Smog 'N Go

Review: smog tech knew that cars with "check engine" light on, usually fail. He did my test on my car, that had the light on, and charged me anyway. I Want Refund

Date of Incident: February 6, 2013

Invoice # XXXXXX

Technician - [redacted]

My name - [redacted] "[redacted]" [redacted]

I took my car to Smog N Go in West Sacramento. I have a 2002 Chrysler 300M Special. I want to clarify that I have a "Check Engine" light on, and I have prior knowledge of the fact. I also want to clarify that I know why the light is on. I just don't have the time and money to fix the issue. Now to continue my complaint; I took my car in. I saw a man. I told him I need my Smog Check for renewal. I gave him my keys. He left to test my car. I saw that Smog N' Go had a sign. I can't remember what the sign said, I wasn't told to read it, nor did I sign a statement to say that I read it, I am just telling the truth here. It went somewhere along the lines that if I were to know that my car would fail the test to tell the employee and he would perform a charged pre-test. I paid no mind, as I know my car doesn't pollute. Less than 5-10 minutes later, the employee returns and says, "Failed. Your check engine light was on." I replied, "I know it's on." He said, "Yeah, that's an automatic fail." I was without words and angry that he would get in my car and just do the test, then charge me. I cannot say if he looked at the "check engine" light. I would assume that, this being his job, he would be ethical, and also trained to do so. You see, I did not know that there was a "functionality test". I assumed that they just check for smog/emissions. He went in there, knowing that if the "check engine" light is on, cars usually fail the "functionality test." He proceeds, while knowing the facts I stated, knowing that my car would likely fail, gets out and charges me. I would believe that as an ethical, common sense practice, a human would tell another human, "hey, your check engine light is on, your car will most likely fail, are you sure you want to proceed, we will charge, I recommend, you have the car checked out first." No. He charged me, took my money. I feel like an it. I did not argue with him about what he did at the time, he didn't talk much, and by the time, I thought to myself "I got ripped off" I was already gone. So I emailed them via their website. Owner [redacted] responded. He basically told me that I still have a free re-test. That to me is useless, as I refuse to do business with them after what they already did. [redacted] also stated that I already have the paper that tells me what is wrong with my car; basically telling me that at least I got that as a service. I tell you, I already knew what was wrong with my car, I get the codes myself when I turn my key 3 times, my car tells me my codes. I responded to [redacted], that all I want is my money back. He responded with refusal, saying that this is company policy.Desired Settlement: I want my refund, $49.75 mailed to me in a check form. Payable to [redacted].

Business

Response:

Business' Initial Response

In response to the compaint.. A work order was signed authorizing the smog tech to perform a smog inspection. The state requires us to smog a vehicle as it comes presented to us. Example: The test is done in steps. 1st the emissions test to measure tail pipe emissions. 2nd, the visual inspection as prompted by the machine, 3rd, the functional portion, which can be many different things depending on the year, make and model of car. In this case it was an OBDII test. That test involves the cars computer communicating to the smog machine through a data cable that plugs into the on board computer of the car. The technician can not simply stop the test if he sees the light on. If the customer were to have inquired about the check engine light before the test we could have told him that the car would fail. The reason the state wants the test completed, is to verify that the car does not fail for other smog related items. Example: If the customer was told the check engine light is on before the test and then leaves, the customer could come back and fail for other items not related to the light, have to leave again, fix those issues, then come back and test again. They refer to this as a "yo-yo" scenario. Wasting the time and money of the consumer having to go back and forth between repair shops and smog shops. Also for the purpose of collecting accurate data for vehicles and smog test results. The test has been reviewed and was found to have been done correctly according to the laws and regulations for the states program. And yes, we do offer a free re-test, good for 90 days. So, yes it is our company policy to do the test as it was done. We have this policy which is created around the regulations set forth by the state. The customer can file a complaint with BAR (Bureau of Automotive Repair) which is part of Consumer Affairs. They oversee the state's smog program and can send a rep out to look into the matter. The test was done correctly. The customer would have gotten the same result from the pre inspection for the same price. The difference is that the pre inspection does not certify the car if it passes. If it were to have passed a pre inspection. The customer would then have to pay for the official smog inspection. So, in a way he saved $49.75 by running the test and getting a free re-test rather than paying for both after he repairs his vehicle. We would have had to have done a test incorrectly to refund an inspection fee. We are still offering the free re-test for 90 days. The same issue COULD have come up for a visual inspection item, such as a broken hose line. We see it, we have to fail it. We can't stop the test and say, "hey fix this and bring it back" when the test is in process. If we did that we would have people coming back 3 or 4 times on every smog check. That isn't how the test is to be done.

