Econo Lube N Tune & Brakes

[redacted] came by and told us what the problem was and we do understand that a wrong mileage was put by mistake on her invoice , we explained to her that it was a mistake on our behalf , we contact carfax immediatly and corrected it ,,,,we showed her the fax that we sent to carfax and she was happy that it was fixed thank you [redacted] *** general manager

[redacted] came by and told us what the problem was and we do understand that a wrong mileage was put by mistake on her invoice , we explained to her that it was a mistake on our behalf , we contact carfax immediatly and corrected it ,,,,we showed her the fax that we sent to carfax and she was happy...

that it was fixed ....                                      ...⇄ thank you                                         ...⇄ [redacted]                                   ...⇄ general manager

Review: We took our car in Saturday April 16th. Called first and told [redacted] it was having trouble stating. Dropped it off a few hours later they called and said you want the good news or the bad news first?They said the good news is it doesnt need a fuel pump but that the heater hoses busted. Saying the cars old. Making us feel like it was our fault. Total was 619.55. And it started out under 200.00. Then they said our water pump was leaking. Wanted another 500.00. Took it home on Friday the 22nd. Took it Wed April 27th to our regular mechanic he said there is nothing wrong with our water pump. That was [redacted] at [redacted] in Rancho Cordova Ca.Desired Settlement: Just wanted to let you know that they are not honest.

Business

Response:

I am sorry for the delay, the information was mis-directed, my neglect to promptly respond does not mean I do not take this issue seriously. I value the business of Ms. [redacted], she has been a customer of ours for a while now, and we have performed a variety of repairs on a couple of her cars. I am sure Ms.[redacted] will agree we do all we can to work with her to provide required repairs, at the best possible price we can, and further work with her on making any arrangement necessary to work within her restraints. I have fully reviewed this complaint, with the mechanic who directly worked on the car, the shop foreman who was also involved, as well as the service writers. Apparently the vehicle came in with a couple issues with the way it was running, and also with some coolant loss issues. During testing one of the coolant hoses actually blew apart. The Technicians completed required repairs to the vehicle to address the coolant hoses and a rough run situation. After completing these repairs, they performed a pressure test on the cooling system and found a slight leak in the water pump, this was brought up to Ms. [redacted] at the time - it was decided to not perform any repairs on the water pump, BUT to address the situation, and in the name of customer satisfaction, at our expense we added "Bars Leak" a cooling system leak stopping product. This was done to stop the leaking at the water pump, and to give the customer some additional time before having to replace the water pump. I feel we did all we could to help the customer, and come up with a win-win. The bars leak appears to be working, and thus an external evaluation of the pump would not show a leak, but it does not mean that the leak was not there. I would be happy to review this with Ms. [redacted], again we want to keep her as a customer, and I want to ensure her that we are not there to take advantage of her, we are here for the long haul

Review: A long story short, I had an oil change performed by [redacted]'s Econo Lube N Tune & Brakes located in [redacted] on 11-14-2015. On 12-1-2015 my car died in morning rush hour traffic within a couple miles of my home. I had it towed to [redacted] shop my car insurance company recommended. Street Tech Auto Care sent me a picture showing that the oil filter was missing and then refilled the car with oil stating that "Engine damage and or turbo damage may already have occurred." When I picked the car up, I stated 3 times that I thought the motor sounded different, but the tech said it could be the "placebo effect"-so I took his advice considering he is the expert. The following morning I went back to Econo Lube and received reimbursement for the work [redacted] did. [redacted], the owner, did not offer reimbursement for the original oil change, the marks on my bumper caused by the cops who pushed my car to a safe location, nor for the rental car I had to get, instead he offered a future free oil change. The company's insurance, Nationwide, concluded that my car was not damaged, despite the dealership determining that the engine had a rod knock and instead claimed my car was vandalized. I checked with my apartments and no reports of vandalism had been reported for the past 3 months. The city police said they have NEVER received a vandalism report for a missing oil filter. Despite the zero probability that my car was vandalized, Nationwide and/or [redacted] are standing by their conclusion.Desired Settlement: I would like my engine fixed and reimbursement on the car rental at least ($ TBD as I drop it off today). I feel reimbursement for the original oil change ($52.39) and the cost to have the dealership determine their findings ($67.50) is not unreasonable. If I could get the bumper fixed and time off work reimbursed, it would be ideal, but I don't see that happening. As for resale value on the car after it is fixed - not sure how that could be determined.

