Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. 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.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:09/03/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Wright Auto Works claim to have master technicians that specialize in ***** but these are lies. I had to come back to this shop about 3 times because they said the check engine light repair work was done, but the same code continuously came back on shortly after leaving. I spent about $2,400 here and then the last time they lied and said something was wrong with the *** & tried to get another $1.6K out of me. I trusted my gut instinct, made an appt. with **** Marietta and they confirmed that the secondary air injection cleaning wasnt done nor anything was wrong with the ***/software/sensing system. Its been two months since Ive left the **** dealership and my light has stayed off - they were trustworthy & fixed the issue. Wright Auto Works scammed me and didnt complete the work at all. **** provided evidence on this.

  Business Response

  Date: 09/05/2024

  On November 11, 2023, ***************************** contacted our business and requested an appointment due to issues with another shop improperly working on her vehicle. She did not arrive for her original appointment, but rather went to another repair shop (allegedly an **** dealership, per her word), for diagnostics. 
  The **** dealership advised ************ that her **** needed repairs to her secondary air system, a common issue on these vehicles with substantiated technical service bulletins, but ************ declined their recommendation due to pricing and asked us to perform the work. Upon arrival on March 18, 2024, we scanned her vehicle and confirmed that the secondary air system did present faults in the computer of her **** and quoted for a secondary air system combi valve replacement as a first step, which was documented and discussed with her. ************ was made aware that further issues could come after these repairs were made because we were not replacing all of the system components but rather taking a step-by-step approach to attempt to ease the financial burden of the repairs to fit her budget. ************ approved $1056.02 towards this repair and was told to return if any further issues came up. ************ was also advised that the particular repairs included a 3 year/36,000 mile nationwide warranty on parts and labor. ************ agreed to advise us if the check engine light came on again so that we could investigate if a next step in the secondary air system repairs needed to be made. 
  ************ did return again on March 26, 2024 with secondary air faults for completely unrelated parts and demanded a discount on the additional repairs, despite originally acknowledging that the original repairs were a first step. Our technician scanned the faults on her vehicle and performed a diagnostic test, complementary of charge, to determine the cause of the faults and the source of the check engine light. Those codes present were P0491L00.01169:000 for ************************* 1 Insufficient Flow; P0492:00/01170:000 for ************************************ 2); P0018:00/00024:000 *************************************************************** 2 Sensor A. These faults were passive/sporadic which lead to intermittent failure of the system components. ************ was advised that the NEXT step in the repair process would be to replace the secondary air pump, per ****s technical service bulletin, in relation to these faults. ************ was notified that there would be a possibility of further issues, and that this repair included a 3 year/36,000 mile nationwide warranty, and should she experience any further issues she should let us know. ************ was also advised that her car needed a software update to alleviate possible air fault symptoms, but ************ declined to pay for these updates. 
  We believe ************** allegations that the repairs were unsatisfactory are unfair and unreasonable considering that we followed her requests and appropriately explained to her the step-by-step procedures. It is clear ************ simply could not afford for the full scope of repairs and is fraudulently attempting to place the blame on the work we did in order to retrieve these funds. ************ has not contacted us at any point to request warranty repairs, either in our store or in our network of stores, despite knowing that these repairs are fully covered for up to 3 years. ************ advised us after checking up on her shortly after her visit that no check engine light had returned, thus causing concern that this dispute is an attempt to unfairly take advantage of our services for her own financial gain.