Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 11, 2014/07/28) */ weeks after oil change customer returned complaing of oil leak we found a slight leak at oil filter the car was only qt low on oil we repaired and toped off the customer stated car shut off after leaving but it was runniing and driving in our store it did have engine noise not due to low oil car has XXXXXX miles on it we explained this to the cunsumer we did not hear from them for months we do not feel we are responsible for a motor with XXXXXX miles on it and we did not have an oppertunity to look into the problem Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 19, 2015/03/30) */ I never received any form of response, both from Midas and Revdex.com regarding this issueI had been waiting to read from Revdex.comThe "response from Midas on 7/28/2014" according to Revdex.com did not reach meI do not know what the response wasPlease re-activate this caseThanks March 28, 2015, Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 21, 2015/03/31) */ in regards to complaint XXXXXXXX/b/ [redacted] we did respond directly to the customer unfortunately there is not a lot I can do the part was tech out of warranty that being said had we been contacted we would have directed them to a midas shop and worked something out but with no old parts no phone call we cant do anything as we explained the warranty was with midas there was several in the area I cant refund without old parts we have no way of knowing what was wrong and the manufacturer would need the old bearing they wont just take our word that it was bad I am sorry but at this time there is nothing we can do Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 23, 2015/04/08) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Contrary to Midas' claim that I did not contact them, I sent them a U.SPostal Certified Mail (tracking number ending with 6690) dated 3/26/ The content of this letter was pasted above as part of my 5/4/complaint to Revdex.comPlease read through it again and notice that I made reference to the estimate (R.O#XXXXXXX of 12/30/2013)which Midas gave me In this estimate, Midas clearly stated that "this vehicle will need a new/used engine to repair" Contrary to Midas' claim that the car was running, their estimate showed that the car was rendered undriveable without engine replacement Since I did not reach a workable agreement with Midas as to own their responsibility for the damage caused to my vehicle, I had to tow it out from their garage I had to leave the vehicle in my premises pending the resolution with MidasDuring this period (between January 1st, and March 26th 2014), I sought a second opinion from another mechanic This was a nearby mechanic, whom I earlier (on December 28, 2013) drove this car to his workshop when I noticed a heavy oil leak in my garageHe confirmed that the oil leak was between the engine and oil filterHe refused to work on it but suggested that I return it to whoever did the oil change Later on April 2,2014, after having waited without any response from Midas, I had to tow this car to the same (second) mechanic who earlier identified the cause of the oil leak This second mechanic confirmed that the engine had been damaged and needed replacement - just as Midas had also stated that the engine needed a replacement In addition to confirming that the vehicle needed engine replacement, this second mechanic established that the cause of this damaged engine was due to the improper handling of the oil change thereby causing serious oil leak In view of the above, it is obvious that my car that I had been driving before the oil change did not breakdown abruptly due to high mileage as Midas wrongly claimed I am hereby once again seeking a refund as claimed in my earlier complaint
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 11, 2014/07/28) */ weeks after oil change customer returned complaing of oil leak we found a slight leak at oil filter the car was only qt low on oil we repaired and toped off the customer stated car shut off after leaving but it was runniing and driving in our store it did have engine noise not due to low oil car has XXXXXX miles on it we explained this to the cunsumer we did not hear from them for months we do not feel we are responsible for a motor with XXXXXX miles on it and we did not have an oppertunity to look into the problem Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 19, 2015/03/30) */ I never received any form of response, both from Midas and Revdex.com regarding this issueI had been waiting to read from Revdex.comThe "response from Midas on 7/28/2014" according to Revdex.com did not reach meI do not know what the response wasPlease re-activate this caseThanks March 28, 2015, Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 21, 2015/03/31) */ in regards to complaint XXXXXXXX/b/ [redacted] we did respond directly to the customer unfortunately there is not a lot I can do the part was tech out of warranty that being said had we been contacted we would have directed them to a midas shop and worked something out but with no old parts no phone call we cant do anything as we explained the warranty was with midas there was several in the area I cant refund without old parts we have no way of knowing what was wrong and the manufacturer would need the old bearing they wont just take our word that it was bad I am sorry but at this time there is nothing we can do Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 23, 2015/04/08) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Contrary to Midas' claim that I did not contact them, I sent them a U.SPostal Certified Mail (tracking number ending with 6690) dated 3/26/ The content of this letter was pasted above as part of my 5/4/complaint to Revdex.comPlease read through it again and notice that I made reference to the estimate (R.O#XXXXXXX of 12/30/2013)which Midas gave me In this estimate, Midas clearly stated that "this vehicle will need a new/used engine to repair" Contrary to Midas' claim that the car was running, their estimate showed that the car was rendered undriveable without engine replacement Since I did not reach a workable agreement with Midas as to own their responsibility for the damage caused to my vehicle, I had to tow it out from their garage I had to leave the vehicle in my premises pending the resolution with MidasDuring this period (between January 1st, and March 26th 2014), I sought a second opinion from another mechanic This was a nearby mechanic, whom I earlier (on December 28, 2013) drove this car to his workshop when I noticed a heavy oil leak in my garageHe confirmed that the oil leak was between the engine and oil filterHe refused to work on it but suggested that I return it to whoever did the oil change Later on April 2,2014, after having waited without any response from Midas, I had to tow this car to the same (second) mechanic who earlier identified the cause of the oil leak This second mechanic confirmed that the engine had been damaged and needed replacement - just as Midas had also stated that the engine needed a replacement In addition to confirming that the vehicle needed engine replacement, this second mechanic established that the cause of this damaged engine was due to the improper handling of the oil change thereby causing serious oil leak In view of the above, it is obvious that my car that I had been driving before the oil change did not breakdown abruptly due to high mileage as Midas wrongly claimed I am hereby once again seeking a refund as claimed in my earlier complaint