Paul's Car Care

[redacted] In response to your email, we maintain our position is we are not responsible for this failureAs stated before, the customer picked up the car and it was quiet and ran fineHe only allowed minimal repair of the water pump to repair the coolant leakHe drove it for three weeks and miles!! Then he came back with a noise in the engine area [redacted] told him he probably needed to replace the timing tensioner because it was failing and causing the noiseHe stated he did not have the money and picked up the carHe drove it about miles and the next day he called stating the car quit runningHe did not have money and did not allow us to do any inspectionInstead he towed the car to the dealerOn his first complaint he stated the necessary estimate was $Now it has accelerated to over $4270.00!!! We question the dealer's statementIt is ***'s belief the work we performed was done properly and we are not responsibleThe customer decided not to do the recommended work due to lack of moneyThis is not our responsibilityThe work was done right, the car ran and was quiet and not leaking or overheating.Sincerely, [redacted] Paul's Car Care Inc [redacted]

RevDex.com: I have reviewed the 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. It is abundantly clear from the first line of ***’s response that we are being unjustly penalized for our relationship with [redacted] ***. [redacted] is a mechanic whom we met when our children played on Little League together. Over the years he has done occasional work on our vehicles as he has done for many acquaintances from the team in our neighborhood. As non-mechanics, we appreciate the advice he shares because we know it can be easy for disreputable mechanics to take advantage of those who aren’t mechanically inclined – there are plenty of national news shows that have proven this fact. Sometimes [redacted] would do the work in our driveway. Other times he would do the work in his driveway. And sometimes, when he worked at a particular auto shop, he would have us bring the car there. The work was never done “under the table” as we always paid the shop owner, not [redacted] , for the work that was performed at the shop. We have and continue to take our vehicles to some of those shops, including [redacted] in Gilbert, which has always done a decent job at a fair price. We sure wish we had taken our vehicle there again this time because we’re certain the outcome would have been different. When our son’s 98 Chevy Truck started acting up a couple of months ago, [redacted] offered to stop by our home one evening to see if he had an idea of what might be causing the problem. He said although he had some ideas, and that a coolant leak might be coming from a plug at the rear of the cylinder head, he wouldn’t be able to tell for sure without getting the truck up on a lift. A few weeks went by before we were able to get the truck to Paul's Car Care and apparently in that timeframe [redacted] had been let go. [redacted] tried to get a hold of [redacted] to see if he thought Paul’s Car Care was a reputable shop but was unable to reach him. If we had been successful in reaching [redacted] , who we later found out was out of town, we probably wouldn’t have kept the car there. But [redacted] seemed honest and willing to assist, so [redacted] explained what [redacted] had suggested might be the problem. Contrary to ***’s response, we did NOT come in knowing what was wrong with the car and we didn’t insist on any particular work being performed or diagnosis being done – we just wanted someone who knows how to fix cars to tell us what we needed to do. The ONLY reason we authorized the transmission to be removed was because the $42.50 diagnostic and subsequent view of the area once the truck was put up on the lift showed evidence of a leak -- [redacted] said that because he didn’t have x-ray eyes he would have to remove the transmission to get at the actual leak. However, [redacted] ALSO subsequently agreed that the leak that he eventually found, which was coming from the lower intake manifold, could have been found and fixed WITHOUT removing the transmission. When [redacted] asked, “did you need x-ray vision to see that the leak was coming from the lower intake manifold” [redacted] said “no.” That’s why [redacted] had no interest in looking at photos which proved that the problem was the intake manifold – it would have been even more infuriating to see proof that the 5.5 hours of work they did to remove the transmission shouldn’t have been done in the first place – you don’t need to move a transmission to detect a lower intake manifold leak or fix a lower intake manifold leak, for that matter. The bottom line is [redacted] and [redacted] did not carefully inspect the vehicle or they could have determined the leak did not require a 5.5 hour transmission removal. [redacted] is trying to infer that [redacted] insisted the leaks were coming from a plug at the rear of the cylinder head. That is simply not true – all [redacted] did was tell [redacted] what [redacted] had suggested. But even [redacted] said he couldn’t be sure without putting the truck up on a lift to get a better view. He does not have a lift which is why he told us to take it to the shop where he was working at – and like we had done any other time we took it to a shop where he was working we expected we would be paying the shop owner, not [redacted] , for any services that needed to be performed. We trusted ***’s Care Care to determine the ACTUAL problem – regardless of what [redacted] had suggested -- and had they found the problem without performing what turned out to be an unnecessary transmission removal we would have happily agreed to pay to have the intake manifold repaired. A mechanic who had repaired the intake manifold about a year ago (who was not [redacted] , by the way) had apparently done a lousy job (hence our suspicion of mechanics we don’t know) and [redacted] said that whoever had done that work was “an a-hole.” [redacted] misdirected anger at [redacted] and his shop’s misdiagnosis of the problem has left us with a nearly $600 [redacted] for work that didn’t need to be performed in the first place, and a truck that still requires an expensive fix. This is the kind of unethical and fraudulent behavior that unfortunately makes so many distrustful of auto repair shops. [redacted] called the police when the angry gang-up on the part of ***, [redacted] and [redacted] made it clear things were getting out of hand. We have never, ever expected anyone to perform work for free and have plenty of repair ***s to prove it. But we do not think it is justifiable to pay for a careless diagnosis and unnecessary work that benefits absolutely nobody but the shop owner. It’s too bad [redacted] isn’t working there anymore – we have no idea what went on between him and the shop owner, but based on our past experiences he’s a capable mechanic who, with the benefit of a lift, would very likely have found the problem that truly needed fixing.Regards, [redacted] ***

In response to your request for us to reconsider our position regarding this complaint, I would like to start by saying that first of all, I called [redacted] and spoke with [redacted] the service advisor on 11/24/2014. I asked him if [redacted] had spoken with the technician regarding his car. He told me no, he has not spoken with the tech. With respect to his claim that the water pump was not installed properly, this is impossible. There is only one way for it to be installed. The bolt patterns and two dowell pins are the only way it is installed. If it were not on properly, the car would not go back together, let alone run! I would like to repeat that originally the car was towed in, overheated and leaking coolant. We replaced the water pump as authorized by the customer. We also recommended the thermostat which he decided NOT to do. Everything started and ran,no leaks, no overheating, no noise. After three weeks which the customer drove 950 miles he came back to the shop with a concern of noise in the engine area which was intermittent. [redacted] told [redacted] this was most likely the timing chain tensioner and that he should have it replaced. Once again he decided NOT to have the recommended repair done. Instead he picked up the car and after driving for a day and a distance of 45 miles the car quit running. At the time of the water pump installation the tensioner was working normally and quiet. If there was a problem the car would have only gone the 45 miles and quit, or maybe not even have started, NOT 950 miles and three weeks! We maintain this is a failure which occured after the initial repair and is unrelated. Mr. Bogan decided on two ocassions NOT to do the recommended repairs and consequently the car quit running. If for a moment we thought it was related to our work, we would have taken care of it. We believe this is NOT due to our work and we should not be held responsible. The customer stated he did not have the money to do the necessary work. Therefore, our hands were tied.