Please help me. Loud Pedal Motorsports, Inc, is trying to extort me
09-29-2010, 08:48 AM
#2
Banned
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Munster, Indiana
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your not gonna spend no 5000 on a lawyer. i had a shop screw me over on a warranty alternator and took them to court asap. and won in a month. hopefully you kept receipts and had them write you receipts on storage and exact costs. take their *** to court! my god i would have already filed and been done with that ****. Their keeping your car? f them. if you got a receipts get down to the courthouse.
09-29-2010, 08:51 AM
#3
Banned
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Munster, Indiana
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and if you say they have been refusing to talk to you, and they are a company judges do not like that. especially when they add costs and go back on their words. But receipts change everything. If you win you pay a lawyer 500-1000 BUT then you dont gotta pay 7000! Good luck with this and hopefully you do go to court with them. Keep Updated.
09-29-2010, 03:30 PM
#6
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am the owner of Loud Pedal Motorsports, Inc. Clearly there is a LOT more to this story than is being portrayed here. Since the threat of legal action has been made, I will refrain from rebutting this here until I have legal advice.
I will say this...
That car got delivered on a wrecker with a blown motor, partially dissassembled, and along with a big box of parts and bolts almost 2 YEARS ago where it sat stored indoors while we were constantly lied to about parts showing up. I can only speculate on why it was removed from the previous shop, but after almost 2 yrs of dealing with this guy, I can totally understand.
We even had to move it from the old shop to the new one and never charged him for that either. His storage bill should have been WAY higher than what we ended up charging. If you want to know the truth, check out what the locals have to say:
Arizona Corvette Enthusiasts
Keep posting, Preston. You're digging yourself in deeper and deeper.
I will say this...
That car got delivered on a wrecker with a blown motor, partially dissassembled, and along with a big box of parts and bolts almost 2 YEARS ago where it sat stored indoors while we were constantly lied to about parts showing up. I can only speculate on why it was removed from the previous shop, but after almost 2 yrs of dealing with this guy, I can totally understand.
We even had to move it from the old shop to the new one and never charged him for that either. His storage bill should have been WAY higher than what we ended up charging. If you want to know the truth, check out what the locals have to say:
Arizona Corvette Enthusiasts
Keep posting, Preston. You're digging yourself in deeper and deeper.
Trending Topics
10-05-2010, 12:45 PM
#11
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: plainfield,IL
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think it comes down to who can prove there story better...i will say though, a shop charging storage for a car they are making money on is a little wrong imo. If i were in both partys shoes id just want this deal done with already, why show your *** and try to drag this out...
10-10-2010, 01:25 PM
#14
I've learned that when you deal with performance shops it's best to get things in writing 1st. cause a verbal agreement holds little water in court when their are discrepancies between both party's. Some shops have established good rapport with their customers that don't always require things be put in writing. And when I say rapport I mean repeat customers. I'd be leary of any shop you've never dealt with that gives you only a verbal agreement PERIOD no matter there reputation. That's just good business sense!!!
10-11-2010, 11:11 AM
#15
I got suspicious when I read that it took the guy 2 years to get an engine built...
Further more the car was stored indoors?
The time frame alone made me realize that there was obviously a lot more to this story.
Further more the car was stored indoors?
The time frame alone made me realize that there was obviously a lot more to this story.
10-14-2010, 09:52 PM
#17
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loud Pedal Motorsports (LPM) is Arizona’s premier automotive performance shop located in Tempe, Arizona. We have always been committed to providing honest and top notch services to our customers. LPM has many satisfied customers since its founding in 2008. However, there have been some unjustified, misleading and negative postings regarding LPM and its services provided to Preston Garrison and his 2008 Z06 Corvette.
Mr. Garrison erroneously claims LPM agreed to store his vehicle for over a year, free of charge, while he attempted to find a new engine for it. He then claims that, even though he had not agreed to storage fees, he paid them to have the work done on his vehicle and the new engine installed. Mr. Garrison also incorrectly states LPM took an unreasonable amount of time installing the engine and that LPM gave him an outrageous bill for the labor for the installation of the new engine and other parts. The following is an accurate summary of the situation involving Preston Garrison and LPM.
