Steve Millen Sportparts Inc

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this issue is mostly resolvedThey have fully resolved the issue with the dipstick in a timely mannerHowever the tune that was received does not workI am still awaiting a resolution for my tuneThey are currently working to resolve this issue, no further action is necessary at this timeI will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***

In the customers complaint they state that they submitted this request through the Revdex.com on November 30th. We have only been notified by the Revdex.com on Dec21. Hence the reason for the delay in responding. I do see that a replacement radiator is currently on order for this customer and
will be sent to them as soon as it arrives

Regarding this complaint - The customer states that he is not satisfied with the quality of the part. This part is a sacrificial part, meant to be a barrier protecting the vehicle's frame from groundingsIt is not cosmeticThis is adequately described on our web site and the images on the site are accurateHe does not say that the part is defective or misrepresented in any wayThese parts are on hundreds of cars without complaintThey all come from the same mold and are virtually identicalAs a gesture of goodwill, we will agree not to deduct our actual cost of shipping the item to the customerIf he pays shipping back, we will refund the entire cost of the itemThe RA (return authorization) number is ***Mark this on the outside of the box and send it to *** *** *** *** *** ** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response 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.
As for Stillens statement that I did not indicate that the "part is in any way defective"-- I DID IN FACT tell them that I was not satisfied with the quality of the part. Here is my exact statement to them copied from an email from 12/23/2015: "I didnt like the quality of your manufactured part-- its a little
bulky, some of the holes weren't cut cleanly and I didn't like how it was
going to be attached to the car.  It is brand new in the unharmed
original box."As for Stillens statement that the $9.95 I paid was "not for shipping"-- Both the shopping cart at time of transaction and also an emailed Order Confirmation from Stillen CLEARLY shows $9.95 was paid for "Shipping & Handling".  I have attached images of printouts of both of these documents.  It wasn't until I actually received the part that another document was included on the box which had a comment line mentioning that Stillen claims to have "saved [me] $66 in shipping cost".  This amount was NEVER disclosed in any way at TIME OF PURCHASE.  Stillen told me that there would be NO restocking fee associated with this transaction so that is a moot point.  I am aware that Stillen would deduct original shipping charges from a refund and on this transaction, that amount is CLEARLY $9.95.These are the honest and true facts.  Stillen should stand behind its pledge of "maximum savings and excellent customer service". I again ask that Stillen please resolve this matter by honoring my original request: "Refund my entire purchase price less $9.95 in original shipping. And
Stillen issue a call tag to have part shipped back to them at their
expense due to the aggravation."
Regards,
[redacted]

We have not seen this happen with sales of a great number of these bars. At our request, the customer supplied pictures that showed the pieces had not been properly installed. Detailed installation instructions with pictures were included with the part. The end link hardware (not "M link") is...

available separately and we have offered to furnish this to the customer at our cost, approximately $25.00. There is nothing wrong with the product.

It is STILLEN's goal to provide our customers with the best Customer Service and product(s) as possible.  In this case the customer has left out some important details that we feel are necessary to bring up.1) The customer and our company came to an agreement and the customer has been...

refunded.2) The product that was sent to the customer was the correct product for the vehicle.  The modifications required are clearly listed in the instructions which are on the product listing of our website.3) It is only reasonable that to return any product the product must be in new or "like new" condition.  The damage to the intake tubes was significant and it was very evident that the parts had been rubbing against each other in the return shipment.  Typically any product that is returned in damaged condition would not be accepted as a return.  When the customer was notified of this policy they became [redacted]et and asked if there was anything that we could do to assist them.  In an effort to assist the customer we offered to sell the product on their behalf on eBay.  We said that we would give them 100% of the money from the sale.  The customer agreed that this was a reasonable and acceptable offer.  We listed the damaged product on our eBay store on behalf of the customer and sold them as we had originally agreed.  We do not feel that it is reasonable that the customer is now trying to renegotiate our agreement via filing a Revdex.com complaint.

In responce to the companies rebuttal [redacted]s claim that they " Produce sound clip videos of their exhaust systems to show consumers what the product will sounds like prior to their purchase " . This may be the case for many exhausts that they have for sale, Not the case pertaining to my claim. The website does have many videos for the q50 V37 Engine, my car is a 2016 Q50 S Red sport Vrddtt 3.0 engine. no such video exists showing me or any other consumer of what our car may sound like prior to purchasing their exhaust system. The V37 is a direct engine only 3.7 liter Motor, Not very similar to the Vrddtt 3.0 Twin turbo 3.0 Liter engine in my unit. This fact holds merit showing that [redacted] does not in fact provide the customer a reliable expectation of the sound of there unit after install. Aside from that fact, [redacted] has a return policy stating that it items that are non refundable are " Clearly indicated on the product page ". After further investigation into this claim, No proof can be found to prove this statement. I reject this claim from the company and request compensation for my order or a refund   Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response 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.
Regards,
[redacted]

This matter has been resolved.  There was a delay in delivering the customer the necessary tune for the vehicle as we had an internal communication error.  For that we do apologize.  However, the tune has been delivered to the customer. In regards to the dipstick for the...

supercharger oil level we spoke with the manufacturer of the supercharger "Vortech" and they confirmed that this was normal and there was nothing to be concerned about.  As a pre-caution and goodwill gesture we asked Vortech to send the customer a new dipstick. All of this was completed prior to our notification of this Revdex.com complaint.