Business

Response:

Response:11-14-2015 Oil Change was done, some 2 weeks later was advised that the filter came off of car, it was towed to [redacted] - they found no filter on vehicle, they put on a filter and performed an oil change, they tested the car and no problems were found. Customer then brought vehicle to my shop - I apologized for the situation, I advised I have no idea what happened, this was quite unusual - Filters just do not come off after 2 weeks, especially when there is no period of leaking & no blow back or excessive oil found in skid plate located below car. I did have my employees, including senior technicians inspect and test the vehicle - no problems were found. Out of customer satisfaction, I paid for the cost of the oil change at [redacted], and offered her another free oil change in the future. Some 2 weeks later, she returned with a work order from a dealership, stating they heard a noise as 2500 RPM and Recommend a motor, something no other technician had heard - she said she was scared to drive the car. Again out of customer satisfaction, I offered to pay to have the car towed to me - When the car arrived, it started just fine, and ran fine - I my shop manager, my senior technician and myself all drive and test it, no tapping heard & no problems at all were found with car - I did open a claim with my insurance company, they sent a senior claims specialist out to look at the car. The videotaped inspection was performed, we tested the car at a variety of rpms, and one more time - no problem was found - insurance agency denied the claim, finding there was no evidence anything was wrong with the car, and further there was no indication of any wrong doing or negligence of my shop. I understand the frustrations of Ms [redacted], I have gone above and beyond what any shop owner would do - I paid for things that in reality I was under no obligation to do - As for any marks, the car was fully inspected by both an insurance senior claims specialist, myself and other staff - no issues were found or seen do to any damage from a police car push. This is a unique issue, I must agree filters just do not fall off, if they do there is usually a lot of oil mess on skid plates, or blow back - One can only guess what happened to the filter, I understand the vehicle is not kept in a secure environment, for all I know it could be vandalism of someone removing the filter (zero probability is not the case) , no filter was ever provided to us - and that would explain the lack of blow back of oil on the undercarriage, but that is just one possible theory, another is that the filter failed - who knows, if a filter blew off while driving a noise would have been heard, oil spread all over - but again we do not have a filter or otherwise. We do literally thousands and thousands of oil changes a year and have Never had any problem like this at all. A further note, as the Bureau of Automotive Repair confirmed (I contacted them because of the paperwork created by the dealer, did not fit BAR Standards) - even IF they truly heard a noise, the next recommendation would be to perform additional diagnosis / inspection to see the extent of any damage, and appropriate repairs required, one does not just go from possible noise to new motor. Do note again, the car drives and operates fine, I am sure Ms. [redacted] continues to drive without any problems with the vehicle - I understand Ms [redacted]s concerns, I tried to do all I could, but no one is going to pay for a repair of something they can not find broken.... I have insurance, and as history shows - if we do something wrong and cause damage to a customers vehicle, we take care of it - that is not the case here. I did pay for tows, an oil change at another shop, provided a free future oil change - I did not know I was expected to pay for the original oil change, something again that we did do. I think I have done a lot to resolve concerns. but bottom line, it is my opinion, that of 2 Different BAR Certified Shops, Insurance Claims Expert and several certified and experienced technicians, that there is No Noise, and further No issues with the way the car operates, no problems found. There is no indication for any reason for Ms. [redacted] to not drive her car as she normally would. If any issues arise in the future, we are here to address them as appropriate.[redacted]

Review: I and my Wife, are filing a complaint against Meineke , located at 740 Dennery Rd San Diego, CA 92154. Over an issue with our 2010 Toyota Venza, that presented itself on the day after we received service for an oil change from them.

In Sept. 2013 we purchased a Pre-owned Certified 2010 Toyota Venza from [redacted] located at [redacted] The vehicle had only 18,000 miles on it when we purchased it(basically brand new) and we've had no problems with it at all. Until 5/29/2014 when we took in our 2010 Toyota Venza to Meineke, located at 740 Dennery Rd San Diego, CA 92154 for an oil change. It was the very next day (5/30/2014) when I was driving the vehicle as usual to work, the brake system started failing. As soon as I arrived to the office I immediately called Meineke and advised them of the issue, at this time I was speaking to [redacted](Owner).

