Long Cadillac - Service Center

Long Cadillac responded

In response to this unfortunate and unavoidable situation, it should be noted that there are some omissions from this side of the story. Ms. Estrada demanded GM buy back her vehicle which Cadillac denied and we believe this led to frustration in dealing with our staff on several matters. We fully accepted responsibility and made no excuses that we damaged (and should have fixed prior to pick up), the door handle and we could have been responsible for the 1/2" scratch on the front bumper cover. While we didn't feel responsible for a very small scratch in the fender, a small ding in the rear door and a 1MM (yes 1MM) paint chip on a front wheel spoke, on a three year old vehicle, we were willing to fix these minor items because of the loyalty of her past business. We told Gabriela in writing that we would repair these items at our GM approved collision center. This offer was unacceptable to Gabriela and she presented us with an estimate from D&G Auto Body, a body shop she and her husband own, and wanted us to issue her a check for $2600, which was not an acceptable solution. Having been in the business for almost 30 years and dealing with affluent customers in difficult situations, I decided to take up the matter the next day. When I found out that she had still refused to return our $130k Cadillac Escalade service loaner while we worked through this matter, we were left with no option other than to let Gabriela know that if the loaner vehicle isn't returned, we would have to report the vehicle stolen which would be a last resort and one that we would rather avoid, to which she responded "do what you have to do". I eventually received a call from her attorney and we had a simple conversation that led to an agreement in about 10-15 minutes, that we would pay for the door handle and bumper repair, which we would normally fix but we felt that she would pick apart the car again for further issues. Gabriela arrived to pick up her car and she proceeded to ignore the agreement made with her attorney, claiming that we "dented" her wheel, which was actually the 1MM paint chip that we put a spot of touch up paint as a simple gesture of goodwill fix (acceptable by most everyone with a 3 year old vehicle). At that point, there was an acknowledgement that she should probably find someone else to work on her car as we don't want to be responsible for every minor issue she finds and blames on poor workmanship. We service hundreds of Cadillac's every month and while we didn't meet our expectations on the door handle matter, this is rarely an issue in our operation and we certainly don't cause five separate matters of damage in a customer visit. In my nearly 30 years in the business, I can count on one hand how many times, we have had to say this to a customer and to have to say it to a customer who lives locally, and bought two cars from us, it's extremely difficult but sometimes this has to happen. While we did repeatedly apologize and look to resolve all of her concerns, we found Gabriela extremely unreasonable and we would likely not be able to please her going forward.

GABBY617 responded

I want to be clear that there were no omissions on my behalf. I did speak directly with GM about my options and, at no point, was I frustrated with the dealership itself. My intent was only to understand my rights regarding warranty coverage and possible buyback options. GM explained the process, and I accepted that information as part of due diligence. Following that, I began exploring trade-in options and was in the process of finalizing a potential deal. I was fully within my rights to seek clarity on these matters—especially given that a three-year-old vehicle, in mint condition, with only 17,000 miles, garage-kept most winters, and serviced exclusively by the dealer, was already undergoing an engine replacement. The size of the damage is irrelevant—the fact remains that damage occurred, and it should never have happened. Further, it is my legal right to decide where my vehicle is repaired. I made it clear to Long Cadillac that I preferred to use my husband’s body shop or another GM-certified repair facility. I should not have been pressured or forced to use only Long Cadillac’s repair services. To further support this, I obtained estimates from three GM-certified body shops. Each one valued the repair at nearly three times the amount Long Cadillac paid out. All three professionals agreed that the wheel had been poorly touched up. GM uses water-based paint, which is not designed for touch-ups, and the result is visibly obvious and substandard. At no point did I refuse to return the loaner vehicle. I returned it willingly once I felt assured of my own safety—something I was forced to consider as a female being intimidated and threatened by Mr. Barry. As additional proof, my vehicle is professionally washed and detailed regularly. Each service includes photographs documenting the car’s condition. I can affirm with certainty that none of the damage was present before it was in Long Cadillac’s care. The only apologies I have received came directly from GM, after they reviewed my case and the manner in which Mr. Barry treated me.

Long Cadillac responded

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I’d appreciate the opportunity to learn more and address any concerns you may have. If you're willing to discuss further, please feel free to reach out to me directly at 508-683-1164 or via email at AParker@LongAuto.com I look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Andrew Parker Service Manager Long Cadillac