Business ProfileforCrowley Marine, Inc.

The dispute involves a starter motor that I bought from the company. The resolution that I am seeking is to be allowed to return an unopened, unused starter motor for my boat that I ordered for a full refund of $952 On April 12, 2023 I ordered a starter motor from Crowley Marine . The starter did not work. I returned the starter under warranty. On May 30 ***********************, ******** associate, left a phone stating the starter was faulty, so the company was going to give me my choice of getting a new starter or a refund. On May 30, Crowley Marine ordered a new starter for me, but when it was found to be out of stock, they cancelled the order. I examined their policy for cancelled orders and found that they were usually refunded in 1-2 business days. I located a different starter to fix the boat. The next day I called Crowley to inform them that I would take the refund and was told that they could not provide a refund until they had heard back from the manufacturer. On June 20, an associate at Crowleys called to tell me that they had received the report back from the manufacturer and that the starter motor had checked out okay. I told them that due to their message and the cancelled order for a new starter I had located a different one and no longer needed their starter, but needed the refund. The associate told me the best the company could do was to refund me $200. I told him that there was no way I could accept $200 for a $950 starter. I received the starter on July 3, and immediately reached out through the companys contact us, link on their website hoping to bring a resolution to the problem My argument is as follows. The company told me the starter was faulty on May 30 and stated I would have the option for a refund. On that day, the company reordered and cancelled a new starter when it was out of stock. Company policy states when an order is cancelled a refund will be issued within a few days. I acted on the information the company provided and decided to get a starter elsewhere. After I acted and got a starter elsewhere, the company claimed that it had made a mistake in informing me that the starter was defective. At that point, rather than offering me a full refund, the company offered me $200 for the starter. Knowing this was a bad deal, if not a deceptive practice, but having no power to change outcomes, I had the company ship the starter. None of this was my fault, the company had a miscommunication that I acted upon. The starter they sent back remains in the original box it was shipped in and is unopened. I propose that an equitable solution is for the company to send me a return label and refund me the original cost of the starter $952. That puts us both in the same situation as before the transaction began.