Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:21/03/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Issue is a dispute on billing for a side by side (OHV) repair. Dropped off in Oct 2024 after it was partially submerged in a puddle, asked to get it running properly. Original business was ****** **********, at some point it was sold to this business. Same individuals involved throughout. Called for an update, was told we were waiting on a fan, estimated $3500 cost. Called for another update, was told they rebuilt the engine. Authorization was not provided for this. After back and forth, shop agreed to drop the labour charges (conversation recorded, summary attached, fault on their behalf admitted). We requested all documentation and were provided what they referenced on the phone as "the original partial work order" under ******, another invoice with multiple parts duplications (admitted to by them in email) ($2765.50) totaling $10+k. While attempting to get confirmation of labor charges dropped in writing, shop claimed a further $1k repair was needed. Finally got them to commit to a price for the repairs in writing. When arranging pickup details (phone conversation), shop changed tactics, said original ****** work order stood, agreement was only for "their engine repair" and the final other repair was presented on separate invoice (including part quoted on original invoice from them). Also sent an email stating all would need to be paid in full or we'd be charged $7/day storage fees (not in any previous documents) and threatened to return machine in a box of parts. Final invoice still incorrectly states KM In and Out. We have also involved RCMP and informed them of the situation as we are not comfortable picking up the machine from them alone at this point. Nothing paid to date.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 22/03/2024

  Thank you for asking us for information regarding this
  complaint. As requested, we are sending you information without names or other
  identifying information. Please contact me if you have any questions, as I
  would gladly speak to somebody about this.
  
  
  
  In October of 2023, the customer dropped of a ***** SXS1000
  for repair. Our parts person talked with them and took the information. It was
  reported that the unit had been submerged, resulting in running and drivability
  issues, and that the customer had already changed the oil 4-5 times.
  
  The engine oil required 2 more changes to be reasonable for
  testing, as well as the air filter required replacement as it was contaminated
  from the unit being submerged. The unit exhibited several trouble codes when
  tested with our ***** diagnostic equipment. While troubleshooting this unit it
  was particularly difficult to diagnose. It had difficulty shifting properly
  through the gears, particularly in automatic mode. Our diagnosis was that the
  engine health was affecting the operation of the transmission, and further
  analysis would be required. We noticed during our testing and troubleshooting
  that the cooling fan was not working as well. Inspection of the fan found that
  it was physically unable to move as it was blocked with mud and debris.
  Cleaning of the fan did result in it functioning, but there is a high
  probability that the fan motor will fail prematurely as a result. The unit
  required washing in order to disassemble and access the engine for disassembly
  and inspection. The engine cylinder head was removed in order to get an initial
  analysis. At this point in time the customer was contacted via telephone. The
  customer was informed that the current diagnosis was that at least one
  connecting rod bearing on the crankshaft had failed, and that if this was
  correct the repair would be quite costly. They were also informed that the
  engine would need to be removed from the unit and completely disassembled in
  order to determine conclusively what repairs would be required. The customer
  was warned that this would be quite an expensive undertaking. Further, the
  existing trouble code had still not been diagnosed. The response received was
  that it would have to be done because it's no good the way it is now. (Note:
  Not verbatim) At this time the issue with the cooling fan was discussed. The
  customer was given the option to leave the fan "as-is" and replace it
  when it failed completely, or to have us order it at this time. The primary
  reason that this was discussed was that ***** ***** ****** did not have stock
  on the fan, and it would have to be backordered with an unknown ETA. The
  customer asked that we order the fan, in order to avoid the possibility of the
  fan failing completely and not being available.
  
  Note: This is the point in time where the customer NOW
  claims that he was given an estimate of $3500.00 for the repair. This is
  absolutely false. The customer's bill at this point was already nearing the
  $2000.00 mark, and there is absolutely no possible way that the engine could be
  removed, disassembled, reassembled, and reinstalled for $1500.00, even if no
  parts were required. This unit has a cab enclosure and other accessories that
  add additional time to what would already be a very time-consuming process.
  
  The engine was removed from the unit and disassembled. There
  was damage to the connecting rods and camshaft as expected. At this point a
  full and complete estimate of labor and parts is normally relayed to the
  customer. This did not happen in this case, in part because of the customer
  being made aware of what the suspected damage was, what it would entail, and
  his response of (something along the lines of) it's no good to me the way it is
  now. Parts were ordered and the unit sat awaiting parts. During this time the
  customer called to inquire about his machine and was inaccurately told that it
  was ready for pick up. This mistake was made because there were two similar
  machines that were in for repair, and the other machine was completed. We had
  also just implemented a new computer program for invoicing, and this added to
  the mix-up as we weren't familiar with the new system.
  
  PLEASE NOTE that during the conversation when the two
  machines were mixed up, that the customer was told that their repairs cost
  approximately $3500.00, as that was the cost of the similar machine's repairs.
  The customer seemed very surprised that the repairs only cost $3500.00 and were
  already completed, and indicated that they expected a much more expensive
  repair.
  
