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. Sincerely, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: First of all I was not informed of this charge. Second they made me pay this fee up front when I paid for the vehicle at time of purchase. Where is my refund it was not discounted when I paid off the loan. Sincerely,[redacted]
We are in receipt of Mr. [redacted]’s latest response. Mr. [redacted] did not pay any finance charges at the time of his vehicle purchase. In fact, Mr. [redacted] paid nothing out of pocket at the time of purchase.
Mr. [redacted]’s claims have absolutely no basis and we consider this matter closed.
We are in receipt of Mr. [redacted]’s response to our May 18th reply. As we stated in our response, we would like the opportunity to re-examine Mr. [redacted]’s Flex to re-verify that the replacement of the body control module will fix the current issues. We stand by our contention that the APIM that was replaced last fall and the BCM that is currently suggested are both necessary repairs. Until we can inspect the vehicle again to find another solution, this is the recommendation that stands. This was not a haphazard diagnosis. As Mr. [redacted] stated in his letter, we spent a great deal of time making sure that we could capture the vehicle’s fail so that we could get a proper diagnosis.
No manufacturer or repair facility can guarantee that another concern or similar concern will never happen with the onboard computer systems. We can only do our very best to ensure that we have diagnosed vehicles with all the means that the manufacturer has provided to us.
We once again extend our offer to do a complimentary re-inspection of Mr. [redacted]’s Flex as a goodwill gesture. We would be happy to provide Mr. [redacted] with copies of all his repair orders and our diagnosis should he choose to have a different Ford dealer of his choosing access his situation. All Ford Manufactured parts come with a 2 year unlimited mileage warranty that is good at any Ford or Lincoln repair facility.
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
We, as customers, are trusting this business with our family's vehicle; a vehicle that takes kids to and from school, to and from practices, and around town. We should be able to trust that there is going to be a high level of due diligence when diagnosing a problem which is safety related. Our family vehicle was left with Titus Will for nearly 2 weeks while they drove it to and from varying locations by different employees to try to recreate the symptoms in Nov/Dec. When the car finally did exhibit the symptoms, all that was done was that it was hooked up to a diagnostic computer to check codes. A computer was replaced, yet no mention of them checking and verifying that there was nothing wrong with the Tire Pressure Monitoring System or the AdvanceTrac system, messages that were being displayed in the vehicle. We fully authorized this with the reasonable understanding that the service provider would be thorough and make sure that what they were stating was wrong was what was actually wrong.
Nearly 3 months later, the vehicle begins to exhibit the EXACT same symptoms as in Nov/Dec. We notified Eric and we were told to bring it in. By the time we arrived, the car was running as normal. Eric said that there was noting that they could or would do until the car is exhibiting symptoms. Now, we are bringing our family's vehicle back in with the EXACT SAME symptoms that were being exhibited in Nov/Dec and Feb/Mar, and Apr/May. Less then 6 months after the 'fix', we are being told that, after hooking it up to a diagnostic computer, a different computer is the problem. It appears that, regardless of anything found during their offer of inspection, that a computer is getting replaced. This all seems too improbable; two different computers dying within months of each other within 4 years of manufacture causing the EXACT SAME SYMPTOMS. I work as a computer technician and know that I cannot solely rely on diagnostic reports, it takes further investigation, especially when I get a call back from a customer with the same issue as before.
Furthermore, the issue with the aftermarket remote starter was something that we took back as we were told that it should work once the computer was replaced. It did not when we got it back. So, we called and were told by Eric that we could bring it back and they would look at it. We did, they looked at it and repaired it. We were told not to worry about any cost.
We want assurance that the issue will be thoroughly investigated, with an exact cause that is provable. We have been dealing with the same issue after we were told that it was fixed.
