Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  09/17/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I've been having issues with this company's equipment and have been reaching out to them via phone and email since February 2024. I first got my device install 6/17/23 but didn't have a license until December so the car was just sitting. Once I got my license and began to drive the device would violate any given time. I had to have my battery replaced twice and took it for service once to make sure it wasn't my car. I have video of the device being on and my car was off for hours before I noticed it. I also have video of my car being parked and off during two of my violations and Rebecca is telling me it's an installation issue as if I installed it myself. I went to ********** ***** as the company required me to go to get it installed. I had my device replaced one and right before the second replacement my device went into a violation at ********** ***** as they were about to give me my vehicle back after checking it out for three hours and they said it's an issue with the device. I am being force to go to another company because these ppl wont help me and I'm afraid that my license will be revoke because of these issues. I've paid out to them directly $1084.65 plus another $130 for violation. I've also had to pay ********** ***** $239.90 to install the device and 298.62 to calibrate it every time it violated and it hasn't even been a year yet, when I should have only been getting a calibration charge of $127.98 for the entire year. I've been working with them up to this point until I got stranded because the device again went haywire on me. I reached out again and she said because I didn't drive in five days so the device had died even though my car battery was at 100% and my car turned on. I also have a video of that. I need them to refund me and to notify the courts that their equipment is failing cause customers to violate their agreements and potentially get their license revoke due to their errors. Now I have to pay another company to uninstall their device

  

  Business response

  10/10/2024

  We are sorry to hear that the customer has made the decision to go with another vendor without giving us the opportunity to get to the bottom of the issue.  Our technical representatives made several attempts to get in touch with her, but she was either on vacation, not available or refused to take direction when asked by our reps to try and troubleshoot the issue.  
  Customer leased the equipment 6/14/23 and had no reported problems until 7/5/2024.   Therefore, there will be no reimbursement for any fees charged during that timeframe.  Customer is required to have the device serviced on a bi-monthly basis by the regulations of the interlock program of the state of NJ.  Fee is $20 every 60 days (not the fee referenced by customer in her complaint) and not refundable as this is a state mandate required service,
  
  Customer reported issue with device 7/5.  Device not shutting down when vehicle turned off.  Our technical support (TS) suggested a way to manually shut the device down, but customer would not take suggestion because service center told her it was a device malfunction.   The manual shutdown involves pressing a button on the device.  It was decided to send a full replacement system to her service center.   Original equipment was returned to our office and after extensive testing on our simulators, nothing could be found wrong with it.  System has been sent to another customer who has been using without incident.
  
  Customer reported same issue with new system. our TS suggested wiring issues as nothing could be found wrong with the original system. Service center was asked to check as they are responsible for warranting all work done at their shop.  They insisted it was not a wiring issue.   Customer was advised that we would send another system out, but t after it was shipped it was decided that she should go to another shop for them to check the wiring first .  Customer was going out of town for several weeks and said she would call upon return.   She was called while out of town to discuss next steps.   Message left.  She returned and called back but employee was off sick.   She spoke to manager of TS who informed her of option.  She could go to another of our Service centers who would check wiring.   We would pay for that visit, but if the bad wiring issue done by the original service center was the cause, then we would contact them and insist that they return charges they made to her for the original system repairs and for the work done by the new service to repair the wiring.  These funds were not paid to our company, Customer called and made decision that she wanted to go with another interlock provider.
  
  Without a second visit to another shop, we have no way of verifying what caused the issue customer was experiencing.   Therefore, we cannot determine that this was caused by device malfunction.   We are willing to refund the violations charges made for two reports of violations reported to the DMV (one in July for $55 and one in August for $75) and will waive the removal and return shipping fee for taking our device out of her vehicle and returning it to us.   Removal must be done by one of our authorized service centers.   This decision needs to be made by no later than 10/11 to avoid any further charges against her account,
  

  Customer response

  10/24/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
  
  As I've said before I've been having issues dating back to February with you and tried to do my best to work with them. On 10/7/2024 I called and I emailed, letting you know that I was not getting calls back from anyone and that I had violated yet again and was about to be locked out. You knew that you had canceled me as a customer and I did not have any choice but to go to another company or be locked out of my vehicle. You send me a return label and then charged my card again for another monthly service you knew I wasn’t using on 10/12/24.

