Cowan Costumes

The customer was sent a check to reimburse him for taking his vehicle to the mechanic to have the lug nut tightened on all wheels on his vehicle and check the tire pressure.  The check was mailed to his home address on September 3, 2015.It clearly states in 3 places on our invoices to have your...

wheels re-torqued after 50 miles.  We do this on all of our tire sales.  Attached are the procedures that we follow when we install tires:

[redacted] has contacted me and he will be going to our Easton location to have them look at his tires.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
You have to ask jack Williams one question only to see they are outright lying. If I spent all that money to get my rear shocks, rear brakes and rear rotors fixed because I had flats on my wheels , then why would I not replace the tires with flat wheels, which could've caused me to have an accident? I already spent money to fix what jack Williams told me was the problem, but NEVER advised me to replace the tires. If you look at this logically, they already told you they lied, without even admitting it. It makes absolutely no sense for me to spend so much without fixing the thing that could've caused me to have an accident. I feel that they are lying to cover their rear ends because they know they messed up. They also write refusals on the bill of sale. Nowhere on the bill of sale does it say I was told to replace tires and customer refused. I want to be refunded for the shocks I didn't need.
Regards,
[redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response...

made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
Jeffrey O[redacted]

The customer came in on April 16, 2014, for us to do a PA State Safety Inspection, Emissions Inspection and also asked us to check her brakes.  We had a look over the vehicle for the PA Safety Inspection and everything passed.  We advised the customer that the front brake...

pads were worn unevenly on both sides, the outside pads were much less worn than the insides which is entirely indicative of brake calipers that are beginning to fail. The calipers do not release evenly everytime the drive lets off the brake, which allows one or both sides (in her case, the insides on both sides) to ride on the rotors more than is intended. This also created some heat marks on the rotors due to much more friction than should happen.  We advised her that the brakes did pass inspection by the PA State Safety Inspection standards, but that she would need brakes in the near future.  We told her that even though the brake pads are worn they still pass inspection as they had not worn to below the state minimum in any area.  The calipers were still working to some extent (though not ideally), and the rotors did not measure below the minimum specification either. Our suggestion to her was to not throw her money away by just putting new pads on knowing that the calipers were starting to fail, this would not fix the underlying problem, she would be paying for labor that would need to be redone again in the near future, and the new pads would wear unevenly and quickly just like the old ones. We gave her an estimate to replace the calipers on both front wheels, a new set of front pads, and suggested a brake flush and new rotors.  We always recommend new brake fluid with caliper problems because calipers usually fail due to contamination of the brake fluid, and the rotors were recommended because they were damaged by the heat, though any future problems from not replacing them was limited.  After we gave her the estimate and explained everything to the customer, she said she needed to discuss it with her father who was more familiar with cars than she.  We did let her know that no brake work was required for inspection, and she said she would call back. Later on, she called back and said she would be getting a second opinion from her from a master mechanic who had been working on cars for more than 30 plus years, this being her Grandfather.   We told her that was fine. The customer paid $62.70 for her Safety Inspection and Emissions.  We advised her that after she had the other mechanic look at her brakes if she wanted us to do the brake work we would need one day heads-up to plan it.  I have attached the work order from when she was in on April 16th and passed inspection and the complaint that she submitted to us. We do not feel that she is entitled to any refund, she did get a safety inspection and an emission inspection.  We always offer to show any customer what is wrong with the vehicle by taking them out into the shop - wearing safety glasses that we provide and being escorted by the technician and a service advisor.  This is a common practice in many garages and a customer is more likely to agree to repairs if they can see exactly what we are advising them needs to be repaired/replaced. It is the customers decision to take the vehicle for a second opinion on repairs, and it was her decision to travel over an hour away so her Grandfather could repair her vehicle.   Our pricing versus what the customer was charged is like comparing apples and oranges.  We have our pricing and other shops have theirs.   We did not charge her to tell her what was wrong with her brakes, we just gave her an estimate on what we found. Please see the attached invoice and complaint from the customer and please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns. Regards,Robin D[redacted]Customer Experience AdministratorJack Williams Tire and Auto Service Center, Inc###-###-####

The customer did come in to our Tunkhannock location on 03/09/2017 stating that he had hit a tree branch and may have done damage to his radiator since the vehicle was overheating, and that the check engine light came on.  We advised that we could perform a 1/2 hour diagnostics on the vehicle...

at the rate of $60.00 the customer agreed to this and we brought the vehicle in.After our inspection and diagnostics of the vehicle we advised the customer that the fan was not working, and that the condenser had a dent.  We gave him a quote to replace the fan, check further into the condenser to see if the dent had caused any damage and also to replace the radiator if he wanted to but it was not the cause of the vehicle overheating.The customer left and advised that he would think about this and get back to us.We did what the customer asked us to do so we would not be refunding him for our time to look at the vehicle and advise him what is wrong with it.See the attached work order showing that we suggested the repair to the fan and condenser after further diagnostics on the vehicle.