Business ProfileforCincinnati Cadillac

On April 1, 2024, I took my car in for a minor repair. My rt rear tail light had a brake light that wasn't working. The rest of the lights in the housing were fine. I received a verbal & written quote of $1418.06. I paid $1450.40. In addition, they gave me a list of suggested repairs totaling $8,371.70. The problem is when I drove home. The rear end of the car was shaking, the wheel was unstable and was veering off to the left. I also heard rattling in the dash and rt door. This has never happened before. Also, THE CAR WAS DRIVING SMOOTH WHEN IT ENTERED THEIR SHOP. There was one tire that lost suspension due to a pothole but the other 3 tires were fine. The rear suspension has always been fine. The next morning, I called and spoke to Martin. He said that anything wrong with the vehicle was my fault and that Cadillac did nothing wrong. After that I called Cadillac Corporate. They sent me to Joseph Cadillac of Dublin the same day for a second opinion. Cadillac of Dublin said that more major repairs needed to be made in addition to waht Cincinnati said just 24 hours before. It seems that every time a diagnostic is performed, more things suddenly break. I have written estimates from both service departments. On April 4th, I spoke to a Jake in Cincinnati who is the service manager. He was defensive and didn't offer any positive solutions other than to review a video. In Columbus, the service advisor asked me if Cincinnati had hoisted my vehicle when they replaced the tail light. I said, I didn't know. He checked the computer and replied, they did, and that's why your rear doesn't have any movement. He said that when the car was raised, the shocks dropped and caused the cylinder to lock when it was replaced on the ground. He also said that the front ones were leaking. Columbus also raised the vehicle during their 3-hr inspection and said that the front shocks needed replaced. Just 24 hours prior, Cincinnati, stated that the front shocks were fine.

Cincinnati Cadillac Response 04/08/2024 On 3/30/24 ***** ******* called the dealership to inquire about a right rear taillight assembly. Upon initial check GM has no stock and that there is no ETA. Martin advised ***** that the taillight assembly is on backorder and that we would have to call to local dealers to see if they would release any stock that is on hand. On Monday 4/1/24 at 11:26am Martin called ***** and advised that a local dealer did in fact have the tail lamp and they would release it to us for replacement. At that time an appointment was created for 3:00pm on 4/1/24 for the assembly to be replaced. Martin documented all notes from the phone call and stapled them to the repair order at write up, as this is the first time she has ever contacted us or had service work. Notes include her Name, phone number, year and model of vehicle, her concerns and needed repairs, as well as a breakdown of pricing. Labor $420.00+tax, Parts $919.00 and core charge $30.00, part number, last 8 numbers of her VIN and total quoted of 1369+106.74 tax for a total of 1476.00. Upon arrival at our dealership, *****, parked outside of the service entry and came in to speak to Martin. Martin welcomed her to our facility and instructed her of the process followed by retrieving her vehicle and pulling it into our facility. Upon pulling the vehicle into the service bay Martin advised ***** that the vehicle has some noise heard in the front suspension and he would advise her of the repairs needed while completing a complementary inspection of the vehicle. The vehicle arrived at our facility at 2:07pm where she was quoted a two hour wait time as well as 1476.00 total due. This estimate is printed on the repair order that was signed by *****. The vehicle was pulled from the service drive to the technician stall at 2:10pm. At that time the technician went to our parts department and retrieved the new tail lamp. To install the taillight assembly the technician removed the retainers on the right side of the rear bumper, opened the trunk, and proceeded to remove the taillight retaining nuts. When the assembly was removed the technician installed in reverse order. The technician verified operation of the assembly and once testing was completed, he reinstalled the bumper retainers and proceeded the visual inspection of the vehicle. This vehicle was in a bay that did not have a vehicle lift, it never left the ground in any way. The technician inspected the brakes and suspension visually from the ground. As per our process, the technician provided a “Report Card” for the vehicle that was accompanied by estimates for repairs on what was visually seen. The technician notated the rear shocks are leaking fluid, front brake pads and rotors were worn, rear brake pads and rotors were worn, and front struts, strut mounts, and sway bar end links were recommended. At 4:02 the vehicle was brought back to the service drive following an interior and exterior complementary cleaning. From 4:05-4:11pm Martin went over the estimate and report card with ***** at our cashier station, where the total billed amount was 1450.40, 26.00 less that originally quoted. Martin walked with her to her vehicle, and they discussed the vehicle and visit until her exit at 4:20pm. ***** ******* called our dealership for a repair, and it was performed in a timely fashion and under the quoted amount. ***** ******* drove 121 miles from her address to our facility for a taillight replacement. She contacted General Motors and spoke to the corporate customer care team as well as had a 1:30 conversation with their associate, our service manager, GM, and her. The results from the phone conversation, which GM has the recording of, shows many attempts to explain the facts of the visit as well as to ask for her requested remedy. She has only stated she feels she should have the tail lamp refunded to her, we declined that as the tail lamp assembly is functioning and was replaced with a new GM unit. We have explained that a vehicle that is 9+ years in age and in excess of 195,000 miles will require repairs and that although we have provided the estimates for the visually failed components that there could be additional items needed. There is no fault of the dealership for any mechanical faults as we followed repair protocol to the letter. We provided no undue interaction with any components of the vehicle outside of the bumper retainer and right rear tail lamp assembly. Per the GM representative ***** has been asked to not patron 3 other Cadillac dealerships local to her and proceeded to drive 2 hours and 4 minutes covering 121 miles to utilize our services. Although services rendered at this location were of the utmost professional, her interactions with GM and the service manager became threatening with legal action and slanderous against a dealership that did only what was asked in the highest regard.