I then scheduled a time to take it back to Meineke to have it inspected on 5/31/2014.

After the inspection on 5/31/2014, Meineke reported no leaks of any kind and no fluids of any kind being added, their theory was that the problem was caused by an internal leak in the master cylinder. My wife and I being very concerned and frustrated with the whole situation(and that coincidentally after having an oil change done, that the very next day there was a problem with the brake system)we called Toyota on 6/3/2014 to schedule an inspection with them.

On 6/9/2014 Toyota performed a brake inspection on our vehicle and the results/findings that came back to us were more than concerning and completely outrageous. Toyota found a foreign fluid that was poured in the master cylinder reservoir of the brake system. This foreign fluid was the complete opposite of brake fluid and was the cause for the system to fail. My wife and I were also informed by Toyota certified mechanics that this foreign fluid not only caused the brake system to fail but has also more than likely done considerable damage to the system components as well.

Another thing they informed us of was that when a non-brake fluid is added to the brake system the symptoms/issues will happen immediately.

After gathering all of the inspection results/reports and info that Toyota had provided to us, we then called Meineke back to inform them of Toyota’s findings. During the conversations both my wife and I had with [redacted](owner of Meineke), we brought to his attention our great concerns with Toyota’s reports that question the integrity of his business and personnel. [redacted] refuted such things or questioning towards his business and personnel, thus turning everything back to Toyota and questioning them and bringing the possibility of this issue being there fault.

After realizing that Meineke([redacted]) would do nothing and continue to cast blame away from him and his business, my wife and I went back to Toyota for more conclusive evidence.

On 6/11/2014 Toyota provided us with information that clears them from any of the allegations from Meineke([redacted]) and any possibility of this problem falling on them. With this report and all other reports from Toyota including the reports from Meineke([redacted]), we contacted B.A.R.(Bureau of Automotive Repair) to present our case and receive justice on this [redacted]. At this moment in time our case is currently/actively being investigated by an investigator from B.A.R. Our sole purpose for submitting this complaint is to bring this preposterous and unethical practice of customer service and business conduct to your attention. So that it doesn't continue and that other customers should be aware of Meinke([redacted]) at 740 Dennery Rd San Diego, CA 92154.Desired Settlement: For Meineke to pay for the repair/replacement of the entire brake system(which is an estimated $4,000.00 per Toyota) including all expenses for a rental car, extra back and forth driving and for all the time away from work to deal with this mess.

Expense total is not final as we are still dealing with this issue. Will provide current expense report if/when requested.

Business

Response:

Regarding Brake Failure:

Have read Toyota's findings report and seen the picture of the contaminate fluid in the brake reservoir. Discussed this episode with Meineke staff

[redacted] the store manager[redacted] the assistant manager, [redacted] the 2nd assistant manager and [redacted] Meineke's Master Technician that inspected

the vehicle when it came in on 5.31.2014 for a warranty check.

[redacted] and [redacted] the owners of the 2010 Toyota Venza claim that during a basic oil change on 5.29.2014 at Meineke located at 740 Dennery Rd. San

Diego, Ca 92130 that the brake fluid was topped off with a contaminate by Meineke personnel. The result being that the contaminate in the brake

fluid damaged the braking system and as of today 6.10.2014 Toyota of Chula Vista is suggesting a complete replacement of the braking system.

Circumstantial evidence and facts that do not support the claim:

Invoice 12034 on 5.29.2014 states that the car received only an oil change. There is no suggestion of topping off of the brake fluid during service

on the documentation for services rendered. The inspection sheet indicates that the brake fluid was in the "green" meaning no service would be suggested

Brake fluids are not topped of a course of service because the brake fluid level is an indication of brake wear. By topping off the fluid the indication for

brake wear based on brake fluid level is lost. On 5.29.2014 the vehicle arrived with 23,314 miles on the odometer again the low miles would indicate no

service for brake fluid would be suggested, recommended or performed. Contamination, After speaking with the used car manager [redacted] today, Toyota

does not plan to test the contaminated fluid to determine what the contamination in the brake fluid is.

