Gonna have a good story by tomorrow night...

5/19/2011 11:35:35 PM

Quote :

"The safety inspection should take about 1-½ hours"

Quote :

""It's got lowering springs. You have to have factory springs." "

Quote :

"costs $80"

http://www.claffie.com/080106.html

But if it ever passes you'll never have to do jack shit to the car again. Drive it til the wheels fall off and decapitate someone.



[Edited on May 19, 2011 at 11:44 PM. Reason : .]

5/19/2011 11:39:09 PM

I've been through it twice but this time I've gone to a different shop, and they appear to be crooks. Going in tomorrow morning to discuss the checklist and what they told my wife "HAD to be done."

If I read this form correctly, it doesn't add up, and I will be bringing down a wrath they've not seen before.

[Edited on May 19, 2011 at 11:46 PM. Reason : ]

5/19/2011 11:46:46 PM

NC will be that way soon

5/20/2011 6:29:19 PM

How soon and what does this entail

5/20/2011 6:52:27 PM

I'm keeping my SC tags for as long as possible. Fuck you NC.

You don't even have to get your car inspected in SC.

5/20/2011 8:04:35 PM

SC isn't the only state that does that

5/20/2011 10:28:44 PM

Uhh, I'm pretty in favor of mandatory safety inspections on a yearly basis b/c I don't want to be on the road with unmaintained shitboxes.

But that shit in MD is pretty retarded.

5/21/2011 12:04:58 AM

Quote :

"You don't even have to get your car inspected in SC."

You say this like its a good thing.

5/21/2011 11:14:25 AM

I'm with tke on this.

I don't want some rusted up shitbox around me.

5/22/2011 9:56:45 PM

poast.. lowered tinted with aftermarket exhaust..

5/22/2011 10:37:48 PM

I will attempt to make this very short.

So the only thing failing inspection is the serpentine belt (cracks) and the brake pads (gone). However, the guy at the front desk (not the inspector) provides my wife with the official checklist and a price quote for the shop to fix the defects. On that list are the belt, brake pads, and brake rotors. She attempted to ask why the checklist said the rotors "pass" but the price quote included them.

Their response was "this form is really confusing," [took the checklist from her hands] "here's what you need to do in order to pass inspection."

The brake pads I expected. The belt was perfectly fine, but it's only $25 so I didn't fight that fight. The discrepancy on the rotors was a flag. I went back after work myself and got the exact same response, almost to the word. However, I told him that we will understand the checklist, because it is the official record of the defects...not your shop's price quote. He began stammering and told me the inspector would be in tomorrow, and I should talk to him.

I did. The inspector was pretty straightforward. He was actually able to tell me what was "needed" and what was "recommended." Rotors were not needed, but looked to be in rough shape (93k miles), so I should replace them.

I did the belt at home, as well as all four sets of brake pads. Took it back 5 days later, he re-inspected those items, and brought me my gold ticket. He also said, "I'm glad to see you took my advice and replaced those rotors. The old ones were looking pretty bad, right?"

At that point I lost it. Had him take me to the manager and I lit them both up for five straight minutes. The inability to provide a consistent assessment of the exact same rotors only 5 days apart is unacceptable. Furthermore the shop lying in an attempt to trick the customer into purchasing work that is not needed is clearly a scam they run all the time.

I'll be contacting the BBB. I am also considering the MD state police, however I cannot prove the things that the guy at the desk said to me.

I guess all in all this is not a MD state inspection problem, it's a problem with this particular shop.

5/25/2011 8:16:29 AM

Well the guy did tell you that the rotors were optional. They probably suggested new rotors because they could not machine them and still keep them within the required minimum thickness. That's a standard practice with the brake jobs. Your existing rotors probably were thick enough to pass the inpection, but it doesnt menan they were not warped or unevenly worn. Generally when you replace pads, you want to either machine the existing rotors or replace them entirely. I see how inspector's comment about replacing rotors coule have been suspicious, but there are probably a ton of cars going through the shop and he was just looking at his notes that said "worn out rotors" as opposed to actually remembering exactly how your rotors looked five days ago.

I mean I am all for doing the work yourself to save money, in fact I am about to do the brakes myself after the shop came up with 900 dollar estimate, but I am not gonna take them to the BBB for being on the safe side or because i think the parts markup is unreasonable (in my case). They are a business and they are out there to make money. If I don't like their terms, i don't use them

5/25/2011 8:56:20 AM

Quote :

"Well the guy did tell you that the rotors were optional."

