- Report: #66028
Complaint Review: Kwik Kar - Arlington Texas
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
Kwik Kar
4801 W. Sublett Arlington, 76017 Texas, U.S.A.
Phone:
817-563-1956
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Kwik Kar 'wants an apology for me speaking the truth about services I do not feel were even satisfactory. Arlington Texas
this is in response to Kwik Kar Lube & Oil rips off woman in Arlington Texas/report.
The crux of a libel or slander claim is a FALSE statement that damages a person's reputation.
If a defamation lawsuit is filed, various defenses are available to the defendant. The most important defense is that the defamatory statement was true, or at least substantially true. The principle behind this defense is that no one should be punished for speaking the truth, even if the truth is damaging to someone's reputation.
With the freedom-of-speech provision of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as its guiding star, the U.S. Supreme Court has by now firmly established that in defamation cases:
The plaintiff must prove that the defendant was at fault in making the defamatory statement.
The plaintiff must prove that he or she sustained actual damages as a result of the defamatory statement.
Because I used the freedom of speech granted to me by the constitution, Kwik Kar (Owner Rich Hall) sent me a certified letter that threatened legal action if I did not remove my entry from this website and replace it with an apology. Can you believe the nerve? I am dissatisfied with the service I received from Kwik Kar Lube and Oil and the owner expects me to apologize to them? I think Kwik Kar owes ME an apology.
On 10/04/02, I took my vehicle into the Kwik kar to h ave my brakes inspected and repaired if needed. The mechanic, (I believe it was Chris), allegedly took off the rear brakes and put new ones on, and supposedly replaced the rear passenger caliper. On 10/09/02 I returned to Kwik kar because I heard a noise in the rear wheels. Supposedly, the caliper had come loose and was rubbing; Chris allegedly repaired it.
On 10/18/02, I took my car back because the caliper was still making the same noise, a "bad caliper" was diagnosed and a new caliper was ordered. Allegedly the parts could NOT be guaranteed, but supposedly the repair was made. I then took the car back to Kwik kar one week later because my brakes were still not working coerrectly. Coincidentally my master cylinder was not functioning either. I bought my own master cylinder (trying to save some money since this was getting very expensive for me) and Kwik Kar installed it. The car did okay for a couple of weeks, but then I started hearing the same noises again. I took the car back on 11/05/02. Rich told me that I now needed a power booster. Again, Kwik kar allegedly did the repair. After repeated trips to Kwik Kar, I no longer felt comfortable with their work or diagnostic capabilities. My brakes were still not working to my satisfaction, so I decided to take my car to a different garage/mechanic. The neww mechanic discovered a pin sticking on the caliper as the cause of the noise; the caliper itself was okay. He also found that the powerbooster Kwik Kar allegedly replaced was broken, so he replaced it. The new mechanic had my brakes working correctly in one visit.
*I feel I was taken advantage of at Kwik Kar. As a single mother with four children, I do not have any extra money. I spent several hundred dollars at Kwik Kar and was not satisfied with their service or the way they treated my family and I.
And they demand that I apologize to them. GOOD LUCK.
Dana
Arlington, Texas
Dana
Arlington, Texas
U.S.A.
The crux of a libel or slander claim is a FALSE statement that damages a person's reputation.
If a defamation lawsuit is filed, various defenses are available to the defendant. The most important defense is that the defamatory statement was true, or at least substantially true. The principle behind this defense is that no one should be punished for speaking the truth, even if the truth is damaging to someone's reputation.
With the freedom-of-speech provision of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as its guiding star, the U.S. Supreme Court has by now firmly established that in defamation cases:
The plaintiff must prove that the defendant was at fault in making the defamatory statement.
The plaintiff must prove that he or she sustained actual damages as a result of the defamatory statement.
Because I used the freedom of speech granted to me by the constitution, Kwik Kar (Owner Rich Hall) sent me a certified letter that threatened legal action if I did not remove my entry from this website and replace it with an apology. Can you believe the nerve? I am dissatisfied with the service I received from Kwik Kar Lube and Oil and the owner expects me to apologize to them? I think Kwik Kar owes ME an apology.
On 10/04/02, I took my vehicle into the Kwik kar to h ave my brakes inspected and repaired if needed. The mechanic, (I believe it was Chris), allegedly took off the rear brakes and put new ones on, and supposedly replaced the rear passenger caliper. On 10/09/02 I returned to Kwik kar because I heard a noise in the rear wheels. Supposedly, the caliper had come loose and was rubbing; Chris allegedly repaired it.
On 10/18/02, I took my car back because the caliper was still making the same noise, a "bad caliper" was diagnosed and a new caliper was ordered. Allegedly the parts could NOT be guaranteed, but supposedly the repair was made. I then took the car back to Kwik kar one week later because my brakes were still not working coerrectly. Coincidentally my master cylinder was not functioning either. I bought my own master cylinder (trying to save some money since this was getting very expensive for me) and Kwik Kar installed it. The car did okay for a couple of weeks, but then I started hearing the same noises again. I took the car back on 11/05/02. Rich told me that I now needed a power booster. Again, Kwik kar allegedly did the repair. After repeated trips to Kwik Kar, I no longer felt comfortable with their work or diagnostic capabilities. My brakes were still not working to my satisfaction, so I decided to take my car to a different garage/mechanic. The neww mechanic discovered a pin sticking on the caliper as the cause of the noise; the caliper itself was okay. He also found that the powerbooster Kwik Kar allegedly replaced was broken, so he replaced it. The new mechanic had my brakes working correctly in one visit.
*I feel I was taken advantage of at Kwik Kar. As a single mother with four children, I do not have any extra money. I spent several hundred dollars at Kwik Kar and was not satisfied with their service or the way they treated my family and I.
And they demand that I apologize to them. GOOD LUCK.
Dana
Arlington, Texas
Dana
Arlington, Texas
U.S.A.
1 Updates & Rebuttals
Jacqueline
Hammond,Indiana,
U.S.A.
It sounds more like you need to write a certified letter for a LAWSUIT!!
#2Consumer Suggestion
Wed, August 20, 2003
I have not read your original report yet,although it is clear you were ripped off. He is way out of line, with threatening to sue for slander. Depending on the amount of money you lost, you might consider collecting a refund. Even if that refund is in the form of a lawsuit, in Small Claims Court. This is not to imply it would be easy, but you were definatly taken advantage of by their negligence, and possible damage to your vehicle. I am unaware of the amount of money you lost. You already have an "Expert Witness". The mechanic who fixed you vehicle as it was intended can at the least provide an Affidavit, maybe more depending on their willingness to stand behind their skill level and professionalism. The letter for slander, can be added as harassment. Especially if they continue. It's just a deeper hole for them. I hope they've seen a copy of your Report. ;) They might get away with ripping you off, but that doesn't mean you have to keep it a secret for them. If you have all of your papers in order, receipts, parts inventory, and payment method, they don't have a legal leg to stand on. I actually printed this Report out, because you clarify the case for "Slander and Defamation of Character" eloquently. It's a good reference. Thank you. :)