  
  Again, I agreed to pick up the device and take it to Trenton. Which shows after everything else I’ve been going through, that I was working with you because that wasn’t my job. But once I was denied the device I was told to drive to see if they'd fixed the issue, which I show you in the emails, that the issue still wasn’t fixed. I was never told anything else after that because I questioned my refund and put in the complaint. After which, no one would talk to me, return my calls or email me back and then, you removed me from ********** ***** customers list and I was no longer able to have my car calibrated and I was forced to go to another company or go with out a vehicle. 

  I am asking for my fine in the amount of $55 and $75, my excess calibrations fees $21.33 x11=234.63, my $69.31 which was charged on 10/12/24 and the removal charge of $126.88 for a total of $560.82 to be refunded to me. I have work with this company and did my best to give you enough time to fix the issue and all I did was accumulate more and more charges, time off of work, batteries, service not need on my car and wasted time running around to accommodate your request with having my vehicle check over for hours for it to do the same thing over again. At the least you can do is to give me back this, 
  
  Regards,
  
  Carmella Williams
  
  
  
  

  
  

  

  Business response

  10/28/2024

  We have made our final offer to you via the last posting.  We will refund $130 in violation reporting fees and your October lease payment of $69.31.    We are not responsible for any fees you paid to the service center.  They are independent contractors responsible for work performed at their shop.   We will make payment if $199.31 upon receipt of your approval.   No further discussions or offers are forthcoming,  As explained before, you made no efforr to allow us to get to the root cause of the issue to affect any other refunds.  Your system was returned to us and found to have no mechanical issues.   

• Initial Complaint

  12/27/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I made the unfortunate decision to go with this company so that I could drive amd work. I was not required to have an interlock but was moving and started a new job in September. Despite the horrible reviews, I went with sensolock and have had nothing but problems with the failing equipment and horrible customer service. My equipment t failed three different times. I have had to have my vehicle towed and was left stranded as the service center was an hour drive one way. The last two times I had to get rides, call ****, stay in a hotel and pay expensive two fees. When asked for reimbursement I was told the equipment failures could be my vehicle or my fault. All three times the equipment was returned and I was not told what the problem was. One of the techs told me it was their power cord bit the other times I was not notified of why. When I asked for reimbursement I was told my car didn't need to be towed. My car was an hour from the service center and could not be driven because the equipment didn't work. I was told I could get hald off mybill for the next month. I was charged a late fee last time by the scammers saying my card was removed. When I called back they were able to charge my card. I went off on the brainless idiot that worked there and was told I would need to remove my equipment which I gladly did. They have caused so much unneeded frustration and expense. Theae lowlife should be out of business.

  

  Business response

  12/27/2023

  ******, As was explained to you by Tech Support, there was a means of starting your car to return to service center however, against our recommendation, you decided to have it towed, that was your call.  You booked a hotel room, incurred **** and other expenses and expected us to pay for them. I explained we simply do not reimburse expenses unless they were pre-approved. As for cc late fee, upon your specific request, November 22 via voicemail, which we have the voice recording on file, you specifically requested that your cc be made inactive so that it required your approval before a transaction was processed. When you failed to call to authorize the lease payment by close of business the due date, a late payment fee was processed. When you spoke with a person in Accounting, demanding that the late fee be credited while lobbing a plethora of F bombs at her along with calling her a whore and bitch, I followed up with an email stating there would be no credit for the late fees and that your account was permanently suspended, the lease agreement cancelled, early termination fee waived and explained that you needed to complete the IID mandated term with another provider. Your language was inappropriate, vulgar and vile, whereas I hope for the sake of others in your life there is another side to you, I will not allow rude customers to speak with employees in that manner. For the record, you have an account balance of $160 which if not paid by close of business December 29, your account will be turned over to a collection agency.
  