Consumer's Final Response

I don't agree with the response from the owner of Smog N' Go. His practices are unethical and irresponsible. I have not had time to create my rebuttal. I am a busy person. I did not create this complaint because I am in desperate need of money. Although my money back would be one of my intentions.

Review: the personell here were deceptive and misleading not to mention rude and unknowledgable.

they failed my car due to the dipstick???

then after it already passed emmissions , after replacing the dipstick, suddenly the emissions were too high after tech ran it for 15 minutes on machine, when I have never seen anyone test so long.....it appeared there were notes from the owner.....who is a rude unhelpful JERKDesired Settlement: my money back from smog test that incorrectly failed there as I went right down the street and it passed easily??????????smog stop

Business

Response:

Business' Initial Response

Mr. McKnight used our Laguna location in Elk Grove to have a smog check performed on his 2004 Nissan Sentra on 08/28/2012. His vehicle did not pass the test. His vehicle failed for the MIL light, or commonly referred to as the "check engine light", with 2 fault/trouble codes stored in his vehicle's on-bored computer. This is part of the state mandated functional portion of the smog test. This part of the test is done by the vehicle communicating to the smog machine through it's OBD2 system. The codes stored were P0303 and P0128. Code P0303 is related to a misfire detected in cylinder #3. Code P0128 is related to a coolant temperature issue with the thermostat. These are short generic descriptions of the codes that are printed on the Vehicle Inspection Report generated by the smog machine. The second portion of the test that failed was an item on the Visual inspection, also a part of the smog test. There is a checklist of several items the Smog Technician must verify that are on the vehicle. Any items that may be broken, missing, incomplete, or not California compliant would cause a Visual inpection failure. The visual item that failed was the oil dipstick. It did not seal properly to the dipstick tube. This is considered by the State, part of the PCV system. All parts of this system must be sealed. The vehicle has failed two of the three parts of the smog check. At this point the vehicle did pass the third part, which is the tailpipe emissions. However, on one of the emissions, the vehicle maxed out on the allowable limits set by the State for this vehicle. The staff mentioned this to him. The max is 0.54 ppm at the 15mph portion of the test. That is what the machine measured the vehicle output at. If it goes to 0.55ppm, it would fail, so he barely passed that part of the test. We offer a free re-test that is good for 90 days and can be retested at any of our 6 locations.

On 08/30/2012, Mr. McKnight returned to our Laguna location. He had addressed the functional failure of the test, but did not address the visual inspection portion that had failed. The oil dipstick was still loose and the system not sealed. We suggested that he purchase the part from Nissan. He did not want to spend the money to get the proper part and opted to purchase an aftermarket part that still did not fit the tube correctly. We told him that rather than waste his free re-test he could go get the correct part and we would still honor his free re-test. He was not happy about the visual failure. We explained it several times and that it is included as part of the visual inspection of the smog test.

On 09/04/2012, Mr. McKnight went to our Calvine location, also in Elk Grove. Once again, he had not fixed the oil dipstick issue. The technician noticed that the vehicle was there for a re-test and had failed the visual inspection. He showed Mr. McKnight the issue of the oil dipstick. Again, we told him we didn't want to waste his free re-test and that we would honor it when he got the right part.

On 09/07/2012, Mr. McKnight returned to our Calvine location. He had replaced the part and it fit properly. The visual inspection now passes. Unfortunately, his vehicle at this point is now failing the emissions portion of the test and passing the functional and visual portions. The emission that failed is the same one that he maxed out on with the first test done at our Laguna location. We let him know back then that it was possible that the car may fail when he came back because it was at the maximum limit. We told him that with 267,269 miles on the car and nearly 345 miles since his first test, that there may be some smog components that are not working correctly and that he would need to take his vehicle to a repair facility to diagnose the problem. At this point Mr. McKnight is even more upset than he was before.

On 09/08/2012, Mr McKnight took his vehicle to a different smog testing company and failed again. Later that same morning his vehicle passed.