The sound of an aftermarket performance exhaust system is a very subjective thing.  At [redacted] we do our best to produce an exhaust system that produces an increase in power while also improving the sound of the vehicle.  The sound expectations are very subjective as some customers prefer...

a quiet exhaust like OEM and others desire a very loud system.  It is our goal to achieve an exhaust note that fits the vehicle.  In this case a luxury vehicle that needs to sound tasteful and refined.  Unfortunately, sound is very personal and what is luxurious to some is not to others.  To prevent this misunderstanding from occuring [redacted] produces exhaust sound clip videos of our exhaust systems to show the consumer what the product will sound like prior to their purchase.Once the exhaust has been installed all of the slip joints are crushed in order to perform the installation.  Additionally, once the vehicle is driven the exhaust becomes used.  Because the exhaust is used and no longer in resalable condition we can not accept a return.  Especially when the shop performing the installation failed to check that all of the connections were secure and the exhaust falls off of the vehicle.  At this stage the exhaust that is requested to be returned is either damaged or missing major components on top of being used.  Hence the reason we informed the customer that the exhaust system was not eligible for a return.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response 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.
According to the warranty agreement at the time of purchase I should be entitled to a replacement of the item free of cost to me for the damages that were beyond my control. Their counter offer to sell me new end links to replace the ones that broke is a violation of the contractual agreement of the warranty and is downright insulting. Their denial of my photo evidence of the damages further demonstrates their negligence to provide a legitimate and ethical service to public consumers.
Regards,
[redacted]

The customer ordered a part on our website. This particular part is a skid plate, designed to cover the bottom of the front  part of the vehicle and take scrapes and groundings to protect the vehicle. It is not a cosmetic part and is exactly as described and pictured on our website. The...

customer does not indicate that it is any way defective.The 9.95 the customer paid was not for shipping, it was for insurance and handling. The actual amount of shipping that we paid is shown on the customer invoice, $66. Per our terms on the website, the customer may return the product, but is responsible for the shipping we paid to ship it to them and they must ship it back to us, shipping charges paid by them. We had agreed to waive our usual restock fee for this gentlemen. He was previously issued an authorization to return the product on 12/21/15. Our return authorizations are good for 30 days. We will extend this for an additional 30 days and he may still return this to us.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response 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.
It was never communicated with my husband [redacted] or myself that the radiator was on back order until I called the company on 12/21/2017. A call to [redacted] L. on 12/11/2017 from my husband [redacted] L. stated that "would call us with a tracking number as soon as he had one" giving us the impressions that the radiator was shipped out on [redacted]'s end and they were just waiting on the package carrier to issue a tracking number. If I had known on 12/11/2017 that the radiator was on back order with no estimated date of arrival I would have opted for a refund check for the full purchase price to take my business to another company as I have been without a car now since 10/23/2017. The lack of professional and incorrect information between [redacted] and us as the customer is unacceptable. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Review: Purchased an automotive part from Stillen. It was invoiced and shipped to me with exactly $9.95 shown and charged for shipping and handling. I was not satisfied with the quality of the part. I requested to return the new unused uninstalled part. Stillen informed me that $66 in original shipping will be deducted from any refund. They refuse to honor the original shipping charge amount of $9.95 that was shown in my shopping cart at time of transaction and also on the invoice I received at time of purchase.Desired Settlement: Refund my entire purchase price less $9.95 in original shipping. And Stillen issue a call tag to have part shipped back to them at their expense due to the aggravation.

Business

Response:

The customer ordered a part on our website. This particular part is a skid plate, designed to cover the bottom of the front part of the vehicle and take scrapes and groundings to protect the vehicle. It is not a cosmetic part and is exactly as described and pictured on our website. The customer does not indicate that it is any way defective.The 9.95 the customer paid was not for shipping, it was for insurance and handling. The actual amount of shipping that we paid is shown on the customer invoice, $66. Per our terms on the website, the customer may return the product, but is responsible for the shipping we paid to ship it to them and they must ship it back to us, shipping charges paid by them. We had agreed to waive our usual restock fee for this gentlemen. He was previously issued an authorization to return the product on 12/21/15. Our return authorizations are good for 30 days. We will extend this for an additional 30 days and he may still return this to us.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response 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.

