The customer brought her vehicle to us on 2/28/17 because, according to the customer, the vehicle had `several indicator lights on' and the vehicle would sometimes hesitate at startup. Customer was not sure if they were related and asked us to look into it. Upon the initial diagnostic testing, the...
technician retrieved all trouble codes from all modules within the vehicle: there were 15 total active codes present across 4 different modules. These codes are detailed at the end of this letter. In most cases, when a vehicle has this many trouble codes it is an indicator that the vehicle has been reporting a fault condition for some length of time. It is extremely unlikely that the vehicle developed all of these faults at the same time or all within a very short period of time before the vehicle came to us. It is our professional determination that the customer had neglected the warnings that her vehicle was giving her over a lengthy period of time.Given the large number of trouble codes in the vehicle, it is virtually impossible to find and fix all issues at the same time; often a technician must repair the most obvious or most critical fault and re-check the vehicle for additional faults, often with additional labor cost. Our technician attempted to identify the fault(s) that might be related to the concern that the vehicle was hesitating at startup, which the customer identified when she dropped the vehicle off with us. Over the course of this diagnostic work, the technician identified a vacuum leak due to a faulty hose, as well as the vehicle's battery testing weak and having a buildup of corrosion on the connection between the battery and its cables to the vehicle. The customer agreed to repairs to the failed vacuum hose, and to replace the battery and clean the corrosion from the cables. At this time she also asked our service advisor for an estimate to replace her broken taillight lens, which we provided and the customer agreed to have us order the part for installation on a future date,The customer brought her vehicle back in a couple days later for the installation of the taillight lens, but also informed us that since the completed repairs from the prior visit, the vehicle had been exhibiting large amounts of white smoke emitting from the tailpipe while running. Several shop employees commented on the smoke having a burning oil smell. The check engine light had come back on, and the symptoms pointed strongly to the vehicle burning engine oil. We advised the customer at this point that the vehicle likely has some internal engine issues which were allowing engine oil to enter the combustion chambers of the engine and being ignited with gasoline. We advised the customer that this issue may require engine repairs that could be labor-intensive, and also offered to the customer to attempt other services which may offer a temporary reduction in the smoke or a short-term fix. We were very clear that it may or may not clear the symptom up and we may still need to perform other repairs. But at no time did we suggest to the customer that the new symptom of exhaust smoke had anything to do with the repairs we performed before, and that in our opinion, the two symptoms were unrelated and the timing was coincidental. The customer seemed to understand our assessment in this matter. We also confirmed that the customer still wanted us to replace her broken taillight lens at this time and she confirmed.Our stance is that we were very up-front with the customer regarding the number of faults the vehicle was reporting when we looked at the vehicle for the first time. We performed no work on the vehicle which was not first approved by the customer. We also assert that repairing a vacuum hose and replacing a battery would have no impact on any conditions internal to the engine, and the condition may have been prevented had the customer paid more attention to the check engine light long before she brought the vehicle to us. Finally, it is purely coincidental that the tailpipe smoking condition occurred shortly after the work we performed during the first visit which began on 2/28/17.
The customer brought her vehicle to us on 2/28/17 because, according to the customer, the vehicle had `several indicator lights on' and the vehicle would sometimes hesitate at startup. Customer was not sure if they were related and asked us to look into it. Upon the initial diagnostic testing, the...
technician retrieved all trouble codes from all modules within the vehicle: there were 15 total active codes present across 4 different modules. These codes are detailed at the end of this letter. In most cases, when a vehicle has this many trouble codes it is an indicator that the vehicle has been reporting a fault condition for some length of time. It is extremely unlikely that the vehicle developed all of these faults at the same time or all within a very short period of time before the vehicle came to us. It is our professional determination that the customer had neglected the warnings that her vehicle was giving her over a lengthy period of time.Given the large number of trouble codes in the vehicle, it is virtually impossible to find and fix all issues at the same time; often a technician must repair the most obvious or most critical fault and re-check the vehicle for additional faults, often with additional labor cost. Our technician attempted to identify the fault(s) that might be related to the concern that the vehicle was hesitating at startup, which the customer identified when she dropped the vehicle off with us. Over the course of this diagnostic work, the technician identified a vacuum leak due to a faulty hose, as well as the vehicle's battery testing weak and having a buildup of corrosion on the connection between the battery and its cables to the vehicle. The customer agreed to repairs to the failed vacuum hose, and to replace the battery and clean the corrosion from the cables. At this time she also asked our service advisor for an estimate to replace her broken taillight lens, which we provided and the customer agreed to have us order the part for installation on a future date,The customer brought her vehicle back in a couple days later for the installation of the taillight lens, but also informed us that since the completed repairs from the prior visit, the vehicle had been exhibiting large amounts of white smoke emitting from the tailpipe while running. Several shop employees commented on the smoke having a burning oil smell. The check engine light had come back on, and the symptoms pointed strongly to the vehicle burning engine oil. We advised the customer at this point that the vehicle likely has some internal engine issues which were allowing engine oil to enter the combustion chambers of the engine and being ignited with gasoline. We advised the customer that this issue may require engine repairs that could be labor-intensive, and also offered to the customer to attempt other services which may offer a temporary reduction in the smoke or a short-term fix. We were very clear that it may or may not clear the symptom up and we may still need to perform other repairs. But at no time did we suggest to the customer that the new symptom of exhaust smoke had anything to do with the repairs we performed before, and that in our opinion, the two symptoms were unrelated and the timing was coincidental. The customer seemed to understand our assessment in this matter. We also confirmed that the customer still wanted us to replace her broken taillight lens at this time and she confirmed.Our stance is that we were very up-front with the customer regarding the number of faults the vehicle was reporting when we looked at the vehicle for the first time. We performed no work on the vehicle which was not first approved by the customer. We also assert that repairing a vacuum hose and replacing a battery would have no impact on any conditions internal to the engine, and the condition may have been prevented had the customer paid more attention to the check engine light long before she brought the vehicle to us. Finally, it is purely coincidental that the tailpipe smoking condition occurred shortly after the work we performed during the first visit which began on 2/28/17.