Mac's Service Center, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I had the chance to review Mac's response and my reply is listed below:When the vehicle was given to Jim, he was was only authorized to diagnose the problem. When Jim called my wife, she told him that.My wife was out of town, but sent me a text message to let me know that Jim informed her that the diagnosis was complete on the vehicle and that I could make contact with the shop to retrieve the car.I called the shop and spoke with Jim. He gave me the details on the diagnosis and I told him I'd be there to pick up the car that day. I told him that I'd look into getting the mass air flow sensor corrected in the future.When I got to the shop, Jim was not there. I ended speaking with Charles. Charles asked if he could keep the vehicle for an extra day because he wanted to return it clean. The auto center provided us with a loner vehicle which I felt was good enough to get me through the next day, so I agreed.When I came into the shop the next day, Jim mentioned a contract. It was the first I heard him speak of a contract. I started to question him. When I questioned him, I began to learn for the first time that work was done on the car without authorization. I was surprised. Surprised that work was done on the car again without authorization and upset that Jim never mentioned it when he spoke to me or to my wife and that he lied to us both as I conferenced her in on speaker phone to ask him about it. While standing at the counter in his presence, he said that he informed us over the phone that he did work on the car - when we both know that is not the truth. I disputed this claim with Jim with my wife on the call and he offered to undo the work. He was unapologetic and callous with his rhetoric. This made things worse from a consumer/customer perspective.I took my wife off speaker phone and stepped outside for 2 minutes to finish the phone call. I asked her what did she want to do. Did she want to make an executive decision to pay, yet again, for unauthorized work on the car that we entrusted to a business, who we we thought was reputable and honest. She said yes (reluctantly) and I went inside and told Jim we could move forward. When Jim gave me the contract and I began to read it, I did not agree with the language and terms and the more I gave thought about the fact that this was happening for the 2nd consecutive time and with the exact same guy, I was beyond insulted. I did an override of my wife's executive decision and told him to give me my car back, to undo the work, and I informed him that I would never do business there again and that I would be submitting a complaint to the Revdex.com and to Consumer Affairs. We have never had a problem with paying for service we requested. To say so is completely false. We previously paid for work that we did not request, but to do so again, is an enabler to the offender and at some point it had to stop.Charles walked through the shop going back to the mechanic area with the door closing behind him, but he was never in the shop for any length of time during my conversation with Jim. Charles is passive and will have nothing to do with confrontation. He always defers.When all parties are clear in their message to a mechanic that the vehicle is to be diagnosed only with no repair; you cannot counter that with an argument that the mix up is because there is more than 1 point of contact. Jim is the issue. Charles is passive and Mac has not held his staff accountable. That is the truth. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tells you they are dropping it off for you to find out what's wrong, you find out what's wrong and report it back to the customer. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tell you to please find out what's wrong and fix it, you find out what's wrong and fix it. That has been the case throughout our doing business with Mac's until this incident and the previous incident.My wife has been the sole contact for Mac's. I stepped in seeking resolution for the last incident after the damage had already been done. The unauthorized work on the car had been performed by Mac's and my wife paid the monies for that unauthorized work (clearly knowing that she authorized a 2 axle brake job and not 4). Charles deferred her to the owner, so my wife kept trying to reach Mac at the shop to speak with him but to no avail did she receive a response. It wasn't until I stepped in and started to call to seek resolution for the error that Mac replied.Can you imagine walking into a repair shop to pick up your car and what you were quoted over the phone for the work in advance was $[redacted]for brakes, but when you get there you find out the bill is $800 because they did work on all 4 axles when theagreement was for 2 axles? That's exactly what happened with Mac's the first time we had this issue. That $400 credit was for restitution (money we should have received, since we paid for work that was not authorized to begin with). Plus the credit has never been fully restituted due this 2 occurrence.I've returned from my time away on vacation and yes I received a voice message from Mac. I have no intention returning his call when he allows this kind of behavior toward a customer. As far as I am concerned, he is a part of the problem too. I want nothing from the man or his staff. Others need to know about the bad and unethical business practices he allows from his establishment. Buyers beware.

