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:18/03/2025

  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.

  My son purchased 2024 B** ******** on February 14, 2025 from Central Service Recreation (saleperson *** ********). **** took the snowmobile for a ride on February 15th, at the 44km mark the snowmobile lost power. It was returned on the 17th of February. It was a faulty injector on the PTO side, part was flown in and replaced by a mechanic on site at the dealership. Pic of email attached showing the issue. We picked the *** *** back up on the 21st of February. He rode the ****** again on March 2nd at 11:30 am.. He was riding with a **** ******* and we have an official ****** report. My son noticed a liquid coming from the top of the machine on the right side. He stopped took off his glove and smelt the fluid, new it was gas. He jumped off the machine and seconds later it caught fire. Central Service recreation said this was the second machine that had caught fire within the last few weeks. The other persons machine was covered under warranty- as we were told because he paid cash and was a good customer of theirs. My sons *** *** replacement was denied by ****  The dealership has the money, and my son has to pay a loan with no snowmobile. We are seeking the amount of money back that he paid. We have a **** file ***********

  Business Response

  Date: 31/03/2025

  Good day,
  
  First thing I must add is that I have never met Ms.B*****,
  she has never even been in my store, only spoke to her a few times on the phone
  in mid February, during the purchase process with her son. We never spoke a
  word to each other after the unit was taken home after Feb.14th. Our few chats
  were always polite and professional. Next time we spoke was after some weeks
  passed, after the process of notifying the manufacturer about the fire incident
  and waiting for a decision on a possible replacement unit. Once she found out
  that her son was referred to his insurer for coverage, she phoned me on Mar.14th with demands and deadlines, she was very upset and aggressive. She is not the
  client, her son/father are on the bill of sale. However, I understand her
  concerns and was willing to speak with her. The sled was originally taken home
  Feb14th. On Sunday, Feb 16th the client emailed me at 6:13 pm to
  inform that the sled was performing poorly and down on power. Later that Sunday
  evening I noticed his email and promptly contacted my service team to advise of
  the issue and set up an appointment for the next day, Monday the 17th at 8:30 am. Emailed the client at 11:10 pm(Sunday night) to ease his mind and
  inform him that I had set up an appointment, the service guys will be waiting
  for it the next morning. The sled was then dropped off and we immediately took
  it in and diagnosed the sled with a bad pto injector. The client was informed
  that we knew the issue and that the part was on emergency freight. Feb.18th I emailed the client to inform him of the status of the part, freight was
  delayed because of weather. Also, told him that *** paid for extended warranty
  for him, a $2,255+tax value, an option giving him 2 years of extra piece of
  mind as a gift from ***. His response was “wow, unreal service appreciate it a
  lot buddy my next machine will be from your dealer as well.” As he had an issue
  early on, I felt that he could use a friendly gesture. Feb 21st the
  unit was ready, injector installed/inspected and test run then inspected again,
  all was fine. Informed the clients grandfather to come pick it up, certified
  and ready. On Mar.2nd, after over 300 kms he says, a couple of days
  riding, the sled caught fire while heading home. The client and Ms B***** maintain that we left a clamp loose on the fuel line and it later caused the
  unit to burn. We didn’t work on nor disturb the fuel line. Also, there is no
  screw tightening of a clamp on the fuel line at all, it isn’t a traditional
  hose clamp whereby you manually turn the screw until tight enough. It’s a
  compression clamp that is installed with a special tool. They may not realize that the clamp is a compression clamp, built to withstand the 44lbs of
  pressure that the fuel line is under. Once installed, it is difficult to remove,
  has to be cut off to remove, in fact, a brand new pressure clamp must be used
  to reattach the line to withstand the pressure it’s under. We had no reason to
  even touch it. With that being said, if the line wasn’t attached properly, or,
  “left loose” as they repeat, the line would likely blow off as soon as the sled
  was started from the 44lbs of pressure. It certainly would not last 300+ kms
  before coming off as admittedly stated by the client and Ms.B***** and the **** officer. This is where they are wrong, with baseless accusations that we
  errored in our work. If the work we performed was compared to a surgeons work,
  it could be argued to be like clipping a toe nail. It’s an important but easy
  job. No need to suspect us of mishandling the fuel line, we didn’t need to go
  near nor even touch it in order to replace the injector. Whatever went on with
  the sled to cause it to burn is 100% impossible to determine as nothing
  remained to scrutinize. *** knows this, their legal dept understands this also.
  The fact is that the sled was a total loss with nothing left to inspect nor to
  make determinations. In other words, clearly refer to insurance. On Mar. 17th,
  Ms.B***** stated that after *** found a replacement sled for the client on
  Mar.10th , which would’ve been over a week after receiving her sons
  signed incident report, she states it was only then that I heard that he had
  insurance, and that’s when the case was closed. This is her “whole issue” that
  she has a problem with, as she stated on VOCM radio morning show. Well, his signed incident report dated Mar 3rd , from day 1, a week earlier, has his insurer and policy # in it. She
  actually posted this report on ** showing the date, then quickly removed it? *** legal has this screenshotted before removal, as proof. The fact that he had insurance had nothing to do with the decision, *** knew over a week earlier. There are several more
  issues with the clients statement, says he had $160 ******* **** gloves on, in
  the vid and pics he provided, he has far cheaper linesmans gloves on? Also, on
  his numerous comments/posts on his ** he says that he had burned or melted
  pants and jumped off? They weren’t listed in the items lost section of his
  signed incident report? This was only mentioned weeks later. His report said a
  GPS(which isn’t visible on the sled), **** gloves when he actually had linesman
  gloves on, a trail pass and spare belt. Weeks later, after being turned down, only now mentions jumping off with pants melting from the fire? His report
  has no mention of burned pants, actually states “I was very lucky that my
  suit never caught on fire.” "my machine caught fire while I was riding on the groomed trail. I stopped and jumped off as fast as I could and moved away from the machine in case it exploded." A story cannot waiver after signing a report, conflicting with
  the **** report...which states that “realized it was fuel he stopped the sled
  and immediately got off, fire started very quickly.” Inconsistent stories simply can't be, it's not me that makes this decision...it's a forensic expert that you have to satisfy, or not. These are their
  words that may have thrown things off the rails, not mine. Any wavering from
  the signed statements is a red light for any investigation. Again, doesn't matter to me but were pointed out during the investigation. Staying on point is key. 
  