Lastly, I have reflected on [redacted]'s contention that my employees are hiding the fact that they topped off the brake fluid to protect themselves from

possible disciplinary action. Being a business owner since 2007 there is one certainty about employees. They do not preform work that is not

required of them. This supposition by [redacted] supposes that one of my employees did work they were not tasked or asked to do.

As I indicated today the (BAR) Bureau of Automotive Repair will be your best resource to get some sort of possible satisfaction in this issue.

Also may want to consider getting a report from [redacted]

Thank you for contacting Meineke and giving us an opportunity to help resolve this issue. However based on my findings I cannot offer any warranty support.

Thank you for your time and patience,

Owner

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response 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.

Review: I took my car in for an oil change. I was not advised that my whole car would be inspected or that my tires would be removed. The person handling my vehicle came back after an hour and stated that my vehicle needed more work done than an oil change. I declined and asked him to complete my oil change only. He said he would give me a quote for the services my car needed. I said asked him to complete my oil change. He handed me paper quote and explained how much it would cost for the additional repairs. He asked me to sign to papers for my oil change and snuck in the repair quote. He continued to make the unauthorized repairs to the car. When it was time to pay for the oil change, he handed me a bill for over $200. When I refused to pay and told him I only wanted an oil change, he sowed me the "quote" that I had authorized. I explained to him again that I had only requested an oil change and he said there was nothing he could do. I ended up paying for the service because I felt I was being taken advantage of (I am a 19 year old female, and was unaccompanied.) When I called the manager to explain what had happened, he said there was nothing that could be done since I had signed the quote and paid for the service.Desired Settlement: I would like a refund for the repairs I did not authorize. I only paid the charges because I needed my car and I needed to leave. I repeatedly told the service man I only wanted an oil change and he proceeded to trick me into signing for unsolicited repairs.

Business

Response:

Response: The key part of this complaint centers around the customer claims that the repairs was not authorized and because they were not authorized now wants a refund. Forwarding a signed estimate authorizing Meineke to do $278.71 in service. There is also a signed final copy attached as well. I cannot authorize a refund if the customer gives written authorization to do the work and then after the work is done wants a refund. If the customer did not want the repairs done the estimate should not have been signed. Thanks

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response 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.

I am very dissatisfied with this response because I did not ask for this service. The person who helped me never asked me if I wanted the service done. He told me what was wrong with my car and I guess he assumed that I wanted to repair it. He was very unclear about it. When I signed the papers, he never explained what I was signing. He just told me to sign and I assumed it was for the oil change I was originally going to get. He should have told me the price for each separate service yet he failed to do it. If he would have done that, I obviously would have know he had made a mistake, but HE DIDN'T! Therefore, I refuse to pay for a service I did not ask for. The employee clearly knows he made a mistake because he apologized to me when I asked him why I was paying so much money. Not only that, but they also recharged the credit card I used to pay even though I had stopped the payment until the problem was resolved. This is not the first time this happens to my family and I there. Every time we go, they tell you something is wrong with your car and they try to fix it. I really hope this issue is resolved!

Regards,

Business

Response:

Greetings,

COMPLAINTS:

Did not ask for service

Recharged credit card

Problem with car each time car comes in for service

RESPONSE:

The estimate page is a legal contract. You signed the estimate page which is a contract to do the services that are in dispute. [redacted] communicated it would take an additional 90 minutes to do the work besides the oil change and you still signed the contract and when back to working on your phone. [redacted] has 10 years’ experience at [redacted] as a service writer, [redacted] is well trained to communicate the sort of issues you describe were not. As the owner of the business I take complaints very seriously however, in the seven months [redacted] has been working full time this is the first complaint about his lack of communication. Lastly and respectfully your response does not include taking any responsibility for signing the contract. The $ total is on the lower right side if you had just taken a moment to see the price this could have been avoided.

Credit card numbers are not saved. So there was no way to rerun a charge on the credit card.

This is an automotive repair shop, most cars receive a multi point inspection and recommendations or suggestions are made to the customer for maintenance if needed. There are businesses like [redacted] that essentially does not inspect the vehicles that you could visit if you are not satisfied with our service.

In conclusion: You are asking for a refund while not taking any responsibility for your actions (signing the estimate page). The reason why the estimate page gets signed prior to any work being done on a car is to ensure that INTENT is established in writing. I can only conclude that at the moment you signed your intent was to have the work done. I cannot offer a refund.