Work was billed but not actually performed.
On June 6, 2013 ***** ****** brought my Chevrolet C1500 pickup to ***** ***** Chevrolet in Porterville, CA for new oil pan seals, (oil pan seal & rear main seal) and oil change. On July 02, 2013, (7 days later), ***** ***** Chevrolet mechanic called and told me that the seals didn't seal and that he would have to redo it. Approximately 2 hours later, the mechanic called and told me the truck was ready. (Why did it take 7 days to do the job the first time due to being a complicated procedure then only 2 hours to redo it?).
On 08/11/2015 I took my truck to Oil Can Henrys for an oil change. The mechanic noted that the oil pan was leaking and appeared to have been sealed with silicone and JB Weld.
On 08/12/2015 I went to a Lassen Chevrolet in Oregon to have the job by ***** ***** verified. After the ASE Certified mechanic's evaluation, he determined that the oil pan had never been removed but rather an attempt was made by ***** ***** Chevrolet to seal the leaks with silicone.
The Mechanic walked me under the vehicle and I observed the less than acceptable work performed by ***** ***** Chevrolet.
After leaving the Lassen Chevrolet in Oregon, I called *** ****** at ***** ***** Chevrolet in Porterville, CA. I informed him of the findings and he was reluctant to admit possible fault pending pictures taken by the mechanic at Lassen Chevrolet.
I am asking that ***** ***** Chevrolet in Porterville, CA to pay Lassen Chevrolet in Albany, OR for ALL necessary repairs as well as ANY damage that may have occurred as a result of ***** *****'s neglect to actually perform ALL necessary repairs to correct the original problem. I am also asking ***** ***** to pay $49.00 diagnostic fee as well as $70.00 to replace the Mobil1 5W-30 Synthetic motor oil that was used for my last oil change one day prior to this discovery. (Paid $109.99 to Oil Can Henrys located in Lebanon, OR on 08/11/15).
First, on Wednesday, June 26, 2013, Lorna Gordon did bring a 1997 Chevrolet pick-up, VIN I ****************, to Merle ***** Chevrolet in Porterville for an oil leak concern. On Friday, June 28, the leak was diagnosed as an engine oil pan gasket and was authorized by Loma Gordon for the amount of $770.00. Parts were ordered and received Monday, July 2. Our technician began the job on Monday afternoon at approximately 2:45 pm and completed the repair on Tuesday, July 2 at approximately 1:15 pm. All documentation we have, including time stamps on the work order and parts charged on the invoice support this was completed. No one here has any recollection of the repair having to be done twice, as Mr. ******** stated, nor would "the mechanic" have called him to tell him anything about the job. The service advisor would have called him when the job was completed. Our service advisor who assisted this customer, who is also still working for our company, says he does not remember any such concern.
I reviewed the repair order with our GM Certified technician who completed the repair 2 years ago, and still works for our dealership. Although it has been over 2 years since doing this repair, he said he vaguely remembers doing the job, mainly because the V-6 engine in, this truck has to be lifted to access the oil pan gasket replacement, and as far as he remembers, the job was nothing unusual and was completed as expected. When I showed him the pictures Mr. ******** sent to me of the "siliconefIB Weld" smeared on the front of his oil pan, he said the job absolutely did not leave here that way and he would never complete a job in this manner.
While I will agree there is an engine oil leak and the glob of sealer should not be on the front of the oil pan., we do not agree on its origin. I personally know our GM Certified technician to be a man. of character and honesty and have no reason to think b.e would have turned out of this substandard quality. We have no idea nor would we speculate on the chain of custody of this vehicle over the past 2+ years and 21,445 miles but do know that there would have been several necessary general maintenance due over this time and miles which would give someone opportunity to do what is alleged of us. Someone did put scaler on the front of his oil pan. but we are confident without question it was not done in our shop.
As to the allegation that "the oil pan had never been removed", that is purely speculation for anyone to make such a statement. We know that the oil pan was removed and the gasket replaced. This is not speculation. Being an ASE Certified technician myself and working in dealer service departments since 1975, I'm not sure how anyone would make that determination, especially after this length of time and mileage since we replaced the gasket, which is more than twice any applicable warranty or guarantee of parts or workmanship. I see no such "evidence" in the photos provided by the customer. If there was an oil leak after our replacement of Mr. ********'s pan gasket, the failed gasket would. have been cover under General Motors parts warranty for 12 m.onth.s or 12,000 miles from 7/2/2013 or 78,745 miles at any GM dealer in the US.
In Mr. ********'s email, he demanded we pay for the pan gasket to be replaced again, as well as the rear main seal, which is also leaking now according to the Lassen Chevrolet invoice, The rear main seal was not leaking on 7/2/2013. We do not feel this is reasonable.
I hope I have properly explained the amount of time we spent investigating the complaint. We never want an unhappy customer and will always strive to do the right thing. T believe we have made a fair decision base on the facts, not speculation. We positively replaced the pan gasket on the vehicle bought to us and it was not leaking after the repair. Furthermore, the silicone or JI3 Weld on Mr. ********'s pan was not present at the time the truck was delivered back to him after the repairs on 7/2/2013. As a footnote, we do not stock JB Weld or a silver silicone in our dealership as seen in the picture provide by Mr. ********. We approached this claim with an open mind to find the truth, although Mr. ********'s mind seemed to be made up as to what was done or not done to his vehicle from, his very first phone call.
All related documents are attached to this letter for you to review, We are more than happy to assist with any further information that the BBB may require.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Mr. ******'s assessment is speculation. I can prove through AT&T records that there was 2 calls from ***** ***** Chevrolet that day. Someone from ***** ***** Chevrolet did IN FACT call to tell me the leak did not seal and that it would be a few hours. ************ can testify to that fact as well. I am MORE THAN WILLING to take a Polygraph or a Voice Stress Analyzer (VSA) and compare it to the actual mechanics Polygraph or VSA result. The external sealant did not put itself on the oil pan seal. I know for a fact that ***** ***** Chevrolet's Service Department is the only entity to do ANYTHING with regards to my oil pan and I am willing , as stated above, to get a polygraph or VSA assessment. A WARRANTY on a job means nothing if the job was never actually done or if the job was not done correctly. Because 2 years have passed ***** this work order, their warranty period should be irrelevant as I do not do daily, weekly or monthly "oil pan checks" and that unfortunately this was not discovered until 08/11/2015. Lassen Chevrolet ALSO has ASE Certified mechanics and verified that the job was never done.
Final Business Response
Here at Merle ***** Chevrolet, we have always done our best to make every customer completely satisl9ed with their experience with us and regret that Mr. ******** feels the way he does_ To my knowledge, in our years of doing business here since 1957, we have never had a situation like this. The reason the Better Business Bureau or the California Bureau of Automotive Repair do not have a history of complaint for our dealership is because we maintain a high level of satisfaction with our customers.
At this customer's request, the California Bureau of Automotive Repair did a full investigation into this complaint as well The state investigator found no fault or wrong doing on the part of our dealership.
for the phone calls, it is customary to talk to a customer by phone multiple times during a service visit but our position stands on our original statement, "No one here has any recollection of the repair having to be done twice, as Mr, ******** stated, nor would lie mechanic" have called him to tell him anything about the job, The service advisor would have called him when the job was completed_ Our service advisor who assisted this customer, who is also still working for our company, says he does not remember any such concern "
We would welcome the opportunity to inspect the vehicle at our facility at no charge as a courtesy to the customer, even oiler mere than two years since this repair was completed. It is unfortunate the customer refuses to bring the vehicle to us for our inspection so we might better help Mr. ******** come to a satisfactory conclusion.