No, he (the front desk guy/sales guy) clearly told my wife and myself the following words six separate times on two different cars that I had inspected over three weeks:

"Everything on this price quote is what you must do in order to pass the inspection. None of it is recommended. It is all required."

That was a blatant lie. I attempted many times to get him to confirm "recommended" from "required" because the rotors were marked as "pass" on the inspection checklist. He (the front desk guy) continued to say the rotors were required.

Quote :

"but I am not gonna take them to the BBB for being on the safe side or because i think the parts markup is unreasonable"

They were not being on the safe side. I brought the exact same rotors back five days later and he thought they were brand new. That is inexcusable incompetence or deliberate deceit.

Quote :

"They are a business and they are out there to make money. If I don't like their terms, i don't use them"

It costs $70 for the MD inspection. Fixed. The inspection's scope is governed by law. When you fail, you fix things and bring it back within 30 days and there is no additional charge. I only purchased a MD state inspection. There is nothing subjective about it. Therefore I'm not going to suck it up and pay another shop $70 to do another inspection.

I should not have to hunt down the inspector himself in the garage to get the straight answer.

Only thing left that I'm looking into is if a company is able to seek retribution against the consumer if a BBB report reveals their scams, making them look bad. This shop is part of a big franchise.

[Edited on May 25, 2011 at 10:12 AM. Reason : ]

5/25/2011 10:10:17 AM

A very similar situation happened to me at the Exxon at Crossroads. I stopped for an inspection before going to the DMV to renew my registration. The took an eternity to inspect it, even though i was the only customer, and when they reported back to me, they told me that my ball joints were worn and that they needed to be replaced to pass inspection. I asked what the acceptable tolerance was for the play on the ball joints, and he informed me that "no play was allowed in the ball joints" I asked him to demonstrate the "play" in the ball joints and he proceeds to push against the tire and show me that it was wiggling and moving, but he hadnt locked the steering wheel and he was just moving the wheel. I then asked if my passenger side would pass and he told me yes. I checked the "play" on it and it was the same as the driver side. At this point i hadnt told him that i had replaced the ball joints 8 months before and that they were perfectly fine. When i told him this, he called me a liar and informed me that "my car would never pass an inspection at his station"
I had a few choice words with him, took my car down to Jiffy Lube where they told me i had a turn signal light out. We looked and saw the bulb had been popped out, put it back in and he passed me. I asked him about the ball joints and he told me they were fine.

Gotta love shady mechanics who try and take advantage of unsuspecting customers.

seems like they just take advantage of customers who are going to get their registration renewed at crossroads and need their car inspected.

5/25/2011 3:36:38 PM

^^no decent shop will ever swap the brake pads without either machining or replacing the rotors. That's why the desk guy said the rotors are required if you want them to fix your brakes. Your rotors could have been thick enough to pass inspection but too thin to machine (they have to be thick enough AFTER the machining to last through another set of pads, and there are tables that give the shop a minimum thickness for each make/model, different from the tables used for state inspection). As far as him saying the rotors looked new when you come back, he probably did not even measure them when you came back as they passed the inspection in the first place. Or they assumed that if you had a brake job done, it was not a half-assed job. Unless there is a deep worn out groove in the rotor, most of the time you can't tell how new or old it is without measuring it first. I am just saying it is entirely possible scenario that they were not trying to scam you.

5/25/2011 4:10:34 PM

agreed

5/25/2011 4:13:19 PM

Quote :

"That's why the desk guy said the rotors are required if you want them to fix your brakes"

That is not what he said. I informed him that I would be handling the work myself. Their shop was not going to do any of the work. And still, the response: "you need to replace the rotors to pass inspection."

Quote :

"I am just saying it is entirely possible scenario that they were not trying to scam you."

There is only one possible scenario: the guy at the front desk misunderstood how his own system works. He actually believes the price quote is the official list of defects, and the checklist itself is not important.

I think it's a very unlikely scenario.

In any event the truck feels great, stopping power is all there, with absolutely zero pull or oscillation in the steering wheel. Rotors were and are totally fine.

[Edited on May 25, 2011 at 4:48 PM. Reason : ]

5/25/2011 4:48:21 PM