  As for the “horrible” reviews you referenced, we have been in business over 25 years having serviced thousands and thousands of customers in that time. Whereas no business owner wants to receive a bad review, the reality of our market is no one wants the product to begin with therefore, certain individuals refuse to accept responsibility for their actions and look to place blame on others for their actions and issues. Last I knew, there are approximately 12 – 15 negative reviews over 25 years, given the nature of the business, I can accept that it’s simply not possible to achieve 100% customer satisfaction. However, a barometer to our longevity and success is, unfortunately for the individual, we have customers returning to us every month based on a positive previous experience(S), to help them through another IID mandate.          
  

• Initial Complaint

  12/20/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY PICK ANOTHER PROVIDER!!!! These devices are old boxy outdated overused pieces of junk. They become immediately uncalibrated by a mere gust of wind in the winter, even if you bring them inside. I am on my second device because the first one was malfunctioned. My car was bricked for a week because they did not have a new device for me. I had to pay towing and for all of the false positives even when I wasn’t eating or drinking anything!! Now I have my second device and guess what? I’m stranded again at the gas station in my way to work because of recalibration issues. Another 55 dollars and possibly another month violation for literally no reason yay! I’m scared to even call the company because of how bad my experience was last time.. If you call the company and tell them your problem they will literally scream at you and gaslight you when all I want to actually do is get my device fixed. I have paid hundred on hundreds in hundreds of dollars of false readings which they then basically use to frame you into getting violations at the dmv. They don’t try to resolve your issue they just tell you to be more cautious when eating lunch and a bunch of other deflections because they know their devices are not working properly all the time. Freezing my ass off on the streets right now because of sensolock.

  

  Business response

  12/20/2023

  The State of CT DMV IID Regulations stipulate a pass/fail point of .025 or greater, all units shipped are programmed to conform to the mandating state and of course, federal requirements. Since this customer had the device installed in June, he has provided 1,508 breath samples, of those, there were only 8 failed start tests (approximately .005% of all samples provided). Neither of the two IID head units he’s had since the initial installation have “become immediately uncalibrated by a mere gust of wind in the winter fallen out of calibration.” The 8 failed breath tests had alcohol readings ranging from .025 - .090. CT DMV requires the interlock go into early lockout within 3 days due to any failed or missed test. That said, whereas the pass/fail point is .025, DMV only extend terms on failed start tests if the reading is .05 or greater. When a separate Violation Report is required due to state regulations, vendors charge a reporting fee, in our case the fee is $55 per report, regardless of the number of failures or missed tests on a single report. Other IID vendors charge $75 per each failed/missed test which in his case, would have amounted to $600. In sum, this customer was charged $210 in Violation fees. The unit he claimed was out of calibration, tested exactly according to specification upon receipt and has been in use another customer since late July without a reported incident. As a result, he was charged $95 for returning working equipment.  In general, there is a misnomer about “false positives” – ignition interlocks detect and record breath alcohol, regardless of the source – whether from an alcoholic beverage or various contaminates such as cologne, hand sanitizer, body spray, work related environmental chemicals, ethanol, etc. Whereas in many cases the failure is not a result of the consumption of an alcoholic beverage, state regulations consider it a failure. The reality is no interlock vendor is providing the breath sample for the customer, therefore it’s in the customer’s best interest to control their environment to eliminate exposure to all alcohol-based products while operating a vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock. There is no “gaslighting” occurring, just the unfortunate reality of being required only operate a vehicle with a mandated ignition interlock.  Best regards,CraigF Craig L***Owner/CEOSens-O-Lock of America