On 6/20/16 the vehicle was dropped off and the customer was put in a loaner vehicle at *no charge*.  The next day, 6/21/16, our shop diagnosed the vehicle as reading the air volume being incorrect and needed to install a mass air flow sensor for testing. Jim called customer to get permission...

for testing. She authorized the necessary diagnostic process. Jim called her back after the part was installed and verified there was no other concerns and that would fix the problem. Jim gave her a price for the replacement of the part needed. She said she would have to talk to her spouse because they didn’t have the money for a few weeks. Jim on behalf of "Mac's offered to extend payment by offering a payment contract delaying the bill for a few weeks to keep from causing more damage to the vehicle instead of driving it around broken. She said she would have to call him back. Jim did not get a phone call back.The next day, 6/22/16, [redacted] came up to get the vehicle and she got angry that the part was on the vehicle (Charles was a witness to conversation). Jim offered to extend payment terms for the bill with a loan contract or we could take the part back off which there would be *no charge.  [redacted] wanted to leave it on the vehicle but not pay for it, she also would not sign a contract to agree to pay for repairs. Jim told her he was not allowed to let a vehicle leave without a written form of promissory note of payment. She again refused to review and sign the contract. She then stepped outside for 5-10 to discuss something on the phone and came back in and said take the part off which we did promptly and gave her the vehicle back washed and vacuumed * free of any charges*. Our shop services over 5,000 cars annually every year and therefore I can say we are very good at communicating with our customers. We pride ourselves on not having this type of problem however if a problem were to arise we will correct any mistake we have made, backed up by our warranty on repairs of 3 years or 36,000 miles whichever comes first. This customer did reach out to me indicating there was a communication error in a previous transaction. I made several attempts before I was successful in contacting her, I was diligent and finally was able to contact her. Our generosity resulted in a $[redacted].00 dollar credit towards future repairs. We have never had communication issues with this customer until there became more than one point of contact. Their account was flagged to be extra cautious and make sure all communications were very clear and precise prior to this last visit. The facts are we have performed yet another free service on this couples vehicle due to poor communication, at some point the customer may have to accept some responsibility for the communication failures. I have left a message for [redacted] around 12:30 and have not heard back as of yet. Sincerely, Mac M[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I had the chance to review Mac's response and my reply is listed below:When the vehicle was given to Jim, he was was only authorized to diagnose the problem. When Jim called my wife, she told him that.My wife was out of town, but sent me a text message to let me know that Jim informed her that the diagnosis was complete on the vehicle and that I could make contact with the shop to retrieve the car.I called the shop and spoke with Jim. He gave me the details on the diagnosis and I told him I'd be there to pick up the car that day. I told him that I'd look into getting the mass air flow sensor corrected in the future.When I got to the shop, Jim was not there. I ended speaking with Charles. Charles asked if he could keep the vehicle for an extra day because he wanted to return it clean. The auto center provided us with a loner vehicle which I felt was good enough to get me through the next day, so I agreed.When I came into the shop the next day, Jim mentioned a contract. It was the first I heard him speak of a contract. I started to question him. When I questioned him, I began to learn for the first time that work was done on the car without authorization. I was surprised. Surprised that work was done on the car again without authorization and upset that Jim never mentioned it when he spoke to me or to my wife and that he lied to us both as I conferenced her in on speaker phone to ask him about it. While standing at the counter in his presence, he said that he informed us over the phone that he did work on the car - when we both know that is not the truth. I disputed this claim with Jim with my wife on the call and he offered to undo the work. He was unapologetic and callous with his rhetoric. This made things worse from a consumer/customer perspective.I took my wife off speaker phone and stepped outside for 2 minutes to finish the phone call. I asked her what did she want to do. Did she want to make an executive decision to pay, yet again, for unauthorized work on the car that we entrusted to a business, who we we thought was reputable and honest. She said yes (reluctantly) and I went inside and told Jim we could move forward. When Jim gave me the contract and I began to read it, I did not agree with the language and terms and the more I gave thought about the fact that this was happening for the 2nd consecutive time and with the exact same guy, I was beyond insulted. I did an override of my wife's executive decision and told him to give me my car back, to undo the work, and I informed him that I would never do business there again and that I would be submitting a complaint to the Revdex.com and to Consumer Affairs. We have never had a problem with paying for service we requested. To say so is completely false. We previously paid for work that we did not request, but to do so again, is an enabler to the offender and at some point it had to stop.Charles walked through the shop going back to the mechanic area with the door closing behind him, but he was never in the shop for any length of time during my conversation with Jim. Charles is passive and will have nothing to do with confrontation. He always defers.When all parties are clear in their message to a mechanic that the vehicle is to be diagnosed only with no repair; you cannot counter that with an argument that the mix up is because there is more than 1 point of contact. Jim is the issue. Charles is passive and Mac has not held his staff accountable. That is the truth. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tells you they are dropping it off for you to find out what's wrong, you find out what's wrong and report it back to the customer. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tell you to please find out what's wrong and fix it, you find out what's wrong and fix it. That has been the case throughout our doing business with Mac's until this incident and the previous incident.My wife has been the sole contact for Mac's. I stepped in seeking resolution for the last incident after the damage had already been done. The unauthorized work on the car had been performed by Mac's and my wife paid the monies for that unauthorized work (clearly knowing that she authorized a 2 axle brake job and not 4). Charles deferred her to the owner, so my wife kept trying to reach Mac at the shop to speak with him but to no avail did she receive a response. It wasn't until I stepped in and started to call to seek resolution for the error that Mac replied.Can you imagine walking into a repair shop to pick up your car and what you were quoted over the phone for the work in advance was $400for brakes, but when you get there you find out the bill is $800 because they did work on all 4 axles when theagreement was for 2 axles? That's exactly what happened with Mac's the first time we had this issue. That $400 credit was for restitution (money we should have received, since we paid for work that was not authorized to begin with). Plus the credit has never been fully restituted due this 2 occurrence.I've returned from my time away on vacation and yes I received a voice message from Mac. I have no intention returning his call when he allows this kind of behavior toward a customer. As far as I am concerned, he is a part of the problem too. I want nothing from the man or his staff. Others need to know about the bad and unethical business practices he allows from his establishment. Buyers beware.

