- Report: #241363
Complaint Review: AAMCO - Roseville California
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
AAMCO
801 Riverside Avenue, Ste. W Roseville, 95678 California, U.S.A.
Phone:
916-773-6455
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
AAMCO Ripoff dishonest owner and mechanics i paid for extended warranty and they denied the fact i have proof they are conartists and shaddy Roseville California
I took my Ford F250 4x4 into Aamco for a rebuilt tranny. They replaced it with what the owner said was a universal 2 WD tranny that fits 4x4's. I was not informed of this till after it broke the second time. I was not asked nor informed of their decision and they charged me 2500 to fix it the first time. After it broke I took it them because I had purchased the extended warranty.
They (Aamco) said I did not have the extended warranty and it would be 2350 to replace this one. I have proof I paid for the warranty and the contract shows that I did not decline the warranty when offered. The owner (Thom) said that he doesnt use the box on the contract that stated i declined (which i did not) and that i would have to pay for a new tranny all over again.
I finaced the first tranny and paid with a check $300 for the extended warranty because they would not finance the warranty. Aamco is saying that this check doesnt count as a receipt and that they never gave me the extended warranty.
Charles
Auburn, California
U.S.A.
They (Aamco) said I did not have the extended warranty and it would be 2350 to replace this one. I have proof I paid for the warranty and the contract shows that I did not decline the warranty when offered. The owner (Thom) said that he doesnt use the box on the contract that stated i declined (which i did not) and that i would have to pay for a new tranny all over again.
I finaced the first tranny and paid with a check $300 for the extended warranty because they would not finance the warranty. Aamco is saying that this check doesnt count as a receipt and that they never gave me the extended warranty.
Charles
Auburn, California
U.S.A.
1 Updates & Rebuttals
Ann
Los Angeles,California,
United States
Re:the angst-ridden comment re the consumer's complaint
#2Consumer Comment
Mon, July 19, 2021
Condolences to the person who took the shop on trust. There's a repair shop on PFE Road nearby that offers Jasper trannies with a nationwide, 3 yr/100k warranty. This place has its drawbacks per their online record, their testimonials page notwithstanding (and they do business under another name, though the one you have is still the one presented online).
Unless one wishes to appear an absolute shill of the company involved (and who has an issue with spelling warranty)- the losses to the consumer pertinent to the company's performance (lack of) are real, and can be understood briefly by taking a look into this concept: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-715 .
Instead of undertaking a tirade against a victim of possible bad business practice, perhaps consider that people take the offerings of presumably reputable businesses concerns in bona fide, toward usual, customary and resonable expectations based in general experience. A look at understanding basic commercial Law regarding transactions may help the literate- https://learntheucc.wordpress.com/tag/course-of-performance/
There are those businesses that take advantage of a customer's trust, as well their necessity and reasonable expectations- after someone entrusts their vehicle to one shop, what reasonable person would expect a) to be misinformed and b) to need to pay to take it to another shop for a "proper" repair and agreement, the average person not being either a mechanic or endowed of a towing company, much less a whole shop, of their own?
Get real is what comes to mind. If someone takes on the faith of presentation of all indicators- a shop site, active business, a reputable name, and some seller's style that seems reasonable to most anyone-
they have every reason to expect performance consistent with diligent business, not a shuck-and-jive run-around when it comes to fulfilling the impression intentionally made upon the consumer.
If this isn't some shady seller on a street corner but a real business that anyone would be inclined to trust saying "We've got you covered" to make the deal-
they can consider being good for the impression that they intentionally make. What good is any vendor who supplies shoddy product/service then dodges responsibility for their own contribution? Misrepresentation is covered at Law, too.