• Initial Complaint

  12/02/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  Send-o-lock provides me with mantadory interlock device for my vehicle. Since I have had these devices I have a had repeated failures where the device won't accept testing and "locks me out" of my vehicle leaving it immobilized. This has now happened on several separate occasions and I have video evidence. Sens-o-locks only solution is to mail me a new unit which is subject to the mail service and whenever sens-o-lock decides to send the units, which I have records that indicate they take they're time with that. So I'm currently locked out of my vehicle, have been waiting since I called 9am Thursday 11/30/2023 (this is documented) and I won't receive my new unit until the post office opens up on Monday ( I have record of shipping). ********* has offered no solution and the owner/ceo has directly deflected my concerns and reverted to blaming me for originally needing the device rather than acknowledging his faulty machinery. I want them to held accountable and to be compensated for the days I have not been able to use my vehicle.

  

  Business response

  12/04/2023

  Submit the following in reply to BBB complaint: ******, you’ve made some inaccurate interpretations and out of context references from our email exchanges Friday, December 1, related to this matter. I’ll skip the rude and unprofessional references in your emails and reply to a few of the salient points. Failures and lockouts - Since installing the system March 3, his log records show there have been 429 passed tests but only 2 failed tests where some form of alcohol was detected in the breath sample. This represents .00047% of all tests provided, very commendable however, CT DMV Regulations require the unit to lockout in 3 days. Defecting concerns and placing blame - You referred to yourself and others as being “forced consumers” to which I replied, “Yes, I understand that few want this product but are forced to use it due to prior decisions and mandates. No judgement!” Equipment maintenance - To address your accusation that we do not maintain our equipment, I replied – “I assure you that we maintain all of our equipment, parts and components are replaced, when necessary, units are cleaned and, every piece of equipment shipped is thoroughly tested prior to shipping.” Our process, along with the other IID companies in the market is to replace equipment if there is a reported failure. Most, if not all IID vendors, ship a replacement component or system when issues are reported. I then stated “The unfortunate reality is than in general, whether it's my customer or one from another IID provider, people tend not to treat these systems as they do their cell phone or tablet. We do not control the environment in which they are exposed nor the way in which there are handled. We do the best possible job of providing a quality product and service to help make our customer's experience as positive as it can be.” Mailing units – you moved from CT to NY, a state we do not service therefore do not have service centers.  As a courtesy, rather than driving 160 miles each way to the nearest service center in CT or NJ, we had been sending replacement head units each month. This courtesy is will no longer be offered, you will need to select a NJ or CT based service center for future calibrations. Aside from sending head units for your normal monthly service, to maintain compliance with CT Regs, there has only been one other unit replaced due to a reported issue. Upon return, the device was thoroughly tested, the reported issue could not be replicated, and the same unit is in use with another customer without any reported incidents. Taking our time to replace systems – as established, you reported an issue Thursday morning, November 30. A replacement unit was shipped the same day. Unfortunately, packages are delayed due to a significant increase in seasonal shipping volume. **** was chosen as their system indicated arrival would occur by Saturday, quicker than the alternative carrier.  Unfortunately, it was not delivered. You were informed of the possible delay due to the increase in volume, we explained that once we tender a package to the carrier, we have no control over delivery. Accountability and compensation – whereas IID vendors do not provide loss of use compensation given that we do not control the environment in which the system is used, vehicle conditions or manner of use, as a one-time courtesy, I will extend a 6-day credit to his account, a 6th day is included in case the shipment is further delayed until tomorrow.        