On 6/20/16 the vehicle was dropped off and the customer was put in a loaner vehicle at *no charge*.  The next day, 6/21/16, our shop diagnosed the vehicle as reading the air volume being incorrect and needed to install a mass air flow sensor for testing. Jim called customer to get...

permission for testing. She authorized the necessary diagnostic process. Jim called her back after the part was installed and verified there was no other concerns and that would fix the problem. Jim gave her a price for the replacement of the part needed. She said she would have to talk to her spouse because they didn’t have the money for a few weeks. Jim on behalf of "Mac's offered to extend payment by offering a payment contract delaying the bill for a few weeks to keep from causing more damage to the vehicle instead of driving it around broken. She said she would have to call him back. Jim did not get a phone call back.The next day, 6/22/16, Jetta came up to get the vehicle and she got angry that the part was on the vehicle (Charles was a witness to conversation). Jim offered to extend payment terms for the bill with a loan contract or we could take the part back off which there would be *no charge.  Jetta wanted to leave it on the vehicle but not pay for it, she also would not sign a contract to agree to pay for repairs. Jim told her he was not allowed to let a vehicle leave without a written form of promissory note of payment. She again refused to review and sign the contract. She then stepped outside for 5-10 to discuss something on the phone and came back in and said take the part off which we did promptly and gave her the vehicle back washed and vacuumed * free of any charges*. 
Our shop services over 5,000 cars annually every year and therefore I can say we are very good at communicating with our customers. We pride ourselves on not having this type of problem however if a problem were to arise we will correct any mistake we have made, backed up by our warranty on repairs of 3 years or 36,000 miles whichever comes first. This customer did reach out to me indicating there was a communication error in a previous transaction. I made several attempts before I was successful in contacting her, I was diligent and finally was able to contact her. Our generosity resulted in a $400.00 dollar credit towards future repairs. We have never had communication issues with this customer until there became more than one point of contact. Their account was flagged to be extra cautious and make sure all communications were very clear and precise prior to this last visit. The facts are we have performed yet another free service on this couples vehicle due to poor communication, at some point the customer may have to accept some responsibility for the communication failures. I have left a message for Jetta around 12:30  and have not heard back as of yet. Sincerely, Mac M[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
Regards,
[redacted]
I had the chance to review Mac's response and my reply is listed below:
When the vehicle was given to Jim, he was was only authorized to diagnose the problem. When Jim called my wife, she told him that.
My wife was out of town, but sent me a text message to let me know that Jim informed her that the diagnosis was complete on the vehicle and that I could make contact with the shop to retrieve the car.
I called the shop and spoke with Jim. He gave me the details on the diagnosis and I told him I'd be there to pick up the car that day. I told him that I'd look into getting the mass air flow sensor corrected in the future.
When I got to the shop, Jim was not there. I ended speaking with Charles. Charles asked if he could keep the vehicle for an extra day because he wanted to return it clean. The auto center provided us with a loner vehicle which I felt was good enough to get me through the next day, so I agreed.
