Newburg service center

This letter addresses the statements made against our repair shop, Newburg Service Center located in Newburg, Maryland.The [redacted] in question is approximately years old and has several hundred thousand miles on the odometerThe customer brought his car to our shop and requested that he wanted a front suspension part replaced, which he had purchased from another parts storeHe was told that we would check the front end and let him know the resultsPreviously, as the customer stated in his complaint filed with the Revdex.com, he had taken his vehicle to another shop and they informed him that a center link was neededWe checked the vehicle and determined that the front end was tightWe called the customer and he said that he was told the center link was needed, so we then installed the center link and performed an alignment on the vehicle.The customer returned to our shop with the [redacted] because of a "knocking noise" in the front endOur technician checked the front end again including all the components (center link, tie rod end, idler arm etc.), The results were that the front end was tight, but the shocks appeared to be weakWe informed the customer of our diagnosis, but did not install new shocksTo summarize, the customer requested a specific part (center link) to be installed on his carBased on our diagnosis, other parts were needed in order to properly repair his vehicleThe customer did not authorize these repairs and only authorized the center link to be replaced based on another repair shop's recommendationThe customer requested us to install the center link which he provided and we performed the work as instructed by the customerThe customer brought the [redacted] work van to our shop for a "check engine light and running rough" issueA diagnosis was performed and the results indicated that a tune up was needed and the EGRValve was not functioning correctlyAll of these diagnostic results were generated from our diagnostic computer scannerWe informed the customer of the diagnostic report and were told by the customer not to perform the tune up, because the customer had already performed this work prior to bringing the vehicle to our shopThe customer authorized the replacement of the EGR Valve which we installedAfter completing the installation and road testing the vehicle, the check engine light was properly off and the vehicle was running properlyThere were no further repairs or testing needed based on the diagnostic reportAfter several days, the customer brought the vehicle back to our shop and indicated that the vehicle was "doing the same thing"He was told that our schedule was full and we were backed up and would not be able to get to it right away, but would do so as soon as we couldThe mechanic performed additional diagnostic tests which indicated the EGR Valve was not functioning properly and extensive testing would be neededWhen the customer called us about the status of van repair, he was told that we had looked at it and that more testing would be requiredDuring that phone conversation, our manager may have been very short with the customer and that was wrong, no matter how many things were going on at that moment in timeWe owe an apology to the customer for that actionSeveral days later as our schedule eased up, we did have an opportunity to investigate the van and the problemsBased on the analysis, the EGR Valve gasket had failed and was replaced at no charge to the customerUpon further analysis, the tune up issue was once again still showing as a problemThe analysis specifically identified two problems 1) the customers' installation of the number six spark plug and wire was defective and 2) a ground wire problem at the fuel pumpBased on this analysis, the number six spark plug was replaced and the spark plug wire repaired and the ground wire at the fuel pump was repairedThe vehicle was test driven several times after the repairs were completed and appeared to be performing as expectedDuring the road testing, the check engine light was not illuminated and the engine was not "missing" or making a "bucking motion"We believe this letter has addressed the customers' complaints to the best of our abilityAs of the writing of this response, the customer picked up his van several days ago from our shopWe have not been informed of any additional problems with this vehicle to dateThank you,Newburg Service Center

This letter addresses the statements made against our repair shop, Newburg Service Center located in Newburg, Maryland.The [redacted] in question is approximately 20 years old and has several hundred thousand miles on the odometer. The customer brought his car to our shop and requested...

