- Report: #1039243
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Tint Masters Auto Center (TMAC)
Tint Masters Auto Center (TMAC)1118 W. Chapel Hill Street Durham, North Carolina United States of America
Tint Masters Auto Center (TMAC) TMAC Shotty Work, White Spots, Bubbling, Peeling, Ghetto Tint Job Durham, North Carolina
*Author of original report: My apologies
*REBUTTAL Individual responds: SOLUTION
TMAC Audio & Window Tinting
ATTN: Rodney Edwards/Tony Peterkin
1118 W. Chapel Hill Street
Durham, NC 27701
On March 14, 2013, I paid $100 for a window tint job on my Mercedes Benz, and today I am extremely unhappy. I learned of Tint Masters Auto Center after seeing a sign outside a tattoo parlor located on Alston Avenue in Durham.
Following my visit to a hair salon, I stopped in Ink Well to inquire into window tinting and spoke with a middleman named Montoya, who claimed to be the brother of the owner of the window tinting business. My interaction with Montoya was
conducted inside the tattoo parlor, at which time I handed him an upfront payment of $100 and was given a receipt (see attached). Subsequent to paying for the tint job, I was asked to follow the employee to another location to get
the tinting done. I thought that this was an odd request, but since I pre-paid for the service, decided to follow the employee. The employee and I arrived at 1818 Chapel Hill Road where window tinting and car washing were being
conducted. Prior to Montoyas departure, he stated that I would need to speak with a Tint Masters Auto Center employee regarding the details of my window tinting job. I waited for over an hour before my car was pulled into the garage, when
an employee named Mike approached and asked for my car keys. Mike and I briefly discussed shading and the work began.
After a total of 2 hours the tinting job was completed and Mike handed back my car keys. I immediately noticed problems with the tinting, including patches of water which had settled in the corners of my windows and white spots. In fact,
there were copious amounts of white spots or dots, and when I brought these imperfections to Mikes attention he stated that the water and white spots will eventually go away in a few days, once the tint has had a chance to dry. When I arrived home and parked my vehicle in the driveway, I was able to better inspect the tint job. Not only was the settled water and white spots very visible, however there were crooked lines where the tint was not properly cut, and on the rear passenger side window there is a 2-1/2 inch gap at the bottom of the window where the tint was again, not properly cut. I immediately called
Montoya to let him know what my windows looked like, and was informed that the white spots occurred because employee, Mike had failed to blow dry the windows for the appropriate amount of time. Montoya called TMAC and spoke to an
employee who stated that I needed to wait a few days to allow the tint to dry before bringing my vehicle back to Chapel Hill Road for re-working. This was a Thursday.
By Sunday, I had begun to text Montoya, expressing my overwhelming discontent with the tint job. I stated that I was very unhappy, and that the window tint made my vehicle look cheap. After three days, the window tint had begun to bubble,
particularly on the rear window, which is very visible to other drivers. Three days later and a series of text messages to Montoya, I was not convinced that Tint Masters Auto Center had performed a professional tint job on my luxury
vehicle, and requested a refund. I communicated to Montoya that I did not have faith that the employees of this tinting business possessed the knowledge to perform professional-level work, and that my tint job looked as though an
amateur had done it. Needless to say, I am very upset and dissatisfied, as well as embarrassed with the way that my vehicle looks.
To make matters worse, I was informed by Montoya that I would not be entitled to a refund of the shotty work which was performed on my windows, and that my only recourse would be to return my vehicle to allow TMAC to correct their many,
many mistakes. As I previously stated, I am not convinced that this can occur, since the initial outcome should not have produced the results in which it had, however due to reasons previously mentioned in addition to poor quality film, I
do not trust TMAC. A business which performs a service for its customers should make every good faith effort to do its very best work; otherwise, the customer should be entitled to a full refund. This is not my first experience with window tint, and did not experience these issues the last time that I had a tint job performed. I allowed two different establishments who are in the window tinting business to look at my windows, and the work was given a failing grade. Furthermore, I do not appreciate the bait and switch and Ink Well passing itself off as part of Tint Masters Auto Center. In efforts to resolve this matter favorable, I made a series of telephone calls and was informed that the owner of the establishment is an individual named Ray Hubert. However, no one at the Miami Boulevard location knows Ray Hubert, and another individual (Kristy) who also claimed to be one of the owners cursed me out when I asked for the owner as well as her last name. I informed Kristy that since TMAC is registered as a corporation in North Carolina, and as a public officer, her last name is public information. Again, I received no cooperation and was treated extremely nasty by this woman.