Sincerely,[redacted]
RE: [redacted] File #[redacted]On April 4,2 016, Vin [redacted] {[redacted]) was towed to Titus-Will Ford with a no start condition (see attached repair order #[redacted]}. Ross Y[redacted], a Titus-Will Senior Master Ford Technician with over 10 years Ford experience reviewed the vehicle and...
found that the timing belt was broken.[redacted] was informed that the belt was broken and agreed to the replacement. The belt was replaced per Ford Motor Company repair manual page 303-0B1 (attached). The procedure does not require nor does it suggest replacement of the tensioner assembly. Secondly, the 2.0 SPI engine is a non-interference engine and valve damage is highly unlikely to occur with a broken timing belt. No engine damage had occurred at that time.[redacted] contacted our service manager, Shannon S** on 6/1/17 and requested that Titus-Will pay for an engine replacement. Mr. S** informed him that the 2.0 SPI engine is a non-interference engine and that he felt Titus-Will had performed the correct repair (to Ford specifications) over a year earlier when the vehicle was brought in. Mr. S** did tell Mr. [redacted] that he would do further research.After researching the situation, we feel that we have done the proper repairs that were warranted on 4/4/16. While the failure of the tensioner a year after the repair is unfortunate, it is not tied to the repair. The failure of a tensioner is generally preceded by plenty of notice of sound. Once again, it is extremely unlikely that engine failure would have been caused by the failure of a tensioner considering this was a non-interference engine.We consider this matter closed.Shannon S**Titus-Will Ford Service Manager
We have reviewed Mrs. [redacted]'s complaint. Our Service Manager, Dave S[redacted] is reaching out to the customer today to let her know that Titus-Will Toyota isgoing to absorb the cost to have the seatbelt replaced with a new seatbelt. We cannot confirm what happened to the belt so feel...
it is in the best interest ofthe customer to replace her seatbelt and make sure she is happy with her interaction with Titus-Will. We consider this matter closed. Titus-Will Toyota
Had the mechanic used due diligence as expected, he would have realized the engine on the vehicle was replaced at some point and it's not the same non interference engine that the car had originally. Checking the Vin on the door the repair was as you're stating. Checking the engine you actually worked on says otherwise. It's a2.0 split port which is very much an interference engine and the tensioner should have been replaced.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]
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. Sincerely, [redacted]
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: First of all I was not informed of this charge. Second they made me pay this fee up front when I paid for the vehicle at time of purchase. Where is my refund it was not discounted when I paid off the loan. Sincerely,[redacted]
February 5, 2016
Attn: Revdex.com
Re: [redacted] ...⇄ ID# [redacted]
We are in receipt of Mr. [redacted]’s latest response. Mr. [redacted] did not pay any finance charges at the time of his vehicle purchase. In fact, Mr. [redacted] paid nothing out of pocket at the time of purchase.
Mr. [redacted]’s claims have absolutely no basis and we consider this matter closed.
Wes P[redacted] �...⇄ General Manager ...⇄ Ford
Revdex.com
RE: [redacted], Complaint #[redacted]
We are in receipt of Mr. [redacted]’s response to our May 18th reply. As we stated in our response, we would like the opportunity to re-examine Mr. [redacted]’s Flex to re-verify that the replacement of the body control module will fix the current issues. We stand by our contention that the APIM that was replaced last fall and the BCM that is currently suggested are both necessary repairs. Until we can inspect the vehicle again to find another solution, this is the recommendation that stands. This was not a haphazard diagnosis. As Mr. [redacted] stated in his letter, we spent a great deal of time making sure that we could capture the vehicle’s fail so that we could get a proper diagnosis.
No manufacturer or repair facility can guarantee that another concern or similar concern will never happen with the onboard computer systems. We can only do our very best to ensure that we have diagnosed vehicles with all the means that the manufacturer has provided to us.
We once again extend our offer to do a complimentary re-inspection of Mr. [redacted]’s Flex as a goodwill gesture. We would be happy to provide Mr. [redacted] with copies of all his repair orders and our diagnosis should he choose to have a different Ford dealer of his choosing access his situation. All Ford Manufactured parts come with a 2 year unlimited mileage warranty that is good at any Ford or Lincoln repair facility.
