ComplaintsforAugustine Automotive, LLC

• Initial Complaint

  01/17/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  In June of 2022, diagnostic work was completely quickly and competently and my oil burn issue with a vehicle was diagnosed as bad piston rings. Despite assurances the repair would be complete by the end of July, the repair was completed well beyond that date. I would pay $4000 for the repair, only to be told a few weeks later that the turbo needed replacing at a cost of over $2000. After repairs were made, the car would be plagued with continual issues and repetitive check engine lights, none of which were problems prior to repair. I would literally drive the car about 5 miles down the road and the check engine light would illuminate. I believe the car was taken back to the shop a total of at least eight ***es! After requesting, due to the poor level of service, a refund, I would take the car to Jeff Schmitt Mazda would quickly repair the car thus showing the incompetence and negligence of ********* Automotive. My request for a refund for the extreme hassle and incompetence was denied by the owner then he blamed me for his shoddy workmanship. All of this took place over the ***e frame of July all the way through the end of November. A detailed breakdown and ***eline is attached. I am requesting from the business a refund of $2000.

  Customer response

  01/17/2023

  I was pretty sure I did originally attach the document.  The document attachment functionality is quite unintuitive but hopefully I have figured it out.

  Business response

  01/20/2023

  
  
  *** has been dissatisfied with many issues on his car and my shop has gone to extremes to help *** repair his car.  *** originally brought his car in to have piston rings replaced and my shop replaced the piston rings to factory specifications and ended up also replacing his rod bearings because they were failing.  The rod bearings were showing copper which is a sign of a poorly maintained engine or an extremely worn out engine that has had a lack of oil lubrication.  We also showed *** pictures of his rod bearings.  ***'s car was in need of many other repairs because it has been abused.  After performing the rod bearing and ring replacement on ***'s car, *** drove his car extremely hard immediately after picking it up while the engine oil was still cold, which as an automotive professional I know this will cause premature engine wear.  This is also when I learned that *** had an aftermarket tune on his car which causes a turbocharger to boost above factory intended boost levels. 

  After *** picked his car up from having the rod bearings and rings replace, *** was hearing a metallic sound under high boost while driving his car. I personally rode with *** while he drove his car extremely hard and I heard the sound that he was hearing. The sound was only audible when the car was driven very hard at high RPMs. We would not have driven ***'s car this way, so we wouldn't have ever heard the noise. After inspection, I personally found extreme turbocharger shaft play which is a common symptom of a failing turbocharger.  I also personally noticed scoring on the turbocharger cold side housing from the turbocharger turbine blades scraping against the housing while under boost.  I took a video of the turbocharger shaft play and sent it to ***. The link is also in the work order, so you are able to see a video of the failed turbocharger. *** approved (by phone), the replacement of his turbocharger. I personally replaced his turbocharger with a genuine factory new turbocharger.  After the turbocharger replacement, the sound was gone and I personally drove ***'s car with *** riding in the car to verify to him that the sound was gone. After *** picked up his car without paying, *** didn't pay his turbocharger replacement invoice until Nov 21, 2022 which was almost 2 months after the work was completed. *** paid through remote pay and not in person. *** also expressed to me that the noise was gone after the turbocharger replacement and after he had his car back.

  *** also brought his car back to the shop again because he claimed that is was hard starting.  When inspecting his car, I found that his battery was very low on charge and his starter was faulty.  I charged his battery and retested the starter to verify that is was faulty.  To help *** out because I knew he was frustrated, I replaced his starter free of charge.  I also found faulty wiring for his Mass Air Flow Sensor and repaired it and replaced his Mass Air Flow Sensor with a remanufactured Denso sensor (Denso is the original manufacturer of the Mass Air Flow Sensor).  I also offered to allow *** to drive my personal BMW while we had his car so he would have free transportation, but he claimed that he didn't need it. Over the course of working on ***'s car, we have bent over backwards to help ***. 

  After *** picked up his car, he said that his car ran great but threatened me by extorting and blackmailing my business for $2000. 
  
