I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below The business apparently did not read my complaint Once again, the Transmission Control Module DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM The car had to be returned the station and the final repair that DID solve the problem was the replacement of the valve body for the SECOND TIME I was promised that if the Transmission Control Module did not solve the problem, WHICH IT DID NOT, I would be refunded for the part I am fully aware of TSB's about the Mazda 3's Transmission Control Module issues But this was obviously not the problem in this instance as the replacement of the TCM, once again, DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM The problem was with the faulty valve body that was supposedly replaced during the original rebuild of the transmission This was the argument that I had with the shop owner when I strongly disagreed with their diagnosis I have thoroughly read the official Mazda Workshop and Transmission Workshop manuals As the owner of the shop should be well aware, there are many things that could go wrong to cause the symptoms that my transmission was presenting Most of these problems are related to the valve body and shift solenoids on the valve body and this is indeed what they replaced to FINALLY solve the problem The proper way to have handled this repair would have been to re-install the old Transmission Control Module once it was determined that IT WAS INDEED THE VALVE BODY AND NOT THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE THAT WAS CAUSING THE ISSUES This would have ruled out any further question about the matterIt is quite obvious that instead of investing the time to do the proper diagnostics on the transmission, the shop opted to do the “easiest” thing and swap out the Transmission Control Module at the cost of the customer While this could have been the problem, it was proven wrong when the exact same problems presented as soon as I left the shop I should not be expected to pay for a misdiagnosis on the part of this AAMCO station Another issue that was not addressed in the business's response to my complaint was an explanation as to why I was told I would only be charged only the COST of the part which should have been $ Instead I was charged $ Why did the transmission shop believe that it is okay to keep the $“Core” charge that was refunded to them by Mazda? I should not have to pay for a part that DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM I will reiterate again, I WAS PROMISED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT IF THE PART DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM I WOULD BE REFUNDED AND THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEMI will not accept any resolution or offer less than what I was promised before I agreed to the replacement of this part, A FULL REFUND FOR THE UNNECESSARY PART THAT WAS INSTALLED Regards, [redacted]
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below The business apparently did not read my complaint Once again, the Transmission Control Module DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM The car had to be returned the station and the final repair that DID solve the problem was the replacement of the valve body for the SECOND TIME I was promised that if the Transmission Control Module did not solve the problem, WHICH IT DID NOT, I would be refunded for the part I am fully aware of TSB's about the Mazda 3's Transmission Control Module issues But this was obviously not the problem in this instance as the replacement of the TCM, once again, DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM The problem was with the faulty valve body that was supposedly replaced during the original rebuild of the transmission This was the argument that I had with the shop owner when I strongly disagreed with their diagnosis I have thoroughly read the official Mazda Workshop and Transmission Workshop manuals As the owner of the shop should be well aware, there are many things that could go wrong to cause the symptoms that my transmission was presenting Most of these problems are related to the valve body and shift solenoids on the valve body and this is indeed what they replaced to FINALLY solve the problem The proper way to have handled this repair would have been to re-install the old Transmission Control Module once it was determined that IT WAS INDEED THE VALVE BODY AND NOT THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE THAT WAS CAUSING THE ISSUES This would have ruled out any further question about the matterIt is quite obvious that instead of investing the time to do the proper diagnostics on the transmission, the shop opted to do the “easiest” thing and swap out the Transmission Control Module at the cost of the customer While this could have been the problem, it was proven wrong when the exact same problems presented as soon as I left the shop I should not be expected to pay for a misdiagnosis on the part of this AAMCO station Another issue that was not addressed in the business's response to my complaint was an explanation as to why I was told I would only be charged only the COST of the part which should have been $ Instead I was charged $ Why did the transmission shop believe that it is okay to keep the $“Core” charge that was refunded to them by Mazda? I should not have to pay for a part that DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM I will reiterate again, I WAS PROMISED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT IF THE PART DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM I WOULD BE REFUNDED AND THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL MODULE DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEMI will not accept any resolution or offer less than what I was promised before I agreed to the replacement of this part, A FULL REFUND FOR THE UNNECESSARY PART THAT WAS INSTALLED Regards, [redacted]