To address Mr. McKnight's accusations and claims, I can tell the Revdex.com that everything was done according to the laws and regulations set forth by the State of California and the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR). No complaints were filed with BAR. The vehicle failed with another company, I assume with the same issue it had had at our locations. We do not drive cars on the dynamometer for 15 minutes. It is driven for a maximum of 90 seconds at the 15mph portion of the test and a maximum of 90 seconds at the 25mph portion of the test. The smog machine decides if its a shorter time or longer, up to the maximum of 90 seconds at each speed. Shorter if it is detecting cleaner emissions and longer if it is detecting dirtier emissions. We can't decide how long or how short a car is driven on the test. The complete test, with everything takes about 10-15 minutes.

As for notes from the Owner regarding the test or Mr. Mcknight to our other locations, they don't exist nor did they ever. Our software keeps track of the customer information and vehicle information, so we have a history of the vehicles coming in and how often. Also for repeat customers so all of their info comes up when we enter license plate numbers or phone numbers. The notes he is referring to are the previous test results.

His claim of going down the road and easily passing somewhere else is not true either according to the state's website. It failed one more time and then passed later that day.

We will not be refunding any of his money. He paid $49.75 for the smog inspection. He came back 3-4 times and we told him what he needed to do. We didn't run the free re-test so he could take advantage of that. Instead, he went somewhere else, paid for that test and failed and was re-tested later that day and passed. We spent a lot of time with him in person at 2 different locations and on the phone several times and told him what he needed to do. We don't issue refunds for legal, legitimate test failures or because of someone upset about failing. We did our job. Sorry, but we do our work legally according to the laws and regulations for our industry. He is always welcome to file a complaint with BAR and they would be happy to send a rep out to look into the matter. We actually encouraged him to do that. He still has not. He has threatened everything else, but not filing a complaint with the agency that oversees the sates smog program. We also have a very good reputation in our communities, with our customers, and with the BAR.

We are sorry for the late response. We did not receive any of the earlier attempted communications on this matter. With the very few complaints customers have filed in our 13 years of being in business, we have always responded quickly. We are always quick to resolve concerns and problems. Very rarely do they reach the point of complaints being filed. We are sorry Mr. McKnight feels he has been wronged, but we have to do the Smog Check correctly and legally and we have a reputation for doing that.

Brian Scholes

Consumer's Final Response

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

Brian,

Please refrain from slanderous claims unless you can back those up with documentation. You may be liable now for slander.

Fact: Your smogn go statons failer a 2004 nissan sentra that easily passed at another smog inspection facilty. Having both print outs this is proof that your testing stations and technicians seem to modify these numbers greatly? They vary drastically.

To the Revdex.com,

The technicians and owner of smogngo in the elk grove area are deceptive, misleading and unprofessional. They are on a power trip. This is a very poorly managed company and they are a dis-service to our nice community of elk grove. as well I find they are deceptive and far less than up front with their customers.

This is what truly happened. I took my car in for smog it passed all the numbers but they failed it due to a "faulty" dipstick.? They then told me where I had to go to get the new dipstick, the dealer where it was quite costly.......I decided to go to a local auto store to purchase one. I checked the seal apparently since it wasn't the one they wanted me to buy. The unit I purchased was perfectly effecient in sealing the dipstick orifice and it was tight. After returning to smogngo to retest with the new dipstick they failed it again, apparently since it wasn't the one they wanted me to buy! I then went to another smog checking business and it passed easily. Fact!

These folks gave me the run around for days. Please innvestigate the legitamcy of the employees of this business.

Business' Final Response

In response to the consumer rebuttal...There was nothing slanderous written or said about the customer or his situation. The previous response from us was accurate. The information used in that response was pulled from our records and from the state's smog website. Like I said before, if the customer files a complaint with BAR they can look into the issue further and we will supply them with all of the documentation and they can interview the employees and the customer. They have access to every test done on this vehicle in their database. We can not alter a test. The machines measure the emissions output, not the technician. So, there is no slander here. The customer is making several accusations that can be considered slander about our employees and company. Like I said in my previous response. The are laws and regulations that we must follow. We can't pick and choose who passes and who doesn't. My previous response was done in great detail and covered everything regarding the customer's rebuttal. Regarding the last paragraph of the customer's rebuttal, I will again refer the Revdex.com and the customer to our first response. And yes I have all the documentation I need to back it all up. That's how I was able to write it.