EONS Auto Care Center

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/09/19) */ Let me begin my response by saying that it always bothers me and my team to have to respond to complaints because we strive to offer expert vehicle careThere are a couple of things that we have learned regarding this case, and we are making the lessons common practice at our shopWe always look for ways in which we can learn and grow, and with this case we have learned not to alter or sacrifice diagnostic protocol at the demand or request of a customer in difficult circumstances, regardless of the benevolence we would like to extendI will also say that our records are complete and documented for reviewWe have assembled a folder including photos of receipts, technicians notes, approval of fuel pump replacement, documentation of conversations with the customer, as well as the decision of the customer to tow the vehicle while declining the proper diagnostic repair procedureOur team has over years of combined knowledge and experience, and I am a former ASE Master Certified TechnicianWe do not have these issues often The other main lesson we have taken from this transaction involves communicationWe apologize for the breakdown in communication that has resulted in frustration for our customerOur response has been delayed due to some miscommunication regarding the urgency and requests of [redacted] of Charlotte NCI was aware of the story regarding the vehicle but not the specifics of the complaintWe do pride ourselves on being accessible and have a dedicated phone number for feedback and/or problems posted conspicuously in our showroomThis number is directly to me and is monitoredUnfortunately, the customer, for whatever reason, did not utilize the numberWe will have to reevaluate communication protocol for complaintsI regret that I have not had the opportunity to discuss this issue with the consumer and for this I apologize This situation arose because a customer diagnosed his/her own vehicle and used our technicians to exchange parts on his/her behalfI restate that this is not our common policy, and the correction has been clearly communicated to the staffWe will no longer replace parts at the customer's request without proper diagnosis I must emphasize that because no diagnosis took place in our shop prior to the part being replaced, there is no means of acquiring actual proof of what needed repairedDiagnosis involves a series of tests to determine symptom, systems, component and causes of failureThis is crucial to any proper execution of the repair, along with retesting to assure the longevity of the repair [redacted] decided to forego this very important procedure based on his remote diagnosisUnfortunately, there was no evidence of the testing to go on, so our tech did not have access to information such as before- and-after fuel pressure, how the pressure relates to the vehicle specifications, ignition system credibility, and existing check engine light codes or pending codesWe were told to replace the fuel pump, which we did with a documentable new partWe were not given an opportunity to properly verify the repair due to the customer giving direction to halt service and had the vehicle removed from premisesTypically, our technician would have tested the repair and made necessary adjustments before releasing the vehicle back to the customer We were given authorization to replace the fuel pump for the total amount without diagnosis We then replaced the fuel pump with a new fuel pump provided from our vendorsWe have the part's receipt and in no way would have had access to a "used" fuel pump for that particular vehicle in our shop, nor have we purchased any used fuel pumpsThe fuel pump is immersed in the tank, covered in fuel, and would be very difficult to determine as used given the clean nature of the environmentIt is with the utmost confidence that I state the fuel pump that [redacted] received from us is new The fuel pump access is available under the rear seat of the vehicle (thus the smaller charge to change than their mechanic)We removed the unit and replaced just the pump part of the fuel pump moduleThe module also consists of a strainer, fuel gauge sending unit, along with the pumpThe module part of the assembly would look "used" as it was not replacedPerhaps this is why the customer's technician stated that the pump was not new We in no way removed the fuel tank and/or examined lines on top of the fuel tank for damage as we were told to only replace the fuel pumpWhen the vehicle did not start, we were told to halt diagnosis and repair until they could figure out what they wanted to doMy advisor informed me that the customer was questioning the technician on the phone regarding ignition system credibility and that we checked that as a courtesy at no charge to the customer At that time, we were informed that they would be towing their vehicle to Charlotte for further diagnosisOur diagnosis charge is $versus $in a tow billThe customer once again declined the diagnosis against our advice and unwisely pursued his own direction After this unfortunate decision by the customer, he asserts that fuel lines were swapped, a used fuel pump was installed, and a kinked line on the top of the fuel tank that involved removal of the tank assembly was an issue (I am assuming)They assert that our one hour labor and the charge for the fuel pump totaling $are too high, but the correct fix involved a $tow bill, $labor and no parts? This includes a fuel tank removal to fix a kinked line when all items are access under the seat? This just does not make sense , and given no opportunity to properly diagnose the vehicle, has created a lose/lose situation for us and the customer I cannot imagine entering a clinic; diagnosing myself; requesting a knee replacement without consultation, ex-rays, MRI's or discussion of options; and then requesting to be moved to another facility to find fault with the given operation [redacted] made an independent decision against our advice and has regret concerning the monetary consequence of the outcome We are guilty of providing and executing exactly what the customer wantedUnfortunately, we have learned a valuable lesson of not allowing our reputation to be based on phone call diagnosis We will offer him the refund for fuel pump installation at $as a good will gesture and consider it a training fee for our staff