  *** took his car to **** ******* ***** for an inspection because he claimed to be getting a P0171 lean fault which was a fault code that was never present when we had his car.  During the inspection, the technician noticed a cracked Positive Crankcase hose and replaced it.  Nothing in the inspection from **** ******* ***** had anything to do with the repair of ***'s car that we performed. and we have contacted **** ******* ***** and found that the technician found nothing unsatisfactory about the work that we performed on ***'s car. 
  
  
  I am willing to refund *** the money he paid for his turbocharger replacement, but *** will need to return the new replacement turbocharger to ********* Automotive that we sold him on this Invoice #***** and as a company policy, we do not refund labor. 
  
  Thank you,
  ****** *********
  ********* Automotive
  ************

  Customer response

  01/20/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Some of ***'s response is truthful, but most of it isn't, the response fails to address my key complaints, and conveniently omits information.  I will elaborate as follows:
  

  *** claims that the engine was poorly maintained and shows signs of extreme wear.  *** conveniently makes this claim well after the car was serviced at this shop and never once was this claim made to me during the servicing of the car.
  
  *** claims that I "drove his car extremely hard immediately after picking it up while the engine oil was still cold".  This is simply not true.  I actually drove the car to the gas station several miles up the street to fill it up, then I drove a few miles to another establishment to fill up tires.  This resulted in at least 20 minutes of run time *during the summer*, which I did intentionally, before applying more than mild throttle input.  Further, I did not drive the car extremely hard.  The disturbing sounds were apparent, in my estimation, at about 50-60% throttle.  Furthermore, *** promptly put my car on the lift in his shop and proceeded to rev and race the engine repeatedly, in a fruitless effort to diagnose the problem, for what was at least a total of 10-20 minutes.  This was so loud that I could readily hear it in the waiting room and while outside taking a phone call.  So *** is guilty of directly violating his own advice and putting much undue wear and stress on those new parts.  Finally, well before repairs were completed, I told *** how I planned to drive the car over the next couple thousand miles, extremely hard, and he directly advised me that this wasn't a problem! *** seems to have a rather selective memory.
  
  *** claims the car has an aftermarket tune: The car does and did, in fact, have an aftermarket tune that slightly raises boost levels of the stock turbocharger but the tune is very mild and does keep the engine load specs within factory specifications nonetheless.
  
  *** claims that the turbo was bad.  I acknowledge that this could be the case.  However, I think, in turn, that *** must also acknowledge that the turbo could have been fine all along.  1) The turbo did not exhibit these symptoms prior to the engine repair 2) Other persistent problems with the repair were found afterward, namely the MAF sensor wiring and assembly, that perhaps could have contributed to the turbo operating out of specification.
  
  *** claims I picked up the car without paying.  This is technically true.  However, I had a direct conversation with ***, the owner, who directly told me I didn't need to pay right when picking it up.  Further, key details are omitted from this over simplification.  Upon picking up the car after the turbo repair, I immediately returned it with a check engine light, two diagnostic trouble codes, hard starts, and poor idling.  So, yes, I decided not to pay for the services rendered until these problems were rectified.  *** also conveniently omits that this scenario would play itself out at least a full half dozen times wherein I picked up the car only to return it immediately *with the same diagnostic trouble codes*.  When the problem was apparently actually discovered after months of searching, I did, in fact, pay the bill.
  
  *** claims the battery was low.  This is simply false.  The battery was literally new.  Further, I had just driven the car for many miles in this one instance prior to taking it into his shop.  If the battery was indeed low then it could only have been due to sitting on ***'s lot for an extended period of time.
  
  *** claims the starter was bad.  I have no way of knowing if the starter was good or not for sure.  However, given the persistent check engine light and accompanying persistent diagnostic trouble codes all pointing to the MAF and literally containing the term "MAF", I think it's quite a safe bet that the wiring issue with the MAF was one of the undiagnosed issues all along.  This persistent issue went undiagnosed for months after the turbo replacement.  *** would ul***ately admit to finding a MAF wiring issue that would clear the persistent check engine light (see the write up and objective evidence).  So not only did the MAF almost surely not need replaced, I find it highly unlikely the starter needed replaced either.  These were replaced in a last ditch effort to fix problems that *** couldn't find, didn't find, or lacked the ability to readily diagnose despite the diagnostic trouble code pointing directly to it the whole ***e - the MAF wiring issue.  
  