On or about March 1, 2009, Mr. Garrison brought his 2008 Z06 Corvette into LPM. The engine in the vehicle had expired, and Mr. Garrison wanted it removed and replaced. When the vehicle was brought into LPM, the engine had already been partially disassembled by another shop, the interior of the vehicle was in disarray, and there was a box of parts on the front seat which Mr. Garrison assured LPM contained all the necessary engine parts. Despite Mr. Garrison’s assurances, LPM quickly realized many parts were missing.
Mr. Garrison asked LPM to remove the engine. He also stated he would promptly obtain a stock LS7 engine for LPM to install. Mr. Garrison promised to keep LPM informed about the progress of the new engine while work promptly began to remove the old engine. Ten days later, LPM had removed the old engine. LPM then discovered a large hole in the side of the block along with miscellaneous loose pieces and evidence of a fire in the engine compartment.
A few days after the engine was removed, Mr. Garrison came to LPM and removed an after-market spoiler. He then promised LPM he would have the new engine in two weeks. Mr. Garrison then requested that LPM remove the aftermarket coil covers and the front and rear brake kits. He assured LPM he would provide stock brakes and suspension to be reinstalled when he picked up the after-market parts.
LPM promptly did as Mr. Garrison requested. Three weeks passed and Mr. Garrison had not provided the stock brakes or suspension. LPM contacted Mr. Garrison, requesting that he provide the factory parts to LPM and pick up the after-market parts. A week later, Mr. Garrison dropped off sway bars and mono leafs and picked up the race car parts. However, LPM was unable to mount the sway bars because Mr. Garrison failed to provide hardware, shocks or brakes. LPM again contacted Mr. Garrison and was informed that the new motor was to be delivered in mid-May and he would have the parts delivered at the time the new motor arrived. At this time, LPM had possession of Mr. Garrison’s vehicle for approximately two months.
Mr. Garrison then completely stopped communicating with LPM. He failed to respond to phone calls or e-mails. Indeed, the phone number he provided to LPM was disconnected with no forwarding information. LPM then became the involuntary storage facility for Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle with no information about when, if ever, Mr. Garrison intended to either complete the project or retrieve his vehicle.
Mr. Garrison finally appeared at LPM in late October and assured LPM the new motor, previously promised to arrive in mid-May, would finally arrive before Thanksgiving. Mr. Garrison also finally supplied the brake pads, end links and shocks he had promised months earlier. Mr. Garrison was then advised LPM was soon relocating, and that if the new engine was not delivered on time, he would have to pick up his inoperable vehicle. Given that Mr. Garrison’s vehicle had now been sitting at LPM for approximately eight months, storage fees were also discussed.
By mid-December, the new engine had not been delivered to LPM as promised. Further, again Mr. Garrison had completely failed to communicate with LPM regarding the situation. LPM contacted Mr. Garrison and again reminded him LPM was moving and he needed to retrieve his inoperable vehicle as per the earlier agreement.
Mr. Garrison agreed to take possession of the vehicle. He asked that LPM invest time to re-assemble the vehicle in order for the vehicle to be ready to be moved. LPM diverted efforts from other unrelated projects and promptly invested two hours reassembling various parts as per Mr. Garrison’s request so his vehicle could be safely picked up.
Despite LPM’s diligent and prompt efforts, Mr. Garrison never arrived at LPM to retrieve his vehicle. Moreover, Mr. Garrison never bothered to contact LPM to inform LPM he apparently decided not to retrieve his vehicle as he promised.
Despite over two months notice to Mr. Garrison about LPM’s scheduled relocation and repeated requests for him to retrieve his vehicle, on January 3, 2010, LPM was forced to move Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle to LPM’s new location. LPM was forced to expend time and incur expense as a result of Mr. Garrison’s intentional failure to retrieve his vehicle. At that time, LPM had stored Mr. Garrison’s vehicle for ten months waiting for Mr. Garrison to simply produce the engine he had promised several months ago.
In mid-February 2010, while Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle continued to sit at LPM’s new facility, Mr. Garrison brought in another vehicle for a racing suspension, service drivetrain and a big brake kit to be installed. Despite the previous problems with Mr. Garrison, LPM completed the work promptly and to Mr. Garrison’s complete satisfaction. Mr. Garrison once again promised that the engine and parts for the inoperable vehicle were to be delivered soon. At this point, after eleven months of storage at LPM and a relocation to the new LPM facility, Mr. Garrison acknowledged and agreed he owed storage fees to LPM. Indeed, Mr. Garrison paid the storage fees at that time. During the next two weeks, Mr. Garrison finally removed the last of the Corvette parts to supply to the engine builder for the new engine.
