I was upset so I went to visit Mr. S[redacted] and he said that Toyota would refund the second charge for the windshield.  Remember it was included in the final quote over the phone and if you look at the above math it would be close to the amount that was owed with the windshield and the extra part . I was told the windshield and the additional part were included in my final bill of $1634.11    It was an error in their math and had nothing to do with the additional part that they stated.  Also Mr S[redacted] started talking about how the car could have additional problems which I thought was strange because unless it was related to their work why was it brought up.  The conversation seem to be a way of saying that if anything was wrong with the vehicle after they worked on it that it was because of an unrelated issues??Please read the part that the repairs included a 12 month OR 12,000.00 mile warranty.  I left Toyota and the car was not running correctly it was rattling when I was in line at [redacted] and when I had to accelerate more to get power and at the traffic light the engine was humming up and down and was not sounding right.  That weekend I was with my son and he drove the car and it was not running properly.  I went to check my oil and it was all gone??  I almost burned up the engine.Both my son and others said I needed to bring it back in to Toyota.  I brought the car back on May 2nd because it was NOT running right.  I had driven it less than two hundred miles not the 12,000.00 which is what is warranted for the work.  .  It was not determined that the car needed work on the lower engine as they did not even have the car long enough to determine that.  Perhaps they knew that before  and went ahead and did the work.  They put a stethoscope up to a part and I listened in and it was agreed that it yet again another part was needed.   I asked if they could fix it and they said they did not have the part but that it was not crucial that I get it fixed that day.  Again this is unrelated to the performance of the car.In response to what was written about the cars history I discontinued to have work done on my Toyota at any Toyota dealer because the work was done incorrectly on numerous occasions where I had to bring it back for insufficient work.  I have records of every repair that was done on my car including the accident that occurred in 2012. The reason the car was repaired is because when it only had 90,000.00 and I have been driving ever since with no problems? Also it was a fender bender in 2015 none of which are related to the work done on the engine.  You can talk to the people who did the repairs, it was body work not engine work so if the accidents had anything to do with the car engine it  would not have not have over  170,000.00 and I had no major issues. If Toyota did not think they could fix it they should NOT have touched the vehicle.  After all Toyota's are known to get  over 250,000.00 miles and I see the same car on the road everywhere I go.  I do not believe the mileage is a factor otherwise why would a decision to work on the vehicle be made.  I believe it is because Toyota made an error in judgment and now I am out the money with a vehicle that is not running properly.It must be nice to have the power and find all kinds of excuses to blame it on other issues to protect the insufficient repairs. Who on earth would agree to pay $1.600.00 for something and not have the work backed up.  Do the right thing and honor YOUR work!

See Attached ResponseMay 13, 2016Revdex.com Response ID# [redacted]Second Response:  A concise thorough summary of the Business’s position regarding this matter.Said vehicle was brought into the Dealership for a diagnosis of a check engine light.  It was diagnosed by a Toyota Master Diagnostic Technician, MDT, who has been a Toyota technician for approximately fifteen years, and through his Toyota education has earned the MDT level of certification.  As requested an estimate to repair the cause of the check engine light coming on was given to the customer.  The customer then left the Dealership and had the vehicle inspected by another service shop.  The customer then inquired at the Dealership about trading the vehicle in on another vehicle.  The veteran sales consultant provided her with the resultant monthly payment on a vehicle she had chosen.  At her request he also explained what the service department warranty work would cover and he explained to her that it covers only the work performed.  At that time she informed him that she was currently unemployed and thought it an inappropriate time to trade the car in.The customer then returned to the service department and spoke to the Service Manger, a twenty year Toyota employee. He explained to her that there is no guaranty that after the check engine light is repaired that other issues might not arise after the repair was done. Customers who are repairing older, high mileage vehicles will always be cautioned when spending a substantial amount of money on a repair. The customer requested and approved the work to be done.The additional current issues that the customer has referred to are not due to the failure of the Dealership’s repairs.  They are different matters that would require additional work for them to be corrected.  The customer did not inform the Service Manger or the Service Advisor of any other concerns other than the check engine light.  The customer confirmed this in discussion with the Service Manger and Fixed Operations Manger on May 2, 2016.  The Dealership followed the correct least expensive orderly protocol in the repairs that were requested, approved, and received by the customer.  It is the position of the Dealership that nothing further is owed to the customer.  There is no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly.  The 12 month or 12,000 mile Parts and labor warranty for the work performed can be honored at any USA Toyota DealershipRegards,Loren R[redacted]Dealership Fixed Operations Manger

see attached
if questions p[lease call:  Art S[redacted]
May 8, 2016As per the Revdex.com’s guidelines:  “Please do not include any information that personally identifies your customer.”Revdex.com Response ID# [redacted]Statement of events:The...

