Arlington Tire & Auto Service Center

Our business was first contacted by *** *** (***) over the phone on or about October 13, and informed us of a Chevy Equinox that had a coolant leak for a vehicle that had been sitting for no less than months According to my Service Advisor, Robin, *** was very
vague about his knowledge of the vehicle's problems *** would only be certain about the facts that "water was gushing out" of the engine area, and that "he believed it to be a bad water pump." when asked specific questions about the vehicle's condition and its history, he would become agitated and say that the vehicle had been sitting for a long time, that he had been "sick" and would only repeat that "water was gushing out" of the engine area, and that "he believed it to be a bad water pump."*** would not (or perhaps could not) answer questions about the circumstances leading up to his conclusions he kept repeating Additionally, and contrary to Complainant's initial statement that "she took her vehicle in to be inspected and also to be repaired due to overheating" is wholly incorrectNever once, did *** say anything about the vehicle overheating, despite Complainant's claim that "this is the reason she had taken the vehicle in in the first place." Furthermore, *** never once told us to discuss the complaint about the vehicle, or the circumstances leading up to the condition of the vehicle with the Complainant, or anyone else for that matterOn or about October 15, 2015, the vehicle was towed to us without either *** or the Complainant accompanying the vehicle Nonetheless, based only on the information provided to us by ***, we wrote a work order (No36907) and included the complaints provided to us (see enclosed invoice.) Based on the information provided to us by ***, and after inspecting the vehicle, we found NEITHER the water pump to be bad, no "water gushing form the engine area." as stated by *** However, we did find a much slighter coolant leak (slighter than "gushing out") originating from the intake manifold, not an "intake valve" as stated in Complainant's Revdex.com complaintRobin prepared an estimate for the repair of the intake manifold and informed *** of our findings and left it to him whether he wanted us to go forward with any repairs At this point, *** neither offered any further information about the circumstances surrounding the condition of the vehicle, nor did he direct us to anyone else that may have such knowledge, i.ethe Complainant After no less than hours, *** authorized us to go forward with the repairs to the issues identified and discussedOn a side note, I find it interesting, that the Complainant is willing to make claims in her Complaint letter without offering any documentation that she received from us This would clearly show the complain, what work was performed and what was foundNonetheless, such information is being offered herein with this responseOn or about October 24, 2015, *** was informed the work authorized had been completed For the first time, on October 24, when the car was being paid for and picked up by ***, the Complainant had contact with this shop by accompanying *** Again, the Complainant had an opportunity to discuss with us any circumstances surrounding the condition of the car when it had problems prior to bringing same to our shop, but no such topics were reviewedOn or about October 26, *** (NOT the Complainant) called us about an overheating problem he was experiencing This is the FIRST time we were hearing of an overheating complaint We immediately took in the vehicle and started our diagnostic After approximately hours of time we spent on the vehicle (which was not charged to the customer), we did find that the engine had damage, likely a bad head gasket We informed *** about our findings, and understandably he was not pleased due to the money he had just spent (Which was $and NOT $as stated by Complainant)Again, we tried to obtain more information about the initial reason for which the vehicle was brought into us, but *** offered no more than he had before, again becoming agitated about the questionsAnd again, *** offered no one else with which for us to discuss the circumstancesAdditionally, I have no proof of how or where Complainant drove the vehicle after leaving the shop Something else could have happened to the vehicle while in their possession that Complainant fails to reveal (much like the original complaint (for the first time) of overheating, *** admitted to having driven the vehicle hot (i.e., driving while the temperature gauge was in the red) (See invoice Noof October 26) which in and of itself can cause cylinder head damageHad Complainant provided you the documents we gave *** regarding our work and findings on the vehicle and not try to mislead you and the Revdex.com, she would see there is NO reference to a "cracked cylinder." There is o way to determine a cracked cylinder head, again which cannot be diagnosed without removing the cylinder head form the engine and tested in a very specific wayComplainant then talks about how we gave her "another diagnostic list of problems that were not mentioned the first time." I am unaware to what Complainant refers As a part of our service, we offer a complimentary check-out of the vehicle so the customer is aware of other conditions of their vehicle Perhaps to this is what Complainant is referring Again, had Complainant bothered to offer you your original invoice (of October 24), they were clearly informed of these other issues In fact, Robin verbally informed *** of these issues, to which he declined any further serviceFinally, Complainant discusses in her complaint letter how she allegedly took the car to "another mechanic and was told that the engine was blown." What is it supposed to mean that the "engine was blown?" No explanation is offered by Complainant about this description If it is meant that the cylinder head gasket was blown, that is possible However, to use language that infers that the entire engine is bad, shows either the ignorance of the "other mechanic," or Complainant's continued improper recitation of factsFrankly, I don't even feel I have to respond to Complainant's complaint, not only for the foregoing stated reasons, but additionally, based on the information stated in Complainant's complaint, she misrepresents the following: Who took the vehicle in That the initial complaint was of overheating The price of the bill paid The extent of the damage later found; A further diagnostic list alleged not to have received; Anything said by anyone else, without supporting documents, is unbelievable, or questionable at best; Uses wrong business name; and Uses wrong business addressFor all of the foregoing itemized reasons, Complainant paints a picture with incorrect (and potentially fabricated) facts which calls into question the condition of her vehicle, let alone sufficient support to bring a claim with you and the Revdex.comNotwithstanding my guarded opinion of Complainant's complaint, I WILL offer to apply half of the labor used in the October repairs (i.e.$273.00), toward repairing Complainant's current conditions.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to callSincerely Yours,
Michael WG***
OWNER

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]
 
 
Due to the fact the vehicle was returned to me unrepaired.  I would like to take legal action against the company.  I would like like [redacted] to also have a chance to respond to the companies allegations.