Shockingly, Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle continued to sit at LPM for the next five months while the new engine was never delivered. During that five month period, Mr. Garrison was virtually unreachable returning calls only infrequently. However, on the rare occasion that Mr. Garrison communicated with LPM, he always assured LPM that the long awaited new engine was only days away from being delivered. However, the engine did not arrive and LPM was forced to continue to store Mr. Garrision’s inoperable vehicle.
Finally, approximately sixteen months after Mr. Garrision dropped his inoperable vehicle at LPM, on July 20, 2010 the new engine was delivered. The new engine consisted of a long block and a couple new parts for the aftermarket dry sump oil system. LPM was forced to purchase a new radiator and several other new parts to complete the installation that had been lost in the move. LPM attempted to assemble part of the engine and found there were missing parts from the stripping of the original engine that had never been replaced. Further, the stock Z06 brakes arrived with no bolts and only half of the hardware. The aftermarket parts Mr. Garrison supplied either would not work or were incomplete. As such, LPM was forced to order more parts.
As a result of diligent efforts by LPM, by mid-September, the engine and the factory monoleaf spring were finally installed. However, at that point LPM found that the spring hit the aftermarket fitting on the oil pan. LPM tried raising and lowering the monoleaf, without success. In an effort to resolve the issue, Mr. Garrison directed LPM to shim the spring. LPM investigated that possibility and refused to do so for safety reasons.
Mr. Garrison then ordered a set of LG coil covers and assured LPM they would arrive in three days. Three weeks later, the coil covers arrived at LPM. They were immediately installed by LPM.
At this point, approximately nineteen months after he dropped off his inoperable vehicle at LPM and LPM had invested substantial time and effort into Mr. Garrison’s vehicle, Mr. Garrison suddenly decided to cancel the project. Mr. Garrison demanded his vehicle immediately and wanted no more work performed. After nineteen months of storage, LPM had not been allowed an opportunity to complete the project and several issues remained unresolved with parts and the new engine.
LPM advised Mr. Garrison that there were safety issues and the vehicle could not be driven. Mr. Garrison picked up the vehicle and LPM charged Mr. Garrison for the parts it obtained and for only threefour months of additional storage. Although Mr. Garrison had previously paid storage fees through February of 1010, there were an additional seven months of unpaid storage fees at the time Mr. Garrison decided to pick up his vehicle.
As a courtesy to Mr. Garrison, LPM waived storage fees for fourthree of the seven unpaid months as well as all additional fees for the costs incurred by LPM for transporting Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle to LPM’s new location. Shockingly, Mr. Garrison was upset with his bill and posted defamatory, untrue and misleading statements about LPM on various websites.
Mr. Garrison erroneously claims LPM agreed to store his vehicle for over a year, free of charge, while he attempted to find a new engine for it. He then claims that, even though he had not agreed to storage fees, he paid them to have the work done on his vehicle and the new engine installed. Mr. Garrison also incorrectly states LPM took an unreasonable amount of time installing the engine and that LPM gave him an outrageous bill for the labor for the installation of the new engine and other parts. The following is an accurate summary of the situation involving Preston Garrison and LPM.
On or about March 1, 2009, Mr. Garrison brought his 2008 Z06 Corvette into LPM. The engine in the vehicle had expired, and Mr. Garrison wanted it removed and replaced. When the vehicle was brought into LPM, the engine had already been partially disassembled by another shop, the interior of the vehicle was in disarray, and there was a box of parts on the front seat which Mr. Garrison assured LPM contained all the necessary engine parts. Despite Mr. Garrison’s assurances, LPM quickly realized many parts were missing.
Mr. Garrison asked LPM to remove the engine. He also stated he would promptly obtain a stock LS7 engine for LPM to install. Mr. Garrison promised to keep LPM informed about the progress of the new engine while work promptly began to remove the old engine. Ten days later, LPM had removed the old engine. LPM then discovered a large hole in the side of the block along with miscellaneous loose pieces and evidence of a fire in the engine compartment.