said vehicle had never been to the S[redacted] Interstate Toyota Service Department prior to February 23, 2016.  On February 23, 2016 S[redacted] Interstate Toyota received the complainant’s 2001 Toyota [redacted] with 167,265 miles.  The complaint was for “Check Engine Light Was on.”  The customer agreed to the $57.00 diagnostic fee.  The Toyota Certified Technician diagnosed the Check Engine Light as an engine misfire.  Further diagnostics by the technician identified three of the four cylinders with none to minimal compression; the cylinders were #1, #2, and #3.  It was further discovered the cause of this was a failed head gasket, and the intake and exhaust valves. The customer was contacted by the service advisor at the customer provided phone number.  There was no answer by the customer however a voicemail was left asking that the service advisor be called back.  That evening after the Service Department had closed at 6:00 PM the customer arrived at the Dealership and was provided a quote for the work and the diagnostic fee was waived.On April 12, 2016 the customer called and spoke with the Service Manger regarding the diagnostics performed.  The customer asked if the repair would correct the check engine light issue and was told by the Service Manger that it would correct that issue, but the Manger cautioned that this vehicle with its condition and high miles may certainly have additional issues unrelated to this specific repair that may later occur.  The customer then informed the Service Manger that the vehicle had been to another shop for another opinion after the February 23rd visit to S[redacted] Interstate Toyota..  The customer also informed the Service Manger that she had also explored the possibility of trading the vehicle in at S[redacted] Interstate Toyota but had chosen to have the vehicle repaired instead because of the customer’s current financial position.On April 13, 2016 the vehicle was received to have the repairs done.  Since the repairs were taking longer than expected, and so that the customer would not be inconvenienced, the customer was provided a Toyota Rental Car at no charge for the duration of the repairs.  During the repairs of said vehicle, it was discovered that another part was needed that was not part of the original quote.  The customer was contacted and approved the cost of the additional part.  Sometime during this time a rock cracked the windshield of the rental car .The customer had agreed and had signed a standard rental car agreement that states the customer is responsible for any damage to the car while they have it in their possession.  When the cracked windshield was reported by the customer they were informed that they would have to bear the cost of the windshield.On April 23, 2016 the customer arrived at the Dealership to return the Rental car and take delivery of their car.  The customer asked to speak to Mr. S[redacted].  Mr. S[redacted] immediately invited her into his office and along with Mr. Z[redacted] listened to the misunderstanding regarding the additional charges to her invoice above the original quote.  It appeared that the customer had not added the approved additional part into the original quote.  As part of goodwill gesture Mr. S[redacted] approved not to charge the customer for the cracked windshield and Mr. Z[redacted] then discounted the invoice further to accommodate the additional part that was authorized by the customer.  During this discussion, Mr. S[redacted] specifically cautioned the customer regarding the possibility that additional unrelated items may need to be repaired on a vehicle that is fifteen years old and has 170,000 miles. The customer went on to tell him that she had looked at a different vehicle as a possible trade but had decided at this time against the purchase of a new vehicle. On April 27, 2016 the customer returned to the Dealership with a noise complaint from the engine area.  It was diagnosed as the belt tensioner.  The customer was informed that the tensioner bearings were bad and told that if not replaced will eventually result in a seizure.  A quote was provided and it was determined that the noise was not associated with the earlier performed repairs.  The customer declined the repair at the time. On May 2, 2016 the customer returned again to the Dealership with another complaint of oil consumption.  It was determined that that the lower end of the motor would require a major repair including new rings.  Again it was determined that this issue was not in any way related to the earlier repair that was performed.  The Service Manger and Director of Fixed Operations met with the customer to discuss the issue and to provide a quote. During this conversation it was discovered that the customer had a prior oil consumption issue that was never previously presented to the service advisor or to the Service Manger.  Since there was no prior history regarding the maintenance or repairs of this vehicle we were unaware of this concern until the customer brought the vehicle to us again on May 2nd.  Both the Toyota National Service History Report and the Auto Check Report both indicate minimal service performed during the car’s life.  Some other type of owner service or independent service could  have been performed but there is no way to ascertain that.  The Auto Check Report indicates the vehicle was in an accident in 2012 and in 2015.It is concluded that the above additional issues that have been discovered are not related to the repair that was performed at S[redacted] Interstate Toyota.  The performed repairs have a 12 month or 12,000 mile warranty.  Even prior to the initial repair the customer was informed by the Service Manger that there is no way to insure that a fifteen year old vehicle with 170,000 miles on it will not have additional issues.  The customer had even explored other options prior to the customer’s decision to move forward with the repair.  The Dealership had even already made further unrequired concessions to the customer by providing  a rental car at no cost to the customer, discounting a part that was authorized by the customer, and not charging the customer for a broken windshield on the rental car while it was in the customer’s possession.  It is determined that the new problems discovered are not related to the performed repairs and are not related to any defective parts installed during that repair.  There exists no basis or evidence that the Dealership acted improperly and certainly no basis for a partial refund of the money as was requested.