Milad Nukho & Sons

Review: Job # [redacted] On 6/**/2013 [redacted] came to my to home to check why my car was still having a battery problem, After 15 minutes he found a short in the ignition system. The other 45 minutes was idle talk about an oil delivery. A new part was ordered from [redacted]. The part was Wrong. It was missing a PASS-KEY II for theft deterrent system which has been around for many years. Why this was given to the mechanic to install on my car? I am convinced that this cause of the needless repairs. Only one contact has been offered, a refund of 192.00.(actual cost 427.24)Desired Settlement: Desired Settlement: Refund-Check

Business

Response:

REF: ID #[redacted]

Dear Sir/Madam,

In connection with your letter dated October **, 2013, as stated in our response dated October **, 2013 [redacted] and Sons will gladly

refund Mr. [redacted] $192.00 for the cost of the ignition cylinder plus $66.75 towards labor to replace the cylinder totaling $258.75 plus tax contingent on the old part to be returned. Thank you.

Respectfully,

Review: I needed 7 AAA service calls for a battery boost to get my car to [redacted] for service. All attempts to repair the electrical problem was unsuccessful. I agreed at times to repairs as I had no choice. [redacted] disabled my remote to repair short.(never helped) Repairs were only temporary.(documented on a invoice) Also I now needed a ABCM and instrument cluster costing over $1000.00. (never installed) [redacted] now decided at this time the problem was a faulty ignition cylinder and steering lock solenoid sold to him by a GM dealer. Lasted about a week. I towed my car to another shop who installed the same parts. It now working for over 3 months and it is still working. The cost of repairs at MILAD was over $1000.00. IDesired Settlement: Desired Settlement: Refund-Check

Business

Response:

Dear Sir/Madam,

In connection to the complaint made by Mr. [redacted], please be advised that [redacted] & Sons made several attempts to resolve Mr. [redacted]'s concerns prior to filing a complaint with this agency. Mr. [redacted] is under the impression that there was unnecessary work performed in excess of One thousand dollars to repair a short with his 2000 Buick Regal. The details regarding Mr. [redacted]'s complaint are as follow:

On April ** 2012 Mr. [redacted] had work performed as per job number # [redacted]. The details of this repair are explained in Exhibit "A";a routine service was performed and the instrument cluster in his vehicle was noted to have a problem.

On February ** 2013 Mr. [redacted] had work performed as per job number # [redacted]. The details of this repair are explained in Exhibit "B"; there was a check engine light issue that required a sensor replacement. There was another remark made abou t the I nstrument cluster having a problem and an oil leak.

On February **, 2013 Mr. [redacted] had work performed as per job # [redacted]. The details of this repair are explained in Exhi bit "C"; there was a bad battery which was replaced.

On March ** 2013 Mr. [redacted] had repair work performed as per job # [redacted]. The details of this repair are explained in Exhibit "D"; this repair includes a brake line repair and also documents the first time a repair was performed

pertaining to a short/battery drain issue involving the instnunent cluster. As noted on April ** 2012 job # [redacted] and on February ** 2013 job # [redacted] the instru ment cluster had a problem which Mr. [redacted] declined to replace due to the cost of repair as was the case on job # [redacted]. Repairs were performed as best as possible keepi ng the original instnnnent cluster. After t he repairs the vehicle remained in the shop for approximately 10 days to be tested and no further problems were found.

On June 24, 201 3 Mr. [redacted] had a repair performed as per job # [redacted]. The details of this repair are explained in Exhibit "E". This invoice explains that another short developed most four months later. The vehicle was parked at Mr. [redacted]'s residence so Mr. [redacted] (part owner of Mi lad Nu kho & Sons) who is an Electrical Engineer and an ASE Master Technician performed a road service and went to the vehicle to test it in the field while the problem was occurring.

