You may recall my last blog post which was entitled “Autoglass –Better at Forgery than Car Repairs” and published on Wednesday 27 April. at 06:00.
Now you will recall that by then I had been waiting 14 days to have my car repaired and had Autoglass out 5 times to do the work. They also produced a document described as an invoice which purports to have been signed by the customer (me) in 2 places and also claims to have carried out checks that were not carried out.
The odd thing was I was present the whole time the Autoglass technician di the work and I was never asked to sign the document. Indeed after the Technician had finished, I sat in my front room doing some paperwork and he sat in his van for 10 minutes or so apparently doing paperwork. However, the form claims I was not present, but has a signature in the section for customer signature.
You will recall I reported this to Autoglass in a letter of Complaint on 18 April 2016 and repeated in further letters of complaint on 18 April, 19 April and 26 April. All these four letters of complaint were emailed to Autoglass.
I still even today have not received a formal written response to those complaints. In fact I have not even received a formal acknowledgement of those complaints. Some 14 days on from the first one being sent to Autoglass. Now, you can draw your own conclusions about that.
Lets however return to 27 April and the fact it was now 2 weeks since Autoglass had been instructed. The fact that on 26 April they left job undone, telling my neighbour they were going to contact me but had not bothered to do so. So on morning of 27 April, I ended up having to make numerous calls to both Autoglass and my car insurers trying to find out what is going on.
I eventually received a telephone call from JR who described herself as Autoglass Legal Counsel. We spoke for nearly 40 minutes and in that call she:
1. Apologised for not contacting me earlier
2. Accepted she had not handled the matter in the best way
3. Provided a verbal explanation of her interpretation of the signature on the form that purports to be for the customer signature.
4. Advised me that the work would be completed on Friday 29 April and it could be done without my being present.
We seem to have made some progress and I ended the call rather more confident this matter was getting resolved. That was to last only till I looked at my phone to see an email and a phone call from Autoglass whilst I had been on the phone to their Legal Counsel.
1. The email confirmed Autoglass were going to attend at my home between 1700 and 2300 that day 27 April 2016. The only problem with this is I would not be home as I was due to be out that night
2. The voicemail message left at about the same time as the email was sent, advised that Autoglass were ordering the relevant parts and would contact me to arrange an appointment to fit said parts AFTER they had received them.
So I now had:
a) an appointment for Wednesday 27 April between 1700 and 2300 when I apparently needed to be present; OR
b) an Appointment for Friday 29 April when I need not be present; OR
c) No appointment as parts were awaited and an appointment would be arranged later.
Confused? I know I was. Obviously now Autoglass were on the case they would be contacting me to resolve this matter wouldn’t they? Of course they didn’t. I think the cowboys were too busy tending their horses to resolve this matter.
At around 15:30 that day, I contacted Autoglass to find out what was going on. I was told they had no intention of attending that evening, despite the emailed confirmation of an appointment.
Great customer service, not only fail to do the job but instead send your customer appointments you have no intention of keeping.
I raised this with both Autoglass Legal Counsel and via their twitter account @autoglass. At the same time as Legal Counsel were confirming that the appointment was on Friday 29 April and I did not need to be present at the appointment, the person operating the twitter account was advising
a) there was no appointment yet arranged; AND
b) an appointment would not be arranged until Autoglass had the necessary parts; AND
c) I would have to be present at the job
Even when I pointed out to the person operating the twitter account that she was directly contradicting Autoglass Legal Counsel she (“Chloe”) Continued to confirm that there was no appointment arranged and that I would have to be present at any appointment.
Now, you would have thought that a reputable company would try to resolve the contradictory advice different people in their company were giving at the same time. Not Autoglass.
On Thursday 28 April, some 10 days after my first letter of complaint that they had still not acknowledged or responded to and some 2 weeks after they were initially instructed, they changed their approach and decided that instead of being a reputable company and dealing with the complaints, they would try to get me to remove my previous blog post.
I received the following by email from their legal counsel
Dear Mr BXXXXXX
I have been made aware that you have published an article/blog entitled ‘Autoglass® – better at Forgery than Car Window Repairs’.
Whilst we have accepted that there have been issues with the standard of service you have received, which we are now putting right, the claims that you make in your blog are not true.
No one has purported to be you and signed pretending to be you. There are some issues regarding the vehicle inspection checklist but I am making enquiries regarding this – however I am confident that once again any claim, of forgery or wrongdoing will not be able to be established. Finally I can confirm that Autoglass® certainly does not teach technicians to: 1. Forger signatures, 2. Falsify documents, 3. Lie to customers/key holders. I therefore respectfully ask you to either take down your blog or amend it to reflect the true position. I understand that you have put this on Twitter and other social media channels.
Please can you confirm that you have taken the blog down – certainly until your ‘case’ is closed/resolved and any investigations concluded. I feel that I have worked hard to personally ensure that the issues that you have experienced are resolved, however I do think that this article is not a fair reflection of Autoglass®.
Now, its amazing that it was 10 days and 4 complaint letters that had not been acknowledged or responded to , but in 24 hours Autoglass can get their finger out to tell me to remove my previous blog post.
I am sorry Autoglass, but:
if you are incompetent,
fail to deal with complaints,
give contradictory advice about what is happening with the job,
make appointments that you do not intend to keep and
produce documents with signatures in the section marked for the customer to sign and claiming to have done work that has not been done
Then you run the risk of having your (you or your technician’s) deceit, incompetence and general crap behaviour exposed.
I think most people would think better of Autoglass if you responded to the 4 letters of complaint as fast as you issue demands to remove a blog post that is accurate and truthful. I am not going to be bullied by your company.
I have to say, I think you have put the cart before the horse. Rather than demanding I take down the blog post until you have completed your investigation, you should be dealing with the investigation.
As I said in my previous blog post, sue me if I have said anything defamatory. You know my address and I await your writ.
On a positive note, the work appears to have been completed on 29 April. Its only over 2 weeks since they were instructed to repair a broken windscreen. I say appears, only because I have not had the chance to inspect the work owing to other commitments. It does appear from a quick glance to have been done satisfactorily.
This experience of Autoglass makes me think that they probably model their business on John Wayne, the biggest cowboy out there.
Oh and I still have not had any written acknowledgement of any of my FOUR separate letters of complaint. Not very impressive is it that a so called reputable company in 2 weeks has been unable to acknowledge any of my four complaints. Well, Autoglass, I will be taking this matter up with the Financial Ombudsman Service who are the regulator for you unless you do respond to each of those FOUR complaints. I wonder what the Ombudsman would have to say about this matter, especially when they see the documentation that supports my complaints.
Whilst researching this blog post, I discovered that I am not alone in having problems with Autoglass. It seems that they have come to the Attention of the BBC TV Watchdog programme
After the BBC TV Watchdog programme was broadcast in June 2015, Autoglass made a statement to the BBC that says
“….To better meet these needs we have changed our way of working and in doing so met challenges that for some people impacted our usually high service levels. We have worked hard to implement our changes and resolve individual customer issues on a case by case basis. To help ensure we deliver the service our customers expect, we have hired new customer service staff and more technicians and we are confident these and other measures we have taken will address the issues we have encountered…”
Sadly it seems some 10 months on from that programme, it is hollow words and their confidence is misplaced.