383 views
New Reviewer
4 comments
Updated by user May 08, 2012

It is now May 8, 2012 and Food Basis refuses to demonstrate good customer service by not offering to pay for the damage that they orginally acknowledged they would pay for. I am going to take some photos that I have and put in on the website for other comsumers to see the damage caused by the shopping cart on April 11, 2011. The damage is quite evident.

Original review posted by user Apr 05, 2012

On April 11, 2011 at approximately 12:30 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. John had dropped me off in front of the Food Basics store, 100 Jamieson Parkway to pick up one item. It was an extremely windy day with winds reaching up to 70-80 kms. There was a lot of activity in the parking lot that day with patrons leaving the shopping carts all over the place instead of in the designated areas. There was one young man that was doing a great job moving the carts but he was doing a job of 2 people that day.Upon exiting the store John had advised me that a run away shopping cart had hit the side of the truck several times with such force that the impact caused visible damage to the passenger door. John advised me to find the store manager and that there was a witness to the accident. John stated the wind moved the shopping cartcratso swiftly it was impossible for him to react, the shopping cart bounced off the truck 3 times. I brought the assistant manager; Mark Chaves over to the truck to witness the damage. The witness verified to Mark Chaves that he witnessed the cart hitting the side of the truck 3 times. Mark Chaves the shopping cart and matched it up with the dents and the assistant manager agreed that they matched. I filled out the accident report and returned it to Mark. We left to go home and came back out to vacuum the truck at the Petro Canada gas station. When we opened the doors on the passenger side we had noticed 2 more dings we did not seen earlier due to the sunlight. We drove the truck back to Basics and spoke to the Store Manager; Mike Helwig.

We showed the damage and amended the accident report. Mike Helwig then advised us to take the truck to Fix Auto (Cambridge) that is where all vehicles go to for repair. We advised him that we would not go to that shop for repairs and that we preferred to go to a Chrysler dealership. We did say that to be fair we will go to the shop to obtain an estimate. The reason that we did not want to have the truck repaired at Fix Auto was we had a bad experience several years ago at Fix Auto when it was Collision Plus, the sticker from the car had been stolen plus the car lot to hold vehicle was not enclosed which would pose a liability and the customer service was terrible. We went to the Fix Auto Shop to obtain a estimate. Joel Giddy viewed the damage and took photographs said it would be roughly $700.00 - $800.00 to do the repairs. I went inside to obtain the estimate and Joel stated that he was a little embarrassed in the quote of $700.00-$800.00 that he stated prior. He now quoted me $1390.86.

The following day we obtained 2 other quotes and faxed all 3 quotes to Metro Ontario Inc. in Toronto. I received call from Carmen and she stated that Metro would have to go with the lower quote and we advised her to make the cheque payable to me. Carmen advised us that is not company policy and I advised her to confirm that with her manager and get back to me. Carmen called back and stated that they would not do that and we advised her that they had admitted liability., there was a witness to the accident we had provided them with 3 estimates. We wanted to wait to do the repairs so that we could do some other repairs to damages that was caused by us. Metro stated their policy stands and would go with the lower estimate of the 2 other estimates we provided (Chrysler and Ford) and would only pay the amount directly to the dealership. and the not the Plaintiff. I have proven my damages. I have gone through the process of filling out the accident report, liability has been established and an independent witness has been presented to the assistant store manager. Their only liability is to pay for the damages caused by the run away shopping cart.

I served and filed the statement of claim on April 21, 2011. On May 17, 2011 I filed my affidavit of service and the court clerk advised me that the defendant did file their defence and found them in default. An assessment hearing was set for July 13, 2011. The defendant filed motion for an extension of time to file a defence and was granted that extension. At the motion trial Joanne Penney had stated she wanted to settle the a matter. The judge ordered cost payable to me in the amount of 100.00 and Joanne Penney was to file her defence in a certain amount of time. Joanne Penney had served me with a whole bunch of unnecessary documents a lot of which was not relevant to the case. In fact there was another estimate from Fix Auto which I had not seen before and was even less than the first Fix Auto estimate. We both became very suspicious.

A pre-trial was set for July 13, 2011. At the pre-trial Joanne Penney stated that she wanted to settle the matter but did not want to pay me directly. The defendant was not willing to negotiate the matter so a trial date was set for November 1, 2011. The Rep-trial Judge advised Joanne Penney how to submit her documentation as evidence at trial, expert statements, sworn affidavits, etc. , none of which she complied with.

Throughout the process I attempted to settle the matter by requesting that the cheque be paid to me directly. We had conversations in the past and I also stated in court that there was other damages that was totally unrelated to the damage caused by one of the shopping carts. I wanted to save up and get the work all done at one time, but Joanne Penney was uncooperative. Joanne Penney had stated that she would only pay the lowest appraisal directly to the Dealership.

Prior to the trial Joanne Penney had called our home and suggested that are motives for our lawsuit were suspect when she implied that we were in court before We cut the conversation short due to Joanne Penney unprofessional behaviour and unfounded comments.