When I came into the shop the next day, Jim mentioned a contract. It was the first I heard him speak of a contract. I started to question him. When I questioned him, I began to learn for the first time that work was done on the car without authorization. I was surprised. Surprised that work was done on the car again without authorization and upset that Jim never mentioned it when he spoke to me or to my wife and that he lied to us both as I conferenced her in on speaker phone to ask him about it. While standing at the counter in his presence, he said that he informed us over the phone that he did work on the car - when we both know that is not the truth. I disputed this claim with Jim with my wife on the call and he offered to undo the work. He was unapologetic and callous with his rhetoric. This made things worse from a consumer/customer perspective.
I took my wife off speaker phone and stepped outside for 2 minutes to finish the phone call. I asked her what did she want to do. Did she want to make an executive decision to pay, yet again, for unauthorized work on the car that we entrusted to a business, who we we thought was reputable and honest. She said yes (reluctantly) and I went inside and told Jim we could move forward. When Jim gave me the contract and I began to read it, I did not agree with the language and terms and the more I gave thought about the fact that this was happening for the 2nd consecutive time and with the exact same guy, I was beyond insulted. I did an override of my wife's executive decision and told him to give me my car back, to undo the work, and I informed him that I would never do business there again and that I would be submitting a complaint to the Revdex.com and to Consumer Affairs. We have never had a problem with paying for service we requested. To say so is completely false. We previously paid for work that we did not request, but to do so again, is an enabler to the offender and at some point it had to stop.
Charles walked through the shop going back to the mechanic area with the door closing behind him, but he was never in the shop for any length of time during my conversation with Jim. Charles is passive and will have nothing to do with confrontation. He always defers.
When all parties are clear in their message to a mechanic that the vehicle is to be diagnosed only with no repair; you cannot counter that with an argument that the mix up is because there is more than 1 point of contact. Jim is the issue. Charles is passive and Mac has not held his staff accountable. That is the truth. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tells you they are dropping it off for you to find out what's wrong, you find out what's wrong and report it back to the customer. If the customer drops the vehicle off & tell you to please find out what's wrong and fix it, you find out what's wrong and fix it. That has been the case throughout our doing business with Mac's until this incident and the previous incident.
My wife has been the sole contact for Mac's. I stepped in seeking resolution for the last incident after the damage had already been done. The unauthorized work on the car had been performed by Mac's and my wife paid the monies for that unauthorized work (clearly knowing that she authorized a 2 axle brake job and not 4). Charles deferred her to the owner, so my wife kept trying to reach Mac at the shop to speak with him but to no avail did she receive a response. It wasn't until I stepped in and started to call to seek resolution for the error that Mac replied.
Can you imagine walking into a repair shop to pick up your car and what you were quoted over the phone for the work in advance was $400
for brakes, but when you get there you find out the bill is $800 because they did work on all 4 axles when the
agreement was for 2 axles? That's exactly what happened with Mac's the first time we had this issue. That $400 credit was for restitution (money we should have received, since we paid for work that was not authorized to begin with). Plus the credit has never been fully restituted due this 2 occurrence.
I've returned from my time away on vacation and yes I received a voice message from Mac. I have no intention returning his call when he allows this kind of behavior toward a customer. As far as I am concerned, he is a part of the problem too. I want nothing from the man or his staff. Others need to know about the bad and unethical business practices he allows from his establishment. Buyers beware.