[redacted] & Sons normally does not perform road services for anything more than a flat tire or jump in an effort to show good intent this is what was done. After spending over one hour out of the shop, Mr. [redacted] found that the ignition

key was removed while the ignition was still in the ON position creating a short. The ignition cylinder was fau lty because the key cou ld be removed from the ignition cylinder leaving the electrical switch partially on. The cylinder should not allow the key to be removed unless the key is in the OFF position. This problem was shown to Mr. [redacted] who was present at the time the vehicle was being checked by Mr. [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] was advised that the ignition

cylinder requ ired replacement in order to continue. Mr. [redacted] agreed and brought the vehicle to our shop and a new ORIGINAL ignition cylinder was installed. Mr. [redacted] was explained that I n an effort to show goodwill there would be no charge for diagnosis or road service. The only charges would be for the new work which was to provide and install the new ignition cylinder which is what was detailed on job # [redacted].

In August 2013 Mr. [redacted] called and spoke with Mr. [redacted] to express disappointment with the repair performed as per job # [redacted]. Mr. [redacted] stated that the new ignition cylinder gave hi m a problem so he sent the vehicle to another repair shop. Mr. [redacted] stated the other shop replaced the cylinder again and his short problem

has never reoccurred since. Mr. [redacted] was informed that the ignition cylinder was under warranty and that he should

have notified us abou t the problem because we would have gladly replaced it for free under warranty.

Mr. [redacted] expressed disappointment because he believed all the prior repairs Uob #'s [redacted], and [redacted]) were not required and that the ignition cylinder that we installed was creating the problem the entire time. Mr. [redacted] went on to explain that the other shop replaced the same part we diagnosed as being bad and the ignition cylinder is an original part. We explained that although we do not like to have a comeback we have no control if a part is defective but that is why are provided. The fact that he chose to take his vehicle elsewhere to have the ignition cylinder replaced again was his choice but we need the defective part to return for credit. Mr. [redacted] stated he did not have the old part and was not willing to understand that job #'s: [redacted], and [redacted] were not patt of his most recent

problem. Although Mr. [redacted] was explained prior he also did not want to understand that job # [redacted] was performed at a discounted rate to reflect no overlap with job # [redacted].

The total money spent towards the short was $225.00 + tax from job # [redacted] and $427.27 from job # [redacted], both of which were necessary to resolve his problem. [redacted] & Sons will gladly refu nd Mr. [redacted] for the cost of the ignit ion cylinder @ $192.00 plus tax providing Mr. [redacted] can ret urn the defective part to our facility. Please do not hesitate to contact our facility with questions.

Thank you.

Business

Response:

Dear Sir/Madam,

In connection to the letter dated September **, 2013, please note the response to Mr. [redacted] comments:

Mr. [redacted] states: Job # [redacted] No mention of an instrument problem Exhibit

A.

Response: On job # [redacted] under the "Recommendations" there was a note made that the odometer will not display the mileage. The odometer display and the instmment cluster are the same part.

Mr. [redacted] states: Job # [redacted] was not advised about the need of a knock sensor Exhibit B.

Response: Mr. [redacted] response is incorrect. Job # [redacted] was performed as per the consent of Mr. [redacted] and this job number

was included in our prior response to emphasize that the odometer/instrument cluster had an ongoing problem and was bad which is relevant to the repairs that were necessary in the upcoming service.

Mr. [redacted] states: Job#[redacted] disabled my remote. I was told by [redacted] this was a needed repair and I agreed to the bypass.

Response: The repair was required because the alarm is tied into the odometer/instrument cluster which had a history of problems as mentioned on job numbers [redacted], and [redacted]. The repair was temporary because the instrument cluster will require

replacement. The repair was performed as best as possible with consideration that the customer declined to replace the part.

Mr. [redacted] states: Job # [redacted] the part needed was an ignition cylinder was installed by [redacted]. The installed part was WRONG. The keys did not have a resistor pellet on the key shaft as required by GM.

Response: The fact that the ignition cylinder, as per the information provided to Mr. [redacted], was the wrong part does NOT discredit the time and money spent to diagnose the problem. If the part was incorrect or defective [redacted] Nukho & Sons will GLADLY refund the customer for the part providing the customer returns the part supplied. summary, Mr. [redacted] is a long time valued customer for whom we have provided years of quality service with never a complaint. We regret that Mr. [redacted] found it necessary to go to another repair facility rather than inform us of his concerns however, to resolve this matter by refunding the customer for the price of the part plus tax. - ·-

Respectfully Yours,