The trial was an absolute disaster. Joanne Penney could not present the facts and did such a terrible job of the case it caused the judge to interrupt the trial several times. In fact the Judge was so upset that Metro a big corporation who has the resources to have hired a lawyer or at least a paralegal sent an employee to present the defendant's case, did not know anything about the court process. A trial that should have taken no more than a hour ended up taking half a day. Joanne Penney as stated in the beginning instructed Mark Chaves to lie on the stand. The witnesses statements were written by Joanne Penney, and the statements were not in their words. Joanne Penney sas leading the witness in their statements. When I was questioning Mark Chaves on the stand he totally contradicted the events that happened on that day. Mark Caves lied and said he did not speak to the witness or did not see the licence plate number that I wrote on the claim form. There as supposed to be another witness a S.R. who Joanne Penney who referred to as slightly handicapped. Ms. Penney should be spoken to on that point alone. S.R. was not able to attend on the trial date because he was he was experiencing anxiety. I believe they pressure him so much to say certain thinsg on the stand that he had an anxiety attack.

On the day in question it was a very windy day and may I suggest that it was a poor error in judgement to have only one person controlling the courts if they are handicapped. Despite Sam Robinson 's efforts to keep up there were too may carts that he was not capable of doing so.

The Judge ruled based on a case law that related to a WalMart in Newfoundland and ruled in favour of the defendant without costs. It was only one case law an irrelevant case law because it related to a parking lot where they have different system to collecting the carts. But the judge had ruled it was an accident. He also stated that if he ruled our favour he would have ruled on the whole amount of $1447.00.

Joanne Penney and Mark Chaves conduct was deplorable and it would appear and I am disappointed in saying so but Basics and Metro are condoning their employees to lie and manipulate a situation in their favour by illegal an immoral means. We want Canadians from coast to coast to know of our unpleasant experience at Food Basics and the deplorable treatment we received from head office.

In closing Metro had accepted liability and all we wanted was for Metro to pay for the damages nothing more and nothing less. It was all down to Metro not wanting to pay us directly.

nd filed the statement of claim on April 21, 2011. On May 17, 2011 I filed my affidavit of service directly to the Dealership.

S.R who Joanne Penney who referred to Sam as slightly handicapped. Ms. Penney should be spoken to on that point alone. S. R. was not able to attend on the trial date because he was he was experiencing anxiety.

On the day in question it was a very windy day and may I suggest that it was a poor error in judgement to have only one person controlling the courts if they are handicapped. Despite Sam Robinson 's efforts to keep up there were too may carts that he was not capable of doing so.

The Judge ruled based on a case law that related to a WalMart in Newfoundland and rule din favour of the defendant without costs. It was only one case law an irrelevant case law because it related to a parking lot where they have different system to collecting the carts. But the judge had ruled it was an accident. He also stated that if he ruled our favour he would have ruled on the whole amount of $1447.00.

Joanne Penney and Mark Chaves conduct was deplorable and it would appear and I am disappointed in saying so but Basics and Metro are condoning their employees to lie and manipulate situation in their favour by illegal an immoral means. We are going to contact the papers to advise Canadians of our unpleasant experience at Food Basics.

In closing Metro had accepted liability and all we wanted was for Metro to pay for the damages nothing more and nothing less. It was all down to Metro not wanting to pay us directly.

I wrote a letter to Vice President Joanne Choiniere, and the President, Eric La Fleche requesting Metro investigate the matter fairly an properly. Unfortunately, no one from Metro had the had the decency to pick up the phone to talk to us directly to obtain our side of the story. Metro closed the matter without a proper investigation. It would be not inappropriate to say that Metro condones their to employees to lie on the witness stand.

We are not surprised by Metro's decision. How can a fair and complete investiagtion be conducted if no one from Metro has called us to hear our side of the story . How cannot take the word of Metrowhen we have not been aadvsied as to what the 2 Metro employee have said in order that we can address and rebut their statements.

As of posting this review, my truck remains unrepaired. Metro has demonstrated extremely poor customer service and codones very professional and illegal conduct by their employeeall. I will continue to to make Canadians aware that Metro does not give a *** about their customers.

Location: Cambridge, Ontario

Do You Have Something To Say ?
Write a review

Comments

chat-icon

Please avoid publishing any personal information and promotional content

You will be automatically registered on our site. Username and password will be sent to you via email.
Post Comment
Guest

Should of got your truck fixed they offered to fix it your just being greedy you piece of ***

Guest

You're a *** joke

Guest

Mike Hedwig should have had the shopping carts collected, especially at high winds. He is the store Manager no excuses! Fix Auto lol bad experience made this store even better.

Guest

You're a nut! A serial suer I'm sure.

Food Basics Reviews

  1. 21 reviews
  2. 19 reviews
  3. 15 reviews
  4. 7 reviews
  5. 7 reviews
Food Basics reviews