On 6/20/16 the vehicle was dropped off and the customer was put in a loaner vehicle at *no charge*.  The next day, 6/21/16, our shop diagnosed the vehicle as reading the air volume being incorrect and needed to install a mass air flow sensor for testing. Jim called customer to get permission...

for testing. She authorized the necessary diagnostic process. Jim called her back after the part was installed and verified there was no other concerns and that would fix the problem. Jim gave her a price for the replacement of the part needed. She said she would have to talk to her spouse because they didn’t have the money for a few weeks. Jim on behalf of "Mac's offered to extend payment by offering a payment contract delaying the bill for a few weeks to keep from causing more damage to the vehicle instead of driving it around broken. She said she would have to call him back. Jim did not get a phone call back.The next day, 6/22/16, Jetta came up to get the vehicle and she got angry that the part was on the vehicle (Charles was a witness to conversation). Jim offered to extend payment terms for the bill with a loan contract or we could take the part back off which there would be *no charge.  Jetta wanted to leave it on the vehicle but not pay for it, she also would not sign a contract to agree to pay for repairs. Jim told her he was not allowed to let a vehicle leave without a written form of promissory note of payment. She again refused to review and sign the contract. She then stepped outside for 5-10 to discuss something on the phone and came back in and said take the part off which we did promptly and gave her the vehicle back washed and vacuumed * free of any charges*. Our shop services over 5,000 cars annually every year and therefore I can say we are very good at communicating with our customers. We pride ourselves on not having this type of problem however if a problem were to arise we will correct any mistake we have made, backed up by our warranty on repairs of 3 years or 36,000 miles whichever comes first. This customer did reach out to me indicating there was a communication error in a previous transaction. I made several attempts before I was successful in contacting her, I was diligent and finally was able to contact her. Our generosity resulted in a $400.00 dollar credit towards future repairs. We have never had communication issues with this customer until there became more than one point of contact. Their account was flagged to be extra cautious and make sure all communications were very clear and precise prior to this last visit. The facts are we have performed yet another free service on this couples vehicle due to poor communication, at some point the customer may have to accept some responsibility for the communication failures. I have left a message for Jetta around 12:30  and have not heard back as of yet. Sincerely, Mac M[redacted]

Review: For the second time, Mac's Service Center performed unauthorized work on our vehicle. The first time, we paid the full balance owed in spite of the unauthorized work. After several attempts to get the owner to return our call, he finally called and offered restitution with giving us a credit. We accepted and thought it would be ok to continue to do business here. Unfortunately, we should have learned our lesson. Unauthorized work was performed again on the vehicle & the same person who was responsible for allowing the mechanic to perform the work the first time is the same person responsible for allowing this to occur again. His name is Jim. Jim called to let us know that they found out why our check engine light was on. We explained prior to leaving the vehicle with him that he was NOT to perform work on the car whatsoever & that we were just dropping it off to find out why the check engine light was on. When Jim called with the results, he never expressed that work on the car was performed. When I came into the shop to pick up the vehicle he wanted to draft up a contract to allow Mac's Service Center to hold us responsible for the work and the balance owed. Jim said because I told him over the phone, after he told me why the check engine light was on, we would not be ready to get the problem fixed until mid July is why he drafted a contract. Are you serious? When I asked him what was going on is when he said to me for the very 1st time that they fixed the car. I told him that the work was not authorized and called my wife & had her on speaker phone to continue the discussion. Jim continued with the lie. Never asserting the lie with her on the phone (only with me). He offered to undo the work, but because the work was done, we were about to go through with it until I started to read the ridiculous contract for something we never gave permission. The more I thought about it, the more it angered me. He is a liar, his attitude is crap & his practices are unethical.Desired Settlement: As a consumer people need to know about these kind of unethical business practices so that they can avoid the headache and heartache. I've been doing business with Mac's since I moved to Ashland over 6 years ago.I will continue to inform my neighbors and people in the community about this place because they need to know. It is my hope that the report of my experience with Mac's Service Center to Revdex.com does not fall on deaf ears and that you do the needful. Thank you.

Business

Response:

