Skperformance:
I appreciate having read RX in NC’s opinion of you - it does seem to be accurate, and it is evidenced by several instances in your post to me.
I don’t know why the officer said that a police report would only be filed if the actual damage to any and all parts of my vehicle totals more than $1,000.00, and that labour costs and taxes should not be included. I trust that he would know the letter of the law better than I would since he probably has more experience in that regard, in addition to probably having received intensive pertinent training.
I did not take any pictures of the damage, so therefore I could not post any.
I found your assertion to be ludicrous - I’ll quote - “Once you show up to make a report they have to make one . Except with you it seems.”
I doubt that the police will respect you as an unquestionable authority in that regard!
And then, to your credit, you even do admit that you are being condescending by your question - “Could it be it is a scratch on the bumper and you want the trunk and both 1/4's blended and a new set of tires ?” No, I didn’t take any pictures of the damage, so therefore I could not post any. But I did have a damage estimate from a reputable collision repair shop in Waterdown, ON. when I visited the police department.
Your following statement “Like most people who come to the Internet hoping to rant and rave over something they rarely post true facts that are irrefutable, like pictures.” I’ll leave it up to any other viewers on this site to form an opinion as to whether or not my initial post validly can be described as ranting and raving.
My reference to the fact that your spelling is often inaccurate was intended to indicate that you do appear to have a problem dealing with factual evidence. Now do you understand that?
As a reply to your pathetic attempt at ridicule as evidenced by your statement “I hope you have finally learned in all your years of spelling how to drive properly now.” Yes, as a matter of fact, in my 45 years of driving experience, I have never caused my insurance company to pay to repair any other person’s vehicle, nor for any injury either to anyone else or to myself. Nice try, though!
Then you lamely assert - “The best thing is not to drive in to a spot ,especially one you cannot drive out of safely which you should have noted before exiting the car.” Have you ever noticed that a driver who has parked in a partially vacant portion of a parking lot may, on occasion, return to his or her vehicle to obsrve that other vehicles have, in the meantime, parked alongside, thereby obstructing the view?
And your comment - “Pay attention to WHAT ?! Did you explain yourself before ? Yes , that was the sound of a resounding NO in your head!” somehow doesn’t seem to correspond to the degree of impartiality and competence which a viewer would expect from a management member on this site.
To refute your assertion that I “like to whine and complain,” take the time to reread my initial post, and don’t be so ready to shoot from the lip, as another poster has accurately confided.
Your hypothetical rant about a customer of McDonald’s, although far-fetched, does merit a reply. Yes, if I was a customer of McDonald’s and my car was hit on a McDonalds’s parking lot by a McDonald’s employee who was driving carelessly, I would probably believe that McDonald’s franchise holder to be somewhat culpable, and the issue itself worth reporting to McDonald’s headquarters so that an investigation might ensue.
You claim that “There is no right/wrong side of the road on private property.” I believe that a two lane traffic artery would reasonably be expected to have one lane in one direction, and the other lane in the opposite direction, unless otherwise indicated. Here, in Canada, the lane to the right is the uniformly established avenue for forward vehicular traffic. Hopefully you do actually realize that!
Your senseless and baseless comments regarding “ brush off ... being persecuted ... the Hubble telescope” demonstrates your inability to be rational, or even competent, in this regard.
My intention is not to attack you, but it is evident that you do leave a trail leading to nowhere worthwhile by your reply.
Since you do “know the manager of the dealership ... As well as having a more than few contacts at Toyota Head office,” would you care to be helpful as a management member of this site by actually providing a few of their names and contact numbers or addresses? You sure seem to be thin-skinned by your words “But that must be a lie because why would they cohort with someone who can't spell.” When did I ever say or insinuate that? Obviously you choose to live in a world of assumption - that validity has been mildly proven by me, but so much more explicitly by you own words.
Thanks for your “Just a word of advise” - I think that you meant advice.
Never once have I claimed to be a victim. But right from the start you insisted that I am “upset so (I am) leaving the facts out.” Somehow, you haven’t competently supported that false assumption!
My initial post related in detail the events of the collision which happened, where it happened, and who I and a witness maintain was responsible. That post was positioned in an appropriate topic location on this Lexus Owner’s website. I also stated that an employee of the Lexus Canada Customer Service Department gave me the “brush-off” by refusing my request that my complaint be forwarded to a higher level of administration, and that I be provided with relevant contact information. I believe that my request, as a Lexus vehicle owner, is not unwarranted or unreasonable. After all, isn’t Lexus official motto - The relentless pursuit of excellence?
I found this comment of your’s amusing - “How you read the original post shows who you are and your emotional state to argue with anyone you can wether they are trying to sift through the information or laying blame.” Would you please explain how my original post would ever show that, as you say, I am ready “to argue with anyone”? My original post was not directed to anyone specific, so how could I have honestly demonstrated that I would be ready to argue without any comment from anyone? Don’t you realize that you’re not being logical in that regard?
But in summation, I note that your management member’s description as “Official LOC Bad Speller” is evident and accurate - Congratulations!