  The customer was called back very shortly after this phone
  call and was informed of the mistake. The service manager apologized profusely
  for the mistake, and specifically recalls telling the customer that their
  machine was "Nowhere near ready, and the bill will be nowhere near only
  $3500.00!". The customer was informed that we were waiting for parts, and
  some were on backorder.
  
  Once all the parts came in, the engine was repaired and
  assembled with the new parts. It was reinstalled in the machine, all settings
  and adjustments made, fluids filled, etc. The unit could now be run and further
  tested as required. The customer was notified that the engine repairs were
  completed, but that there was still a trouble code being displayed that needed
  addressed. When the customer was told what their current total was
  (approximately) they seemed very surprised. They said that they thought
  "someone" had told them it would be about $3500.00, but they weren't
  sure who said it or when it was said. No staff member recalls this
  conversation. The customer then said that they didn't expect a bill for more
  than "about $5500.00". They expressed concern that they were not
  notified that the repairs would cost so much, and that they did not give
  authorization for such repairs. The conversation was polite and cordial and
  resulted in an agreement that we would discuss options as a business, and the
  customer would consider their options as well.
  
  A few days later another two telephone conversations took
  place where the customer and their spouse/life-partner were both speaking with
  us. During these conversations, we tried to discuss different options or
  possibilities for a resolution. Apparently, the customer(s) recorded these
  conversations. we were not aware of this, but in a way, we are glad that they
  did, as it will confirm our information to be accurate. You have received a
  summary of the conversation from the customer(s) already. If you have the
  recorded telephone conversations available to you, then you will be able to
  verify the following:
  
  We agree with the customer(s) that they deserved to be given
  a full and complete estimate for the work, and that we should have acquired
  authorization from them prior to completion. We accept responsibility for this
  oversite and would like to rectify the situation. We understand that had we given
  the customer(s) a full and complete estimate once the engine was disassembled
  and assessed that they would have had several options. They could have chosen
  to not get the work done and picked up their machine in pieces, they could have
  asked if we would discount the invoice, they could have financed the invoice,
  or they could have paid in instalments. We acknowledge that by us repairing the
  unit that we essentially took away the ability for the customer(s) to choose
  how to proceed. We understand that the customer(s) feels they did not have the
  option to decide what to do, and we want to give them the choice. This was all
  communicated in the recorded telephone conversation. We wanted feedback from
  them on how they would like to resolve this. We gave several suggestions and
  were hoping for some input from them as to if they had any suggestions. We
  suggested that they imagine that we went back in time to when the engine was
  apart, and that an estimate was given to them. How would they like to proceed?
  If they would have wanted to see if we could offer them a discount, then that
  option would have been there, and given the current situation, it definitely
  is. If they would have sought financing, that is still an option, and even
  something that we may be able to assist with. If they would have wanted to pay
  in installments, that's something we could have explored. If they would have
  chosen to not get the repairs done, and picked it up in pieces, then even that
  is still an option. They would have to pay for the work done until the point
  where the estimate should have been provided, and It would mean us
  disassembling the engine and removing the new parts, but if that's what they
  would like then that's what we would do. At that point it was even offered that
  we charge NO labor for the assembly and installation of the new parts
  (providing they paid for the parts). The customer(s) offered no suggestions as
  to how they wanted the issue to be resolved, appeared to not want to discuss
  options for a resolution, indicated that they would be seeking advice from a
  lawyer and possibly taking legal action, and requested documents be forwarded
  to them via e-mail. We agreed to this and sent the requested documents. These
  documents included an invoice from the previous business at which the customer
  originally dealt with, as the business was sold to a new owner in December. The
  invoice sent to them from us for the work in question was printed from a
  program they we are currently using, but at the time was quite new to the
  staff. Somehow when the parts department was adding parts to the invoice some
  parts were accidentally input twice. I can only speculate at this time as to
  why or how that happened, but unfortunately the invoice wasn't proofed prior to
  sending. You have received copies of these invoices, as well as the follow up
  e-mails. In the first e-mail response (after us sending the documents for the
  customer(s) to review with legal council) the customer(s) brought three
  inconsistencies/duplications to our attention, and they indicated that they
  would be willing to move forward to resolve the matter of the unauthorized
  charges to which we were willing to charge no labor for. This email is dated
  March 4th, 2024. We replied back the following day, reporting that we had
  received the email and noted the duplications. We also advised the customer(s)
  that we had found other duplications as well and that we would correct these
  issues prior to final billing. We also asked about the trouble code issue that
  had been present and advised them of what the cost would be to repair that
  issue. We asked for authorization prior to repair to avoid any future problems.
  The customer(s) replied back on March 6th giving consent to the additional
  repair, with a provision that the original labor costs be deducted from the
  final invoice. We responded back the same day clarifying that we were not
  offering to deduct all the labor charges. We clearly stated that labor charges
  will be charged for all authorized repairs, but that we would not charge for
  anything that they did not pre-authorize. It was also clearly stated the amount
  that we would be charging in parts and labor for the engine repair. We received
  an email asking us to proceed with the additional repairs, and e-mailed the
  customer(s) when it was completed. The customer(s) advised that they would pick
  up the unit on Saturday, March 16th,2024. We sent a couple of emails saying
  that we would like to be around for the customer(s) when they came and asked
  for a timeline to ensure that the parties involved in the issues and resolution
  could be present to help assist the customer(s). When we hadn't heard anything
  by Friday, we phoned to inquire and left a voice mail message. The customer(s)
  called back and gave us a timeline. To ensure that there were no further complications
  we wanted to review everything with the customer(s) and verify that even though
  some issues had arisen with us completing repairs without prior authorization,
  that the issue was resolved. At this point in time the customer(s) claimed that
  they had not agreed to pay these amounts and became aggressive and
  argumentative. They said that they would not pay, and that we would hear from
  their lawyer. At that point they were told that that may be the best way for
  them to proceed (as it appeared that pleasing them and coming to a resolution
  wasn't working) and they were sent a final invoice/demand letter.
  
