Non-compliance with C19 Protocols, no service, inept management staff, and lies

Paragraph 1 On 3 September 2021, I experienced problems with our vehicle, a Renault Captur, registration number FX 27 MF – GP. I advised the service advisor/ consultant that I suspected a problem with either the battery, or the alternator. I further explained that the battery had undergone an over-night charge, which led me to believe that it may have been the alternator that was not providing a charge. Ellene assisted me, who explained that they would have to run their own diagnostics, which involved placing the battery under charge again. She further explained that this process could take more than 4 hours. My request was noted on the invoice marked Annexure A. I was advised that there would be a diagnostic fee, which I found to be reasonable.

Paragraph 2 On 6 September 2021, at 09:58am, I received a call from service advisor, Portia, who advised that their diagnostic test revealed that the battery was defective and therefore needed to be replaced. She further advised that the cost would be about R2500.00. I inquired about the alternator and she confirmed that they did not test it. I indicated that I did not have a problem if the battery needed to be replaced, but for personal “piece of mind”, to test the alternator, which was also part of my initial request. She confirmed that this would be done and that she would contact me with the results. At approximately 10:52am, there was another call between myself and Portia, who confirm that the diagnostic test revealed that the alternator was in working condition and that it was indeed the battery which needed to be replaced. I then advised that the battery was relatively new and under guarantee from the supplier, so it made sense to take it back to them instead of purchasing a new one. I inquired if the vehicle would start, and Portia indicated that they would start the same if it did not. I then confirmed that I was on my way to collect the vehicle and take it to the battery supplier as time was of the essence. Paragraph 3 a. At 11:03am, my husband and I arrived at the dealership. We were both allowed to enter the premises without any COVID-19 protocols being followed, that is, we were not met by a security guard to sign in and take our temperatures. b. I proceeded to enter the dealership and speak to Portia who advised me to wait. Which I did.

Paragraph 4 I then asked if I could make payment while I waited, and Portia advised that this was impossible, as the paperwork was not ready and was only prepared by the technician. After several more minutes of waiting, Portia approached me and asked if I would like the vehicle to be washed, and I rep**** “no”, as again, time was of the essence. Another several minute passed, and at 11:48pm, Portia then approached me and advised me that she was “waiting for paperwork to be signed off”. She further advised that only 2 people were allowed to sign off the paperwork, being the Service Manager, who was out, and the Foreman, who was on a test drive. I then inquired as to when any of them were due to return, and Portia was unable to advise me. I then queried the process and contingency plan, asking if there was nobody else available to sign off the papers. At which point, Portia confirmed that she was in contact with the foreman, asking for advice on what to do. I then requested that she returns with a solution.

