I rarely leave reviews like this, particularly for a business I have repeatedly supported, but this…read moreexperience warrants one.
I reserved a bike online. When I arrived, multiple details of my reservation were incorrect, including the date and bike size. I provided the information again and moved on. Mistakes happen.
The bike itself was the bigger problem. The chain showed visible rust/oxidation, and the bike did not shift properly while I was riding it in the hills.
When I returned the bike and reported the problem, I was told that their bikes are maintained and lubricated before rentals and that the coastal environment had oxidized the chain during my rental.
That explanation is difficult to reconcile with the condition of the bike and basic corrosion science.
Rust is the result of oxidation of iron-containing metal. Moisture and oxygen cause corrosion, salt can accelerate it, and proper lubrication helps protect a bicycle chain by limiting exposure to those elements. The bike was stored inside a garage when not in use and was not ridden on the beach or exposed to ocean water.
I had the bike for approximately six days.
Coastal air can accelerate corrosion. That does not establish that visible corrosion and shifting problems developed entirely during my six-day rental. The condition of the chain and poor shifting raised legitimate questions about its prior condition and maintenance.
Then came the $55 charge.
I had communicated that I would return the bike Sunday at approximately 3:00 p.m. I actually returned it eight minutes after they opened Sunday morning, hours before the return time I had communicated.
I was still charged an additional $55.
During the subsequent text exchange, I was told that they would have reimbursed me if I had purchased chain lubricant or paid for a shifting adjustment.
Think about that: I rented a bike that did not shift properly, reported the problem, and was subsequently told I could have purchased lubricant or obtained an adjustment and sought reimbursement.
I asked them to reconsider the $55 charge.
Their written response was: "The total rental cost would have come out to $380 in any case so nothing to reconsider there unfortunately."
That response summarizes the customer-service problem better than I ever could.
I have rented from this business multiple times. My friends and family have also spent significant money renting from them, and I have referred customers to them.
All of that goodwill was lost over how this situation was handled.
I have screenshots documenting the text exchange and will include them with this review, with identifying information redacted. Readers do not have to take my word for what was said. They can read the exchange and reach their own conclusions.
Reservation mistakes happen. Mechanical problems happen. Billing disputes happen.
How a business responds to them is what determines whether customers return. I won't. Happy to provide screen shots.
Ryan, your response reinforces my concerns because both the dates and the math you provided are incorrect.
Sunday was August 30, not August 29. I returned the bike Sunday, August 30, approximately eight minutes after you opened. I did not return it Monday morning, as you stated.
Your math also does not reconcile. You claim I had the bike for "9 calendar days," yet you state that the $55 charge covered "the week plus one day." Seven days plus one additional day is eight days, not nine. Both statements cannot be correct.
You also question why I would provide screenshots because your business keeps records. That is precisely why the screenshots matter. They document the actual communications, dates, and timestamps and allow readers to independently compare those records with what is now being claimed publicly.
Characterizing this as "confusing for you" while your own response contains an incorrect date, an incorrect return day, and contradictory math is dismissive and does nothing to address the substance of my review.
This is not a matter of opinion or confusion. Dates, timestamps, charges, reservation information, and written communications are objectively verifiable. I have retained the screenshots and documentation to substantiate what I have stated.
It is evident based on your response that you are not capable of reading and interpreting my response. The screen shots are provided so... maybe you can understand the facts. Maybe you can see how I was given a thumbs up and encouraged to post a review. This has to be embarrassing at this point. I wish you luck being able to read my response - this is such a joke.