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/09/19) */
Let me begin my response by saying that it always bothers me and my team to have to respond to complaints because we strive to offer expert vehicle care. There are a couple of things that we have learned regarding this case, and we are making...

the lessons common practice at our shop. We always look for ways in which we can learn and grow, and with this case we have learned not to alter or sacrifice diagnostic protocol at the demand or request of a customer in difficult circumstances, regardless of the benevolence we would like to extend. I will also say that our records are complete and documented for review. We have assembled a folder including photos of receipts, technicians notes, approval of fuel pump replacement, documentation of conversations with the customer, as well as the decision of the customer to tow the vehicle while declining the proper diagnostic repair procedure. Our team has over 70 years of combined knowledge and experience, and I am a former ASE Master Certified Technician. We do not have these issues often.
The other main lesson we have taken from this transaction involves communication. We apologize for the breakdown in communication that has resulted in frustration for our customer. Our response has been delayed due to some miscommunication regarding the urgency and requests of [redacted] of Charlotte NC. I was aware of the story regarding the vehicle but not the specifics of the complaint. We do pride ourselves on being accessible and have a dedicated phone number for feedback and/or problems posted conspicuously in our showroom. This number is directly to me and is monitored. Unfortunately, the customer, for whatever reason, did not utilize the number. We will have to reevaluate communication protocol for complaints. I regret that I have not had the opportunity to discuss this issue with the consumer and for this I apologize.
This situation arose because a customer diagnosed his/her own vehicle and used our technicians to exchange parts on his/her behalf. I restate that this is not our common policy, and the correction has been clearly communicated to the staff. We will no longer replace parts at the customer's request without proper diagnosis
I must emphasize that because no diagnosis took place in our shop prior to the part being replaced, there is no means of acquiring actual proof of what needed repaired. Diagnosis involves a series of tests to determine symptom, systems, component and causes of failure. This is crucial to any proper execution of the repair, along with retesting to assure the longevity of the repair. [redacted] decided to forego this very important procedure based on his remote diagnosis. Unfortunately, there was no evidence of the testing to go on, so our tech did not have access to information such as before- and-after fuel pressure, how the pressure relates to the vehicle specifications, ignition system credibility, and existing check engine light codes or pending codes. We were told to replace the fuel pump, which we did with a documentable new part. We were not given an opportunity to properly verify the repair due to the customer giving direction to halt service and had the vehicle removed from premises. Typically, our technician would have tested the repair and made necessary adjustments before releasing the vehicle back to the customer.
We were given authorization to replace the fuel pump for the total amount without diagnosis . We then replaced the fuel pump with a new fuel pump provided from our vendors. We have the part's receipt and in no way would have had access to a "used" fuel pump for that particular vehicle in our shop, nor have we purchased any used fuel pumps. The fuel pump is immersed in the tank, covered in fuel, and would be very difficult to determine as used given the clean nature of the environment. It is with the utmost confidence that I state the fuel pump that [redacted] received from us is new.
The fuel pump access is available under the rear seat of the vehicle (thus the smaller charge to change than their mechanic). We removed the unit and replaced just the pump part of the fuel pump module. The module also consists of a strainer, fuel gauge sending unit, along with the pump. The module part of the assembly would look "used" as it was not replaced. Perhaps this is why the customer's technician stated that the pump was not new.
We in no way removed the fuel tank and/or examined lines on top of the fuel tank for damage as we were told to only replace the fuel pump. When the vehicle did not start, we were told to halt diagnosis and repair until they could figure out what they wanted to do. My advisor informed me that the customer was questioning the technician on the phone regarding ignition system credibility and that we checked that as a courtesy at no charge to the customer.
At that time, we were informed that they would be towing their vehicle to Charlotte for further diagnosis. Our diagnosis charge is $71.96 versus $545 in a tow bill. The customer once again declined the diagnosis against our advice and unwisely pursued his own direction.
After this unfortunate decision by the customer, he asserts that fuel lines were swapped, a used fuel pump was installed, and a kinked line on the top of the fuel tank that involved removal of the tank assembly was an issue (I am assuming). They assert that our one hour labor and the charge for the fuel pump totaling $345 are too high, but the correct fix involved a $545 tow bill, $200 labor and no parts? This includes a fuel tank removal to fix a kinked line when all items are access under the seat? This just does not make sense , and given no opportunity to properly diagnose the vehicle, has created a lose/lose situation for us and the customer.
I cannot imagine entering a clinic; diagnosing myself; requesting a knee replacement without consultation, ex-rays, MRI's or discussion of options; and then requesting to be moved to another facility to find fault with the given operation.
[redacted] made an independent decision against our advice and has regret concerning the monetary consequence of the outcome.
We are guilty of providing and executing exactly what the customer wanted. Unfortunately, we have learned a valuable lesson of not allowing our reputation to be based on phone call diagnosis.
We will offer him the refund for fuel pump installation at $71.96 as a good will gesture and consider it a training fee for our staff.