Shannon S**
Service Manager
Titus-Will Ford
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because:
We, as customers, are trusting this business with our family's vehicle; a vehicle that takes kids to and from school, to and from practices, and around town. We should be able to trust that there is going to be a high level of due diligence when diagnosing a problem which is safety related. Our family vehicle was left with Titus Will for nearly 2 weeks while they drove it to and from varying locations by different employees to try to recreate the symptoms in Nov/Dec. When the car finally did exhibit the symptoms, all that was done was that it was hooked up to a diagnostic computer to check codes. A computer was replaced, yet no mention of them checking and verifying that there was nothing wrong with the Tire Pressure Monitoring System or the AdvanceTrac system, messages that were being displayed in the vehicle. We fully authorized this with the reasonable understanding that the service provider would be thorough and make sure that what they were stating was wrong was what was actually wrong.
Nearly 3 months later, the vehicle begins to exhibit the EXACT same symptoms as in Nov/Dec. We notified Eric and we were told to bring it in. By the time we arrived, the car was running as normal. Eric said that there was noting that they could or would do until the car is exhibiting symptoms. Now, we are bringing our family's vehicle back in with the EXACT SAME symptoms that were being exhibited in Nov/Dec and Feb/Mar, and Apr/May. Less then 6 months after the 'fix', we are being told that, after hooking it up to a diagnostic computer, a different computer is the problem. It appears that, regardless of anything found during their offer of inspection, that a computer is getting replaced. This all seems too improbable; two different computers dying within months of each other within 4 years of manufacture causing the EXACT SAME SYMPTOMS. I work as a computer technician and know that I cannot solely rely on diagnostic reports, it takes further investigation, especially when I get a call back from a customer with the same issue as before.
Furthermore, the issue with the aftermarket remote starter was something that we took back as we were told that it should work once the computer was replaced. It did not when we got it back. So, we called and were told by Eric that we could bring it back and they would look at it. We did, they looked at it and repaired it. We were told not to worry about any cost.
We want assurance that the issue will be thoroughly investigated, with an exact cause that is provable. We have been dealing with the same issue after we were told that it was fixed.
Sincerely,[redacted]
RE: [redacted] File #[redacted]On April 4,2 016, Vin [redacted] {[redacted]) was towed to Titus-Will Ford with a no start condition (see attached repair order #[redacted]}. Ross Y[redacted], a Titus-Will Senior Master Ford Technician with over 10 years Ford experience reviewed the vehicle and...
found that the timing belt was broken.[redacted] was informed that the belt was broken and agreed to the replacement. The belt was replaced per Ford Motor Company repair manual page 303-0B1 (attached). The procedure does not require nor does it suggest replacement of the tensioner assembly. Secondly, the 2.0 SPI engine is a non-interference engine and valve damage is highly unlikely to occur with a broken timing belt. No engine damage had occurred at that time.[redacted] contacted our service manager, Shannon S** on 6/1/17 and requested that Titus-Will pay for an engine replacement. Mr. S** informed him that the 2.0 SPI engine is a non-interference engine and that he felt Titus-Will had performed the correct repair (to Ford specifications) over a year earlier when the vehicle was brought in. Mr. S** did tell Mr. [redacted] that he would do further research.After researching the situation, we feel that we have done the proper repairs that were warranted on 4/4/16. While the failure of the tensioner a year after the repair is unfortunate, it is not tied to the repair. The failure of a tensioner is generally preceded by plenty of notice of sound. Once again, it is extremely unlikely that engine failure would have been caused by the failure of a tensioner considering this was a non-interference engine.We consider this matter closed.Shannon S**Titus-Will Ford Service Manager
We have reviewed Mrs. [redacted]'s complaint. Our Service Manager, Dave S[redacted] is reaching out to the customer today to let her know that Titus-Will Toyota isgoing to absorb the cost to have the seatbelt replaced with a new seatbelt. We cannot confirm what happened to the belt so feel...
it is in the best interest ofthe customer to replace her seatbelt and make sure she is happy with her interaction with Titus-Will. We consider this matter closed. Titus-Will Toyota
Had the mechanic used due diligence as expected, he would have realized the engine on the vehicle was replaced at some point and it's not the same non interference engine that the car had originally. Checking the Vin on the door the repair was as you're stating. Checking the engine you actually worked on says otherwise. It's a2.0 split port which is very much an interference engine and the tensioner should have been replaced.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]