Meggan V.
Opportunistic Forfeiture and Hidden Fee
I came with my friends for a brief lesson and a drive test, and witnessed how they ridiculously treated their customers and charged a hidden fee. Even though they removed the extra fee at the end, charging it without consent in the first place is already an intentional attempt to take advantage. Only reverting it after the customer discovery, doesn't make you innocent. We checked in with the staff weeks before the scheduled lesson about what documents we need. Explained that we have a digital permit, but not a physical card. The staff offered (in writing) to print it for us, because my friend travelled internationally for this specific drive test in Washington state. For 13 days, this driving school went silent after getting the personal info and no issue was brought to our attention. We even arrived earlier to deal with the printing, which failed due to a system error. The school accepts no alternative ID and is very passive-aggressive in pointing fingers and putting all the responsibility on the student. Charged a hidden no-show fee on the account, whereas we were physically there and punctual. Forfeited the lesson tuition, refused to reschedule, and charged an additional no-show fee. No matter how much Gursanjam Bal (owner) wants to talk out of this, charging without consent at the beginning already meant there's no prudent scrutiny! According to law: (a) RCW 19.86.020 (Washington Consumer Protection Act) — unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce, including: (i) billing fees not authorized by any signed agreement. (b) RCW 18.235.130(11) and (12) (Uniform Regulation of Business and Professions Act) — misrepresentation in any aspect of the conduct of the business, and failure to adequately supervise auxiliary staff to the extent that consumers may be harmed. (c) "Courtesy" does not defeat reliance — this is the basis of equitable estoppel.