A few days after the engine was removed, Mr. Garrison came to LPM and removed an after-market spoiler. He then promised LPM he would have the new engine in two weeks. Mr. Garrison then requested that LPM remove the aftermarket coil covers and the front and rear brake kits. He assured LPM he would provide stock brakes and suspension to be reinstalled when he picked up the after-market parts.
LPM promptly did as Mr. Garrison requested. Three weeks passed and Mr. Garrison had not provided the stock brakes or suspension. LPM contacted Mr. Garrison, requesting that he provide the factory parts to LPM and pick up the after-market parts. A week later, Mr. Garrison dropped off sway bars and mono leafs and picked up the race car parts. However, LPM was unable to mount the sway bars because Mr. Garrison failed to provide hardware, shocks or brakes. LPM again contacted Mr. Garrison and was informed that the new motor was to be delivered in mid-May and he would have the parts delivered at the time the new motor arrived. At this time, LPM had possession of Mr. Garrison’s vehicle for approximately two months.
Mr. Garrison then completely stopped communicating with LPM. He failed to respond to phone calls or e-mails. Indeed, the phone number he provided to LPM was disconnected with no forwarding information. LPM then became the involuntary storage facility for Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle with no information about when, if ever, Mr. Garrison intended to either complete the project or retrieve his vehicle.
Mr. Garrison finally appeared at LPM in late October and assured LPM the new motor, previously promised to arrive in mid-May, would finally arrive before Thanksgiving. Mr. Garrison also finally supplied the brake pads, end links and shocks he had promised months earlier. Mr. Garrison was then advised LPM was soon relocating, and that if the new engine was not delivered on time, he would have to pick up his inoperable vehicle. Given that Mr. Garrison’s vehicle had now been sitting at LPM for approximately eight months, storage fees were also discussed.
By mid-December, the new engine had not been delivered to LPM as promised. Further, again Mr. Garrison had completely failed to communicate with LPM regarding the situation. LPM contacted Mr. Garrison and again reminded him LPM was moving and he needed to retrieve his inoperable vehicle as per the earlier agreement.
Mr. Garrison agreed to take possession of the vehicle. He asked that LPM invest time to re-assemble the vehicle in order for the vehicle to be ready to be moved. LPM diverted efforts from other unrelated projects and promptly invested two hours reassembling various parts as per Mr. Garrison’s request so his vehicle could be safely picked up.
Despite LPM’s diligent and prompt efforts, Mr. Garrison never arrived at LPM to retrieve his vehicle. Moreover, Mr. Garrison never bothered to contact LPM to inform LPM he apparently decided not to retrieve his vehicle as he promised.
Despite over two months notice to Mr. Garrison about LPM’s scheduled relocation and repeated requests for him to retrieve his vehicle, on January 3, 2010, LPM was forced to move Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle to LPM’s new location. LPM was forced to expend time and incur expense as a result of Mr. Garrison’s intentional failure to retrieve his vehicle. At that time, LPM had stored Mr. Garrison’s vehicle for ten months waiting for Mr. Garrison to simply produce the engine he had promised several months ago.
In mid-February 2010, while Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle continued to sit at LPM’s new facility, Mr. Garrison brought in another vehicle for a racing suspension, service drivetrain and a big brake kit to be installed. Despite the previous problems with Mr. Garrison, LPM completed the work promptly and to Mr. Garrison’s complete satisfaction. Mr. Garrison once again promised that the engine and parts for the inoperable vehicle were to be delivered soon. At this point, after eleven months of storage at LPM and a relocation to the new LPM facility, Mr. Garrison acknowledged and agreed he owed storage fees to LPM. Indeed, Mr. Garrison paid the storage fees at that time. During the next two weeks, Mr. Garrison finally removed the last of the Corvette parts to supply to the engine builder for the new engine.
Shockingly, Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle continued to sit at LPM for the next five months while the new engine was never delivered. During that five month period, Mr. Garrison was virtually unreachable returning calls only infrequently. However, on the rare occasion that Mr. Garrison communicated with LPM, he always assured LPM that the long awaited new engine was only days away from being delivered. However, the engine did not arrive and LPM was forced to continue to store Mr. Garrision’s inoperable vehicle.