According to the North Carolina Secretary of State, I learned that both Tony Peterkin and Rodney Edwards are registered agents and/or co-owners of Tint Masters Auto Center. As such, I felt it appropriate and necessary to let each of you know
about my experience with your business entity. I have pictures of the tint job which was performed on my vehicle, and will be more than happy to email them to each of you. Then, you tell me whether or not you would drive around with your
vehicle looking like mine. Contrary to the policies at Tint Masters Auto Center, customers do have recourse against their less than par workmanship, and botched tinting jobs.
If I do not receive a full refund from the tint job with (5) days, I intend to file a complaint in Small Claims Court, and allow a judge to decide whether or not a refund is warranted. The total cost to recover my damages is $226, which includes the original cost of the tint job plus Court costs and filing fees of $126.
This is not a matter of $100 breaking your business or my bank, as I intend to pay 3M Tinting $249 for a professional tint job. I am a very busy professional with a tight schedule, however have spent two weeks dealing with this issue, and it
has disrupted my life immensely.
I appreciate your time and attention to this highly important matter, and should you wish to discuss this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/30/2013 05:50 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Tint-Masters-Auto-Center-TMAC/Durham-North-Carolina-27701/Tint-Masters-Auto-Center-TMAC-TMAC-Shotty-Work-White-Spots-Bubbling-Peeling-Ghetto-T-1039243. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
- Business's (11)
- Lawyers and Law Firms (5312)
- Administrative Law (11)
- Admiralty & Maritime Law (27)
- Agricultural Law (2)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (10)
- Antitrust & Trade Regulation (1)
- Appellate Practice (72)
- Aviation & Aerospace (11)
- Banking Law (90)
- Bankruptcy (380)
- Business Law (232)
- Civil Rights (55)
- Class Actions (30)
- Commercial Law (13)
- Communications Law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Construction Law (83)
- Contracts (7)
- Corporate Law (75)
- Criminal Law (668)
- Debtor & Creditor (51)
- Education Law (14)
- Elder Law (77)
- ElectionCampaign & Political (0)
- Eminent Domain (5)
- Employee Benefits (7)
- Energy (0)
- Entertainment & Sports (17)
- Environmental Law (43)
- Family Law (13)
- Finance (0)
- Government (14)
- Government Contracts (2)
- Health Care (1)
- Immigration (482)
- Indians & Native Populations (1)
- Insurance (90)
- Intellectual Property (526)
- International Law (33)
- International Trade (0)
- Internet Law (7)
- Investments (1)
- Labor & Employment (12)
- Legal Malpractice (92)
- Litigation (20)
- Media Law (1)
- Medical Malpractice (13)
- Mergers & Acquisitions (0)
- Military Law (5)
- Natural Resources (10)
- Occupational Safety & Health (0)
- Personal Injury (842)
- Products Liability (21)
- Professional Liability (0)
- Real Estate (361)
- Securities (169)
- Taxation (142)
- Technology & Science (0)
- Toxic Torts (0)
- Transportation (2)
- Trusts & Estates (368)
- White Collar Crime (1)
- Wills & Probate (7)
- Workers Compensation (242)
- Zoning, Planning & Land Use (10)
- Legal Services (32)
- Arbitrators/Mediators (7)
- Automotive Expert Witnesses (0)
- Bail Bonds (0)
- Court Reporters (1)
- Electronic Data Discovery (1)
- Expert Witnesses (1)
- Forensic Experts (1)
- Jury Selection (0)
- Legal Assistants (8)
- Legal Speakers (2)
- Litigation Support (2)
- Medical Expert Witnesses (1)
- Other (14)
- Paralegal (5)
- Private Investigators (6)
- Process Servers (7)
- Translators/Interpreters (0)
- Miscellaneous Business Services (19)