As for Stillens statement that I did not indicate that the "part is in any way defective"-- I DID IN FACT tell them that I was not satisfied with the quality of the part. Here is my exact statement to them copied from an email from 12/23/2015: "I didnt like the quality of your manufactured part-- its a little

bulky, some of the holes weren't cut cleanly and I didn't like how it was

going to be attached to the car. It is brand new in the unharmed

original box."As for Stillens statement that the $9.95 I paid was "not for shipping"-- Both the shopping cart at time of transaction and also an emailed Order Confirmation from Stillen CLEARLY shows $9.95 was paid for "Shipping & Handling". I have attached images of printouts of both of these documents. It wasn't until I actually received the part that another document was included on the box which had a comment line mentioning that Stillen claims to have "saved [me] $66 in shipping cost". This amount was NEVER disclosed in any way at TIME OF PURCHASE. Stillen told me that there would be NO restocking fee associated with this transaction so that is a moot point. I am aware that Stillen would deduct original shipping charges from a refund and on this transaction, that amount is CLEARLY $9.95.These are the honest and true facts. Stillen should stand behind its pledge of "maximum savings and excellent customer service". I again ask that Stillen please resolve this matter by honoring my original request: "Refund my entire purchase price less $9.95 in original shipping. And

Stillen issue a call tag to have part shipped back to them at their

expense due to the aggravation."

Regards,

Business

Response:

Regarding this complaint - The customer states that he is not satisfied with the quality of the part. This part is a sacrificial part, meant to be a barrier protecting the vehicle's frame from groundings. It is not cosmetic. This is adequately described on our web site and the images on the site are accurate. He does not say that the part is defective or misrepresented in any way. These parts are on hundreds of cars without complaint. They all come from the same mold and are virtually identical. As a gesture of goodwill, we will agree not to deduct our actual cost of shipping the item to the customer. If he pays shipping back, we will refund the entire cost of the item. The RA (return authorization) number is [redacted]. Mark this on the outside of the box and send it to [redacted]

I ordered a pair of stillen long tube headers and high flow catalytic converters for my truck and the business never sent me a box needed that is supposed to come with catalytic converters to turn off my check engine light. I discovered it recently and email them and they told me they can give it to me for $49 bucks. Why should I pay for something that is already supposed to be sent to me? Bad business all around. Will not recommend to anyone.

Review: On June 26, 2014, I purchased a sway bar through [redacted]'s company website for my 2007 Nissan Altima 2.5 S sedan, to be picked up. After picking up the item I installed it with the help of [redacted], who is an auto expert at Auto Hub Supply in Costa Mesa, CA, using all the proper tools and to the exact specification that was listed in the manual. It wasn't anything complicated, just nuts and bolts mostly. After assuring that everything was securely fastened I began driving with my new sway bar. About four months later the M-links on both sides of the sway bar broke. The M-link on the driver side was slightly bent and ripped away from the sway bar, but still attached to where it was secured to my vehicle. The M-link on the passenger side broke in two pieces. One piece that was fastened to the car broken off and ending up somewhere in the street as I drove away, unaware of what had happened, and the second piece was still attached to the sway bar. According to [redacted]'s website I had a one-year warranty on the part that I had purchased so I called to get the M-links replaced. I began a three month process of going back and forth with Ivan Paredes, who works in parts for [redacted], giving him information and pictures of the damages by email and phone. After not hearing back from anyone for several weeks I called back only to be told that they would not honor the warranty, claiming "installation error." They said that the problem was that the nuts were not put on correctly, causing the part to slip off. One problem with this claim is that would not result in the M-link breaking into two pieces, which they know and so they ultimately denied that it had broke in such a way despite my photo evidence proving that it had. A second problem is that there is no way that they can absolutely say that the part slipping off had to do with incorrect installation and not faulty parts (nuts, bolts, etc.).Desired Settlement: As my desired outcome I would simply like [redacted] to honor their warranty policy and give me the replacement M-links that had broke, or refund my money of $214.69.

(Additional sources contact info) [redacted] - auto expert at [redacted]

Business

Response:

We have not seen this happen with sales of a great number of these bars. At our request, the customer supplied pictures that showed the pieces had not been properly installed. Detailed installation instructions with pictures were included with the part. The end link hardware (not "M link") is available separately and we have offered to furnish this to the customer at our cost, approximately $25.00. There is nothing wrong with the product.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response 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.

According to the warranty agreement at the time of purchase I should be entitled to a replacement of the item free of cost to me for the damages that were beyond my control. Their counter offer to sell me new end links to replace the ones that broke is a violation of the contractual agreement of the warranty and is downright insulting. Their denial of my photo evidence of the damages further demonstrates their negligence to provide a legitimate and ethical service to public consumers.

Regards,