Finally, approximately sixteen months after Mr. Garrision dropped his inoperable vehicle at LPM, on July 20, 2010 the new engine was delivered. The new engine consisted of a long block and a couple new parts for the aftermarket dry sump oil system. LPM was forced to purchase a new radiator and several other new parts to complete the installation that had been lost in the move. LPM attempted to assemble part of the engine and found there were missing parts from the stripping of the original engine that had never been replaced. Further, the stock Z06 brakes arrived with no bolts and only half of the hardware. The aftermarket parts Mr. Garrison supplied either would not work or were incomplete. As such, LPM was forced to order more parts.
As a result of diligent efforts by LPM, by mid-September, the engine and the factory monoleaf spring were finally installed. However, at that point LPM found that the spring hit the aftermarket fitting on the oil pan. LPM tried raising and lowering the monoleaf, without success. In an effort to resolve the issue, Mr. Garrison directed LPM to shim the spring. LPM investigated that possibility and refused to do so for safety reasons.
Mr. Garrison then ordered a set of LG coil covers and assured LPM they would arrive in three days. Three weeks later, the coil covers arrived at LPM. They were immediately installed by LPM.
At this point, approximately nineteen months after he dropped off his inoperable vehicle at LPM and LPM had invested substantial time and effort into Mr. Garrison’s vehicle, Mr. Garrison suddenly decided to cancel the project. Mr. Garrison demanded his vehicle immediately and wanted no more work performed. After nineteen months of storage, LPM had not been allowed an opportunity to complete the project and several issues remained unresolved with parts and the new engine.
LPM advised Mr. Garrison that there were safety issues and the vehicle could not be driven. Mr. Garrison picked up the vehicle and LPM charged Mr. Garrison for the parts it obtained and for only threefour months of additional storage. Although Mr. Garrison had previously paid storage fees through February of 1010, there were an additional seven months of unpaid storage fees at the time Mr. Garrison decided to pick up his vehicle.
As a courtesy to Mr. Garrison, LPM waived storage fees for fourthree of the seven unpaid months as well as all additional fees for the costs incurred by LPM for transporting Mr. Garrison’s inoperable vehicle to LPM’s new location. Shockingly, Mr. Garrison was upset with his bill and posted defamatory, untrue and misleading statements about LPM on various websites.
10-14-2010, 09:53 PM
#18
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LPM always has been, and continues to be, dedicated to providing exemplary service to its customers. Even though Mr. Garrison was uncooperative with LPM, and had essentially abandoned the vehicle for several months, LPM was vigilant in attempting to maintain contact with him and insuring his vehicle was secured. LPM personnel took it upon themselves to make sure the vehicle was moved to their new location even though Mr. Garrison failed to make arrangements for it himself after months of notice. LPM charged Mr. Garrison reasonable fees for storage and labor, and the largest portion of his bill was the result of missing parts that LPM ordered to complete the work.
LPM is saddened that Mr. Garrison has chosen to misuse the internet in an attempt to tarnish its well deserved good reputation. LPM is proud of the high quality work and service it provides to its customers. LPM has always maintained the highest possible standards in all of its work and will continue to do so in the future. LPM has never had any complaints prior to Mr. Garrison, and will continue to provide excellent quality service in all repairs and modifications. LPM is confident that its good reputation will continue to grow due to its ever increasing list of satisfied customers who know first hand the strong commitment to its customers LPM had always displayed.
LPM is saddened that Mr. Garrison has chosen to misuse the internet in an attempt to tarnish its well deserved good reputation. LPM is proud of the high quality work and service it provides to its customers. LPM has always maintained the highest possible standards in all of its work and will continue to do so in the future. LPM has never had any complaints prior to Mr. Garrison, and will continue to provide excellent quality service in all repairs and modifications. LPM is confident that its good reputation will continue to grow due to its ever increasing list of satisfied customers who know first hand the strong commitment to its customers LPM had always displayed.
10-15-2010, 11:09 AM
#19
ProGod, thanks for the heads up, you reminded me that I need to bring my 5th Gen Camaro into Loud Pedal for a coilover install or simply dropped springs.. good work..
Hey Loud Pedal, I know you folks deal with Pedders suspension bits, after lowering my Camaro, are you folks familiar with 'timing' of the bushings?
Hey Loud Pedal, I know you folks deal with Pedders suspension bits, after lowering my Camaro, are you folks familiar with 'timing' of the bushings?
10-15-2010, 11:39 AM
#20
Teching In
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thx,
Dave