  However, the picture of the sled on the clients *********
  with the skis pointed towards the sky, while over 40% break in period
  remaining(% admitted repeatedly in his statements on his personal **), may be argued to be related to the fire. These high performance sleds are designed
  for aggressive riding, but in several feet of snow, not inches of snow over
  hard packed/rain dampened/wind blown conditions. High revving and stunt
  manoeuvres, pounding the sled like this are strictly prohibited during the
  vehicles break in period. This is the time to gently run the sled and give
  a chance to let the engine run, try things out with a logical/gentle and
  calculated process to ensure it has the longest life possible and prevent any
  hardship. Once this crucial process is done, the sled can be ridden much harder
  as it should’ve been brought back to the dealer by then, factory parameters
  checked/inspected/oils & fluids changed or inspected/track
  tensioned/inspect fuel lines/etc. This is the time whereby any potential issues
  with the sled that could’ve developed during the break in ***, can be
  discovered and addressed before stepping up the performance of the sled. There
  is a high possibility that these jarring manoeuvres, may have disturbed the
  clamp, maybe from blunt impact. Landing on hard pack icy snow is violent, it’s
  common sense. Landing in lots of snow is soft and doesn’t exert the same
  extreme pressures on the sled. These sleds are tough but far from invincible,
  if broken in properly/inspected & operated in appropriate conditions, these
  unfortunate outcomes can often be avoided. There is also no way that I can 100%
  say that this was the issue and not what I'm implying, it’s just amongst the many possibilities that can
  be suggested or argued. Not trying to point blame at him with certainty and
  they absolutely should not do so to us, I’m just exhibiting a possibility. Maybe it was a clamp issue, maybe something else. It’s
  actually a waste of time because nobody can ever know what happened with
  certainty, so, nobody should be trying to hang the blame on eachother, again,
  this is clearly an insurance matter. The last pic should illustrate the heart
  of any investigation, there is nothing left to investigate unfortunately. 
  