On 6/20/16 the vehicle was dropped off and the customer was put in a loaner vehicle at *no charge*. The next day, 6/21/16, our shop diagnosed the vehicle as reading the air volume being incorrect and needed to install a mass air flow sensor for testing. Jim called customer to get permission for testing. She authorized the necessary diagnostic process. Jim called her back after the part was installed and verified there was no other concerns and that would fix the problem. Jim gave her a price for the replacement of the part needed. She said she would have to talk to her spouse because they didn’t have the money for a few weeks. Jim on behalf of "Mac's offered to extend payment by offering a payment contract delaying the bill for a few weeks to keep from causing more damage to the vehicle instead of driving it around broken. She said she would have to call him back. Jim did not get a phone call back.The next day, 6/22/16, Jetta came up to get the vehicle and she got angry that the part was on the vehicle (Charles was a witness to conversation). Jim offered to extend payment terms for the bill with a loan contract or we could take the part back off which there would be *no charge. Jetta wanted to leave it on the vehicle but not pay for it, she also would not sign a contract to agree to pay for repairs. Jim told her he was not allowed to let a vehicle leave without a written form of promissory note of payment. She again refused to review and sign the contract. She then stepped outside for 5-10 to discuss something on the phone and came back in and said take the part off which we did promptly and gave her the vehicle back washed and vacuumed * free of any charges*. Our shop services over 5,000 cars annually every year and therefore I can say we are very good at communicating with our customers. We pride ourselves on not having this type of problem however if a problem were to arise we will correct any mistake we have made, backed up by our warranty on repairs of 3 years or 36,000 miles whichever comes first. This customer did reach out to me indicating there was a communication error in a previous transaction. I made several attempts before I was successful in contacting her, I was diligent and finally was able to contact her. Our generosity resulted in a $400.00 dollar credit towards future repairs. We have never had communication issues with this customer until there became more than one point of contact. Their account was flagged to be extra cautious and make sure all communications were very clear and precise prior to this last visit. The facts are we have performed yet another free service on this couples vehicle due to poor communication, at some point the customer may have to accept some responsibility for the communication failures. I have left a message for Jetta around 12:30 and have not heard back as of yet. Sincerely, Mac M[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the offer and/or 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.

[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]

Regards,

I had the chance to review Mac's response and my reply is listed below:

Review: I took my [redacted] to Mac's Garage and left it overnight to have them run a state inspection on the car.The following morning they call me and tell me it needs $740.91 worth of repairs to include transmission fluid, battery cable corrosion, replace front sway bar links, replace rear sway bar frame bushings, rear tail lights, & said the car was extremely rusty underneath and things would probably break during repairs so those costs would be additionalI asked them not to do the work as I wanted a second opinion. The gentleman got very nasty with me and charged me 16.00 for the inspection fail and put a big rejected sticker on my windshield.I picked up the car & called [redacted] in Richmond, VA and told them I needed it inspected. I dropped it off the following evening without telling anyone anything except it needed to be inspected. They called me the following day and stated the car was done and passed. Said there was a big regected sticker that said it failed for bad suspension but they could not find any issues. I picked up the car and there were no costs as they do complimentary inspectionsDesired Settlement: none, just think it was wrong to try and take advantage of me that way. So poor soul that doesn't know any better would have paid when nothing was wrong

Business

Response:

7-17-14

[redacted] my first ever Revdex.com complaint is purely a set up for a mere $16.00 inspection in which I am cutting a check #[redacted] for $16.00 as we speak and gladly mailing it to her as a refund. [redacted] car failed Virginia State Inspection for items 1. 2. and 3. clearly noted on her copy of the repair order attached as a pdf file. Number 1. Indicated the tail lights were not working and when we checked to see if it was a bulb or a wiring issue in doing so we found someone had installed the incorrect bulbs. Part # 921 bulbs had been installed where part #194 were needed. We replaced the bulbs at no charge to her just to verify the wiring and sockets were still in proper working order. [redacted] presenting her car for another Virginia State Inspection and not giving a copy of the rejected items compounded the problem. The State Inspection Rejection Sticker required by law when a vehicle presented for VA. State Inspections fails does not have the room to write down why it failed. The sticker only has a few categories to have many items fall under. Her receipt clearly noted why it failed. Most of the problem area was in the rear of the car. The rejection sticker category for suspension would have drawn the inspector to the front ball joints or coil springs in which it did not fail for. If [redacted] would like to have a Virginia State Trooper reinspect the vehicle for verification the items missed by [redacted] would be quickly uncovered and repairs would be required to properly pass the V.S.I.

The estimate she was given was for other items not limited to the State Inspection. [redacted] vehicle is 11 years of age and has over 160,000 miles on it presently and the repairs needed are very common for the mileage. [redacted] did not reach out to myself prior to filing her complaint or I would have gladly addressed her concerns. Mac's Service Center has a stellar reputation and it is a shame that it is tarnished by someone who feels that she should not of been charged the $16.00 (which now has been refunded) because her car fails inspection. I can only hope those components do not fail altogether while driving at highway speeds.

Please contact me [redacted] to confirm receipt of my response. I currently am in my other office @ [redacted]. I left a voicemail for you earlier while you were at lunch.

Thanks,