  Further, I did not ask for or authorize either for the starter or the MAF sensor to be replaced.  In fact, I was never asked or notified until well after the installation.  Even cursory research shows that aftermarket MAF sensors are not advised in this car.  So if indeed I did authorize replacing the MAF sensor, I would have accepted only a factory OEM sensor.  When I formally requested the original MAF sensor, *** had sold it for core.  To his credit, he did offer to buy me a new one, but at that point I didn't trust *** nor his motivations.
  
  *** claims that the P0171 code that tripped was not do his work.  Again, I have no way of objectively proving that.  But I do know that when I asked Mazda they said the PCV hose was in very bad shape, extremely brittle, and had multiple cracks in it.  Undoubtedly, this should have been noticed and the hose simply replaced during the natural course of the original repair or *during the three plus months it was in the shop with the same, persistent issues*. This was almost surely contributing to myriad issues that persisted with the car after *** laid hands on it.
  
  *** did, in fact, offer to let me borrow his BMW, which was a nice act and much appreciated.  I didn't feel comfortable for legal (insurance, liability) and other reasons accepting such an arrangement like this from a business and I think that is completely understandable.
  
  *** makes the offer to refund me the money for the turbocharger.  This is a hollow and meaningless gesture and *** must know that.  By the ***e I pay for the uninstallation of the turbocharger and the installation of the old one, it will cost me way more than leaving it in the car.
  
  Finally and most offensively, *** claims that I "threatened me by extorting and blackmailing my business for $2000".  I defy you or anyone to show me where I did this.  I made sure that in those final stages all of our communication was written.  This is a boldfaced lie.  Further, I have provided all our correspondence in the write up that I submitted.  So one can plainly see that claim is simply false, and I would never threaten, blackmail, or extort.
  
  In short, my dissatisfaction can be summarized with a series of indisputable facts as follows:
  
  -My car was unavailable and at ********* Automotive for over a four month period.  This is indisputable.  This resulted is great inconvenience and monetary impact to me and my family. 
  -After the turbocharger repair, the car was returned to ********* at least a half dozen ***es with the same issues: check engine light, same diagnostic trouble codes, hard start, and poor idling.  This is indisputable.
  -*** would ultimately admit, after a few months, to finding a MAF wiring issue, which would finally clear the check engine light and the two diagnostic trouble codes.  This is indisputable.
  -*** would, without authorization, replace my starter and MAF sensor.  Notably, the MAF sensor was replaced with an aftermarket product which is well known to be not advised for this vehicle.  *** then sold the original MAF sensor.
  -No apology would ultimately be offered by *** and he would simply blame me for the all the problems with the car!
  -Before the repairs at *********, the car had faithfully run for 100,000 with none of the problems that were present and persistent after the repair.
  -Initially, during the course of the repairs, *** was actually apologetic and admitted fault a number of times.  I even distinctly remember him telling me after the turbo was replaced that "it should be perfect".  But his attitude would completely change over ***e to be one that would embrace a position of faultlessness despite a mountain of contradictory objective evidence.
  -Shortly after I would take delivery of the car from ********* Automotive for the final time and after driving it about 200 miles, it would throw a check engine light with a new diagnostic trouble code P0171 (lean on bank 1).  I would take the car to the Mazda dealership and they would find the PCV hose completely severed.  Further, they would point to the brittleness and multiple cracks in the hose which were all contributing to the vehicle's poor operation and performance.  This hose should have been replaced during the repair of the car and certainly should have been diagnosed during the three plus months and 6+ visits to the shop.  This is indisputable.
  
  Given that the total cost of repairs was right around $6500, I don't find a request to be refunded $2000, in light of the circumstances, to be at all unreasonable.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ******* *********

  Business response

  01/27/2023

  Thank you for your response.  ********* Automotive only charged you for repairs that were authorized by you on your car. Nothing that my shop did, caused any of the many issues that your car had and still has. 

  I will not continue to argue pettily over issues of your car. I disagree with almost every argument that you make.   

  I saw the slanderous and personal attacks that you wrote on your Google review. Because of the personal attacks,  I will not be corresponding about this matter anymore.  I personally tried to resolve this issue with you in a professional manner and never personally attacked you and slandered you.  I will not be refunding $2000. 

  Thank you

  ****** *********

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