Harry's Auto Repair

Response: I was contacted by Mr [redacted] on August His vehicle, a Nissan Pathfinder, was at a local body shopThe body shop and I made arrangements and they delivered MrSingh's vehicle to ***'s Auto RepairMr [redacted] emailed an inspection form that his insurance agency required in order to insure his vehicle after it was labeled a total loss (salvage title) vehicleDuring this phone conversation I informed Mr [redacted] that a salvage title vehicle will require an official brake and lamp inspection and certification before the vehicle can legally be driven in California and asked if he would like us to perform this inspection as wellI told him that the inspection he was asking for was not sufficient for re-certifying a salvage titleHe declined the service and told me he would not need the state mandated brake and lamp inspectionThe vehicle was delivered around 3:00pm on the 17thWe performed the inspection Mr [redacted] requestedThis was a simple inspection and checklist and did not require any official measurements or certificationsAt the time of this inspection the only problem we encountered was that his windshield wipers were separating and required replacementWe noted this in the appropriate box on the provided formMr [redacted] returned on August around 9:00am to discuss the negative mark made for the windshield wipers on the 17thHe agreed after some discussion to replace the disintegrating wiper blades and we filled out another inspection form with all passing marksLater the same day, August 2017, Mr [redacted] returned and requested the official brake and lamp inspectionWe charge $for this service$for the inspection and $for each state certificateMr [redacted] became combative and argumentative regarding the brake and lamp inspection feeHis position was that we should use the previous inspection form from days prior and apply the findings to the brake and lamp inspection and issue his certifications at no additional chargeWe explained to Mr [redacted] that the brake and lamp inspection was very different from the inspection he requested on the 17th and that it was more invasive and would require measurements and a state licensed brake and lamp adjusterAfter some discussion, we agreed to lower the inspection price to $(for inspection and $for each state certificate)Our state certified brake and lamp adjuster found the vehicle's parking brake out of adjustment (the pedal went to the floor and the parking brake would not hold the vehicle), he found a marker light bulb out, and the vehicle's brake fluid failed a moisture content testMr [redacted] became angry and combative when we told him he would need some very minor servicesWe took the gentleman to the vehicle and had the technician demonstrate the moisture testThe fluid in MrSingh's vehicle measured between 3-4% moisture on our moisture testerWe established a control by performing the test in front of Mr [redacted] with fresh brake fluidThis test showed less than 1% moisture on the same tool with the fresh brake fluidMr [redacted] then argued the validity of our test procedure and toolHe argued that the burned out bulb should have been caught in the initial inspection days priorHe also did not want to pay for the parking brake adjustmentMr [redacted] argued pricing and validity with every problem we foundMr [redacted] again became angered and combative and attempted to negotiate for better pricing and/or some kind of work-aroundAt this point, it became clear that Mr [redacted] and ***'s Auto Repair were not going to come to any agreeable terms on this matterAs Mr [redacted] stated in his complaint, a lot of time had now been wastedWe informed the customer that we were no longer willing to service him or his vehicle and that he was welcome to have the service performed elsewhere and that we were not going to charge him for our timeMr [redacted] parted from ***'s Auto Repair on the 25th having paid nothing for services rendered or shop timeThough we had several technicians involved with his service and several other employee's time invested, we did not charge Mr [redacted] for the services or time described aboveTo date, Mr [redacted] has paid ***'s Auto Repair $for the insurance inspection on August and $for windshield wipers on August These services total $As stated in his complaint, Mr [redacted] requested and agreed to, signed for, and paid for both of these servicesThe amounts disputed in his complaint ($and $418) are a mystery since we did not charge him for his brake and lamp inspection nor for any recommended repairs thereafterAs to what another shop found in their inspection is between Mr [redacted] and that shop, the professional technicians at ***'s Auto Repair perform their services to the best of their abilitySometimes we find issues, especially as regards state mandated inspectionsWe understand that our findings are not always what the customer wants to hear as they sometimes lead to addition services and repairsWe are here to reach mutual satisfaction between the state's needs for clean air and safe vehicles and the consumers need for prompt and accurate serviceThe State of California charges us as a facility to perform these functions with a high level of accuracy and to predefined standards and guidelinesI wish Mr [redacted] and ***'s Auto Repair could have reached a mutually beneficial solution in the matter at handAs for reaching a successful resolution, since we did not charge Mr [redacted] for the services he is disputing, I am not sure what he expects at this pointIt is our position that this matter was resolved when we waived the gentleman's fees and parted companyThank you for your time and consideration, Justin Kramasz ***'s Auto Repair [redacted] Sent on: 9/5/10:36:AM