  Customer response

  12/07/2023

  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.   Regards,  ****** *******

• Initial Complaint

  11/06/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  When I first got senso lock in my car within the first week I had gotten like four violations because it needed a firmware update and was malfunctioning so they did that and I thought It had fixed it but getting random charges in my account and they’re saying I received a violation on October 20 of a fail in rolling test with a BAC that never happened if it happened I wouldn’t care I understand I wouldn’t go through so much trouble but it was a Friday I was at work. I literally don’t drink at all anymore. Didn’t even get this for alcohol and I I’m just baffled because it never happened and I had to get a calibration on the 25th. They never said anything to me like it never happened so I don’t understand how it recorded it and they are absolutely no help at senso lock nobody knows what they’re talking about, nobody knows what to do. They transfer you to every other person and then you get a manager who doesn’t do shit like this machine can’t mess up because it obviously did over and over and over and over again.

  

  Business response

  11/07/2023

  ********,
  
  I appreciate the feedback but it’s important to recognize details and facts. The firmware update you reference shortly after the installation was a maintenance matter much like firmware updates for cell phones. The difference is this model IID does not communicate via cellular network therefore, the unit must be connected to a computer to perform the update.
  
  You called Saturday afternoon, after the office was closed, asking about a charge to your account. To alleviate your concerns over the weekend, after attempting to call you, I sent the email below. The only edits to the email I sent you is deleting the last name of the rep who you spoke with along with the failed test reading.
  
  Aside from standard monthly lease charges, the only other charges to your account, as outlined in the lease agreement that you accepted and signed, are for two violations to the DMV IID Program Regulations. The first, is a result of failure to show up for the monthly calibration service DMV requires. As you know, there is a 5-day grace period to show for the service and every time you start your vehicle the dates are displayed on the device screen. As clearly addressed in the training video and in the Quick Reference Guide, both of which you claim to have watched and read, lockout occurs at 12:01AM on the Lockout Date.
  
  The second violation fee was charged was due to a low BrAC level. The email I sent Saturday afternoon, below, covers this topic.         
  
  “I tried returning your call but for some reason the call did not go through. The $55 charge was a Violation Reporting fee from a failed RRT on 10/25, see below. The good news is DMV will not add another month unless there are two or more failed RRTs in the same month - looks like you’ll be fine. It’s a very low level, probably a result of come airborne contaminant in the vehicle – windshield wiper fluid, hand sanitizer, perfume, body spray etc.
  
  Since you have five minutes to provide a test when the alert sounds, it’s a good idea to lower the windows, let some fresh air clear out the vehicle and the a few deep breaths to purge anything from your lungs before providing the test. This should help eliminate any similar issue in the future.
  
  10/25/2023 8:24 AM  (******)  -{Customer had Early Lock Out 10/24/2023} - Card Declined/Sent Email -
  HH-**************** LOD-11/24/2023
  2023-10-20        18:23:51             ***************** **** **** ****** **** ****** ***** * *****
  
  Best regards,
  
  Craig
  
  F Craig L***
  Owner/CEO
  Sens-O-Lock of America
  

• Initial Complaint

  04/07/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  4/7/23 this is a interlock breathalyzer i had a wintergreen mint and it violated me said i was drinking, i was using smart start and never had any issues like this

  Customer response

  04/13/2023

  Please be advised the company has contacted me and resolved the issue to my satisfaction in a very timely manner. Please update or remove the complaint. Thank you **** ****

• Initial Complaint

  06/13/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Sens-O-Lock of America I'm now having the second replacement unit sent to me. The last unit registered 0.0 to 0.2+ and then back to 0.0 in 30min. Clearly there is a problem with the unit. Took the unit directly to the mechanic that installed it and the unit failed to boot properly. The mechanic needed to get on the phone with the vendor to get the unit to at least boot. The company refused to take any responsibility and has the policy to blame the customer for their broken equipment.

  

  Business response

  06/13/2022

  Customer's claim that our company is not taking any responsibility is incorrect.  We are sending a replacement unit to the client's service cente,r and he was told that we will thoroughly test the unit upon return.  If a device issue is discovered, appropriate action with the DMV in his mandating state and appropriate fee credits provided.  This issue is pending until the device in questions is replaced and returned to our company for testing.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