Paragraph 5 At approximately 12:00pm, I was summoned by the cashier to make payment, which I did. I was then directed to Portia’s desk, whereby she handed me my invoice and diagnostic results. I inquired about the non-compliance with COVID-19 protocols, to which, Portia had no explanation. I inquired as to who/ how my papers were signed off and Porta advised that the foreman had returned from his test drive. I then queried the hypothetical situation where he had not arrived, and Portia advised that all test drives were very short. I then queried contingency plans in the event of a delay, and Portia then definitively stated that a delay in a test drive was an impossibility for Renault, as, and I quote, “they only drive up to 2km’s”. This is a fact that I am yet to investigate in detail. During this time, I was on a live chat with Renault South Africa about my dissatisfaction in service and the non-compliance with COVID protocols. The consultant provided me with the names of both the dealer principle and the service manager. I then asked Portia if the dealer principle, Denzil, was in his office as I wanted to speak to him. She advised that the dealer principle was in his office. I then asked why he was not able to sign off the papers to avoid the wait, and she rep**** by saying that Denzil does not involve himself in such a duty and that I was unable to see him. I then enquired about Andre, the service manager and was again told by Portia that he was at a panel beater. She did not know the time of his departure, or his expected time of arrival. This interaction yielded no assistance and Portia’s nonsensical responses baffling to say the least. Paragraph 6 Upon perusing the diagnostics results, I noticed an anomaly and confirm with Portia that the date appearing on the result, was the exact time that the test was conducted. The diagnostic test revealed that the battery test was conducted on even date at 9:22am. The voltage was 12:58 and CCA showed 151. The test further revealed that the alternator test was conducted at 11:41am. This was during the time that I was waiting for “papers to be signed off” and well after I was informed that the test was completed and that the alternator was not the problem. Paragraph 7 In light of the above, I query the results of the supposed alternator test. How did Portia know at 10:52am that the alternator was not at fault and that I needed to replace the battery, when the test was conducted at 11:41am? Why was I given excuses while waiting and not advised that the test was being conducted? One can only infer that the information provided by Portia at 10:52am was an untruth. Upon leaving the dealership, I drove to the battery supplier who is situated approximately 5km’s away from the dealership, with a speed limit of 80kms/hour. A test was performed on the battery and I was informed that the battery was in perfect working condition. The battery was charging, with a CCA of 458 and voltage of 13.31. These readings and the outcome are in complete contradiction to the supposed diagnostics performed by the dealership. Please see Annexure C. I was informed that I in no way needed a replacement battery, which the Renault dealership and Portia advised me to do. Had I not had the wherewithal to question the actual problem and take advantage of my current guarantee, I would have been out of pocket of about R2500 and the dealership would have been unduly enriched. Is this a method of taking advantage of unsuspecting customers?

Paragraph 8 At 12:47pm, I received a call from the dealer principle Denzil, who advised that he was not in the dealership, and had not been in the dealership. Again, another clear untruth by Portia who had told me that the dealer principle was in his office, and did not involve himself service queries. I informed Denzil about this lie, who seemed to find it either amusing or facetious as there was a laugh. I further advised of the non-adherence with COVID-19 protocols and the events and discrepancies with the diagnostic results. Denzil confirmed that he was on his way into the office, and would investigate the matter. Paragraph 9 At 02:59, I received a callous email from the service manager. Please see Annexure D. When reading his response and supposed investigation findings, it is clear that my version of events was not taken into consideration. Despite proof in the form of date stamps and recording. (Recordings and date stamps are subject to the POPI Act and will be revealed should it pass the rules of evidence in the vent of litigation.) Despite my request for an explanation and details of solutions app**** in respect of the non-adherence to COVID-19 protocols, I received an apology from the service manager. What about the people who entered the premises before and after me? Where they COVID-19 positive? Everyone in the building has been compromised as a result, with seemingly no reaction from management.

Comments: The response to the failure in COVID-19 protocols was taken as basically something that occurs regularly, as there was no concern. On 6 September 2021, during any interaction with any Renault representative, there was no proper application of customer service. This reveals a serious gap in skills relating to dealing with customers. The blatant lies spoken by Portia and her rude and arrogant behaviour bring Renault name into disrepute. The lack of action by management indicates that this behaviour is not only common practice, but condoned. The supposed diagnostic tests and results are questionable to say the least. A reasonable person can safely infer that there has been attempted *****.

Resolution: It goes without saying that this is the last time that we conduct business with Renault Ontdekkers. Despite the utterly disgusting experience, we will continue to engage with the brand itself, as we have two Renault vehicles. However, the damage has undoubtedly been caused. No reasonable person will find the above acceptable, and I request the following: Confirmation from the COVID-19 Compliance Officer that regular audits are conducted to ensure compliance with protocols. Every person who entered the building on even date is at risk, and should be contacted and advised of same and that they have possibly been exposed to the virus. People have a right to know if they may have been exposed. A refund of my payment of R977.50 for the very suspicious diagnostics test. (Should the matter proceed to litigation, please note that said matter will be heard in the local Magistrates Court as I will include actual costs, legal fees, and pain and suffering in my claim for damages.) Proper training in terms of dealing with customers and problem solving of Portia, including management. A full investigation into suspected ********** behaviour from the service team.