  
  
  The following is a personal note, and not a part of our
  official reply:
  
  My name is *** **** and I am the service manager for S5
  Powersports. *** (LAST NAME?) purchased this business (formerly Glenn's Sports
  Line) as a lifelong dream and puts customer service above everything else. I
  share his sentiment on this and we take great pride in providing fantastic
  customer service. I have been in this industry for over 30 years, and have a
  reputation for treating customers fairly and professionally. Over the years I
  have had to resolve a few complaints and have typically done so without issue.
  I have NEVER dealt with a customer quite like this. I believe they are using
  the fact that we admitted fault (to not receiving proper pre-authorization
  prior to repair) to try to take advantage of us. We were very clear in our
  communications with them, especially after learning that they would be
  conveying all our correspondence to a lawyer. The claim that we "changed
  tactics" is completely false. They were sent the work Order from Glenn's
  Sports Line in February and didn't ever question it. We specifically said that
  the cost of $5448.27 was for parts and labor for the engine repair, and we made
  it very clear that the repair for the additional repair ($1047.12) was just
  that... an ADDITIONAL repair. They authorized these repairs and then reneged
  and threatened legal action. At this point I was very frustrated and tried to
  remain my composure. I told them that they should go that route and have their
  lawyer contact us. I did not "threaten" to take their unit apart and
  leave it in pieces. We had an agreement with them to not charge any labor for
  the assembly of their engine with new parts, and they would pay for the parts
  and the authorized labor. Because they reneged on that the day before they
  planned to pick it up, I feel like I'm running out of options. The problem
  arose when the engine was disassembled and assessed, and they were not given a
  full and complete estimate like I should have given them. Me returning it to
  that point may be the only option I have. It makes more sense to me for them to
  pay for the parts, and pay no labor for the parts to be replaced, and the
  engine to be reinstalled, but that appears to be an option they have refused.
  The final email I sent them indicated that they would be charged a storage fee
  if they didn't care to resolve this issue and pick up their unit. It is true
  that this was not something that was previously discussed, but we didn't feel
  the need to do so prior to these recent developments. We also didn't mention to
  them that we will be charging interest on the unpaid bill, but that is
  something that we reserve the right to do if we feel it's necessary. We are
  probably some of the nicest and easiest people to deal with, and really want to
  make our customers happy and have an ongoing mutually beneficial relationship
  with them, but in this case we have accepted that this isn't possible. When
  threatened we legal action we responded in kind. Please reach out to me at any
  time for clarity or more information. I would actually like to speak with
  someone regarding this situation. ************* ** ************************

  Customer Answer

  Date: 31/03/2024

  
  
  Complaint: 21466134
  

  We are rejecting this response because:

  It is clear from your response that improper/poor procedures
  and training, incorrect documentation and miscommunication, if not misleading
  business practices, have let to the dispute we face. The level of detail
  recalled in your response to the ****** ******** ****** was much higher and
  clearly detailed than any our communications, which we have been careful to
  document once it became apparent there could be no level of confidence held
  with the documentation provided to us by your business nor recollection of
  verbal discussions that were agreed upon by both parties. 
  
  We maintain our assertion that an agreement to cover all
  repairs was reached and the invoices from the original business and the final
  repair on the side-by-side were included in this agreement. Although we are not
  experts in business law, we are trying to maintain our rights as consumers and
  come to an agreement that was fair to both parties. Your additions or
  implications that storage fees and interest will be charged on the outstanding
  invoices are considered to be unfair business practices as we have not agreed
  to these modifications of our original contract with you and consider this
  pressure to agree to your terms while trying to resolve a consumer dispute
  caused by your business errors. If the business is unwilling to resolve this
  dispute through the *** for the total of $5448.27, we will advance this
  complaint to Service Alberta for an investigation under the Consumer Protection
  Act.
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* ****** *** **** ******