  The client and I got along famously, right up to the point
  that a replacement sled was turned down. We sure wish that we could undo this
  incident for sure, only a higher power may know what actually happened. He
  seems like a great fellow and client, passionate events like this can turn
  things upside down, I was 19 once and understand much of his feelings. But, I
  can say with 100% certainty that we did not have anything to do with the fuel
  line being any issue, we didn’t disturb it but did inspect it and it lasted for
  hundreds of kms, proving that the pressure clamp was fine…until maybe it
  wasn’t. If not attached properly it would come off likely immediately upon
  starting the sled because it's heavily pressurized.
  
  We understand the client and Ms B******* frustration and
  wish this never happened. We did all that we could to help and garnish a better
  result, but the situation is not an easy one and I also understand the
  manufacturers decision. Honestly, I viewed them as great customers moving
  forward and enjoyed dealing with them. It’s too bad, this unit is expensive and
  the situation is a tangle so I totally have to respect their passion. We also
  wish that their insurance would’ve paid them the full amount instead of leaving
  $3,000 to depreciation but I assume it’s their policy. This has already been scrutinized by forensic experts, it's been referred to insurance and is concluded. We wish them all the very best.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  **** ********
  
  *** ************** *****
  ************* **
  *** ***
  
  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/04/2025

   I am rejecting this response because:** ******** stated multiple times that this was a *** issue. When we asked if he wanted the
  remains of the *** ***- which we had with us, he said it wasn’t necessary and
  that the issue was with **** which he would be forwarding. The **** gloves   and the
  GPS was in the front container. We have the serial number.
  ** also mentioned that this was the second machine to burn within
  two weeks from this dealership and implied that the other customer was a long-time client of
  theirs, and replacing their machine was not an issue.  We don’t know what happened internally because
  we couldn’t open the hood to inspect the damage. Josh had to jump off the
  machine, and the crotch of his pants was scorched. When the machine was first
  returned, ** ******** again stated it was a *** problem.
  This machine was ridden diligently and not misused. It was never
  subjected to hard-packed snow impacts, and any assumptions to the contrary are
  incorrect. ** initially acknowledged the issue, spoke to Josh about it, and
  even located another Ski-Doo for him. He is a salesperson and even mentioned
  that the previous customer who experienced a similar issue was a good customer.
  Despite all this, ** did not take the remains of the machine,
  stating that forensics could not be performed because nothing was left.
  However, at the end of the conversation, he contradicted himself by saying that
  forensics had already closed the case. He then offered us a "good
  deal" on a side-by-side, which felt like an insult considering the
  circumstances.
  From the start, my son stated that this machine was a lemon and
  that something was clearly wrong. ** responded dismissively, saying, "This
  is not Walmart." We are seeking the full replacement cost of the machine,
  as insurance does not cover the full amount, and now our premium is increasing.
  Additionally, a mechanic from Central Service Recreation came to
  ** ******** office and mentioned that the rubber fuel line is known to break
  due to vibration, which could have contributed to the issue. The way this
  situation was handled was completely unacceptable. ** told us from the beginning
  that this IS a *** issue. A salesperson provides great service when making a
  sale, but once an issue arises, they want nothing to do with you and this in
  indeed what happened here.  "Extending
  a warranty gesture as he claims is a clear acknowledgment of potential issues,
  and calling it 'good customer service' is nothing more than a way to cover it
  up.
  I am seeking
  full replacement cost of this machine, my 19-year-old son was so proud and
  excited to buy his own ******* and chose that dealership himself. When the
  first issue arose, he told ** it was a lemon, but ** reassured him that it was
  under warranty. Then, after the machine burned to the ground in front of him,
  ** said it was a *** issue and located another *** ***—only to take that hope
  away and tell him to go through insurance instead. Now, he's left making
  payments on nothing but metal and ashes. Watching something he worked so hard
  for go up in flames right before his eyes was devastating, and the way this was
  handled has taken a serious toll on him mentally."