that he wanted a front suspension part replaced, which he had purchased from another parts store. He was told that we would check the front end and let him know the results. Previously, as the customer stated in his complaint filed with the Revdex.com, he had taken his vehicle to another shop and they informed him that a center link was needed. We checked the vehicle and determined that the front end was tight. We called the customer and he said that he was told the center link was needed, so we then installed the center link and performed an alignment on the vehicle.The customer returned to our shop with the [redacted] because of a "knocking noise" in the front end. Our technician checked the front end again including all the components (center link, tie rod end, idler arm etc.), The results were that the front end was tight, but the shocks appeared to be weak. We informed the customer of our diagnosis, but did not install new shocks. To summarize, the customer requested a specific part (center link) to be installed on his car. Based on our diagnosis, other parts were needed in order to properly repair his vehicle. The customer did not authorize these repairs and only authorized the center link to be replaced based on another repair shop's recommendation. The customer requested us to install the center link which he provided and we performed the work as instructed by the customer.
The customer brought the 2000 [redacted] work van to our shop for a "check engine light and running rough" issue. A diagnosis was performed and the results indicated that a tune up was needed and the EGRValve was not functioning correctly. All of these diagnostic results were generated from our diagnostic computer scanner. We informed the customer of the diagnostic report and were told by the customer not to perform the tune up, because the customer had already performed this work prior to bringing the vehicle to our shop.
The customer authorized the replacement of the EGR Valve which we installed. After completing the installation and road testing the vehicle, the check engine light was properly off and the vehicle was running properly. There were no further repairs or testing needed based on the diagnostic report. After several days, the customer brought the vehicle back to our shop and indicated that the vehicle was "doing the same thing". He was told that our schedule was full and we were backed up and would not be able to get to it right away, but would do so as soon as we could. The mechanic performed additional diagnostic tests which indicated the EGR Valve was not functioning properly and extensive testing would be needed.
When the customer called us about the status of van repair, he was told that we had looked at it and that more testing would be required. During that phone conversation, our manager may have been very short with the customer and that was wrong, no matter how many things were going on at that moment in time. We owe an apology to the customer for that action.
Several days later as our schedule eased up, we did have an opportunity to investigate the van and the problems. Based on the analysis, the EGR Valve gasket had failed and was replaced at no charge to the customer. Upon further analysis, the tune up issue was once again still showing as a problem. The analysis specifically identified two problems 1) the customers' installation of the number six spark plug and wire was defective and 2) a ground wire problem at the fuel pump. Based on this analysis, the number six spark plug was replaced and the spark plug wire repaired and the ground wire at the fuel pump was repaired. The vehicle was test driven several times after the repairs were completed and appeared to be performing as expected. During the road testing, the check engine light was not illuminated and the engine was not "missing" or making a "bucking motion".
We believe this letter has addressed the customers' complaints to the best of our ability. As of the writing of this response, the customer picked up his van several days ago from our shop. We have not been informed of any additional problems with this vehicle to date.
Thank you,Newburg Service Center

This letter addresses the statements made against our repair shop, Newburg Service Center located in Newburg, Maryland.The [redacted] in question is approximately 20 years old and has several hundred thousand miles on the odometer. The customer brought his car to our shop and requested that he...

wanted a front suspension part replaced, which he had purchased from another parts store. He was told that we would check the front end and let him know the results. Previously, as the customer stated in his complaint filed with the Revdex.com, he had taken his vehicle to another shop and they informed him that a center link was needed. We checked the vehicle and determined that the front end was tight. We called the customer and he said that he was told the center link was needed, so we then installed the center link and performed an alignment on the vehicle.The customer returned to our shop with the [redacted] because of a "knocking noise" in the front end. Our technician checked the front end again including all the components (center link, tie rod end, idler arm etc.), The results were that the front end was tight, but the shocks appeared to be weak. We informed the customer of our diagnosis, but did not install new shocks. To summarize, the customer requested a specific part (center link) to be installed on his car. Based on our diagnosis, other parts were needed in order to properly repair his vehicle. The customer did not authorize these repairs and only authorized the center link to be replaced based on another repair shop's recommendation. The customer requested us to install the center link which he provided and we performed the work as instructed by the customer.The customer brought the 2000 [redacted] work van to our shop for a "check engine light and running rough" issue. A diagnosis was performed and the results indicated that a tune up was needed and the EGRValve was not functioning correctly. All of these diagnostic results were generated from our diagnostic computer scanner. We informed the customer of the diagnostic report and were told by the customer not to perform the tune up, because the customer had already performed this work prior to bringing the vehicle to our shop.The customer authorized the replacement of the EGR Valve which we installed. After completing the installation and road testing the vehicle, the check engine light was properly off and the vehicle was running properly. There were no further repairs or testing needed based on the diagnostic report. After several days, the customer brought the vehicle back to our shop and indicated that the vehicle was "doing the same thing". He was told that our schedule was full and we were backed up and would not be able to get to it right away, but would do so as soon as we could. The mechanic performed additional diagnostic tests which indicated the EGR Valve was not functioning properly and extensive testing would be needed.When the customer called us about the status of van repair, he was told that we had looked at it and that more testing would be required. During that phone conversation, our manager may have been very short with the customer and that was wrong, no matter how many things were going on at that moment in time. We owe an apology to the customer for that action.Several days later as our schedule eased up, we did have an opportunity to investigate the van and the problems. Based on the analysis, the EGR Valve gasket had failed and was replaced at no charge to the customer. Upon further analysis, the tune up issue was once again still showing as a problem. The analysis specifically identified two problems 1) the customers' installation of the number six spark plug and wire was defective and 2) a ground wire problem at the fuel pump. Based on this analysis, the number six spark plug was replaced and the spark plug wire repaired and the ground wire at the fuel pump was repaired. The vehicle was test driven several times after the repairs were completed and appeared to be performing as expected. During the road testing, the check engine light was not illuminated and the engine was not "missing" or making a "bucking motion".We believe this letter has addressed the customers' complaints to the best of our ability. As of the writing of this response, the customer picked up his van several days ago from our shop. We have not been informed of any additional problems with this vehicle to date.Thank you,Newburg Service Center