Hi Joseph, I would like to address what you brought up. Since there are two sides to every story.
The one thing that surprises me in all this, is that despite my well intended, professional recommendations, you wanted certain things done that were not necessarily needed to be done. And after they were done perhaps it was a placebo effect,since you thought it was running better. That’s fine. We wanted to make you happy, so we did everything that you had asked us to do. I will not deny there were a couple bumps along the way that we addressed and took care of. However, I do feel confident that anybody who wants quality work done, at a fair price, and that comes with a three-year 36,000 mile nationwide warranty will be happy with our work. We are a local, small business that takes pride in what we do. We value our relationships with our customers. The last time I saw you, when you picked up your car, you gave me 2 thumbs up in front of my employee stating how happy you were. If there really were problems, I would have hoped you would have notified me personally right away. REALLY confused on your negative reaction and claims.
Now let’s get into the technicalities.
I like to start off by saying that when you came in originally you had six fault codes for the DME or digital motor electronics. As you can see from the printouts. They were 2779 for the hot film air mass meter, 2C57 for the charge pressure control, 2D22 for the oxygen sensor after catalytic converter, 33FD for engine oil pressure control, 33FF for engine oil pressure control valve, and 3786 auxiliary water pump.(As a side note all of our scanners are date stamped and time coded with the V.I.N. vehicle identification number listed in the top right-hand corner) All of these fault codes are listed on the print out from September 27, 2017 and September 28, 2017 the date code will look like 27.09.2017 and 28.09.2017
[smartslider3 slider=4]
As far as the MAF (mass airflow meter) and the drive ability issue that you had spoken of, we recommended removing the piggyback that you had installed on the car. For anyone reading this and does not know what that is, it is a device that goes between the actual component (MAF) and the engine computer (DME) to give it a false reading so you can inject more fuel and get better performance, more power out of your engine. We had recommend removing that devise and driving it to see if that fault code came back. I felt that this would address the fault code 2779, 2C57 and 2D22 for the hot air mass meter fault, charging pressure control fault, and for the oxygen sensor after catalytic converter fault. I did mention that if these faults do come back you may need a new mass airflow sensor. However, as the following printouts show those fault codes did not return and you did not complain of any more drive ability issues up to that point. I felt the situation was taking care of.
Let’s now look at the engine oil pressure, control fault, and engine oil pressure control valve fault. Fault codes 33FD and 33FF. You did mention to me that you had had the update of the small wiring harness taken care of at universal MINI. But as that bulletin specifies, it is for a leak, and I don’t believe yours was leaking. We were addressing it because of the fall codes you wanted it taken care of. (See attached pictures) Under where it says description on the print out it says that the fault code was not currently present and the third line down states “fault would not cause a warning light to light up”. In my professional experience. ( 25years) I’ve had numerous times where even brand-new parts have come to me defective. My recommendation to replace that part was based on, that it had been changed previously it may have been bad. This is a small wiring harness that connects the engine wire harness to the oil pressure control valve. Also it’s the least expensive of the fixes. And that’s always where I like to start off. After we replaced the part and cleared the code we re-scanned the car to verify the fix. ( See printouts on 27.09.2017 and 28.09.2017 )it this would’ve been after the work was done on September 27th we got a new Fault code. This one was fault code 3401 for the engine oil pressure control valve so this is different from the 33FD and the 33FF we had previously the day before, so on completion of that repair we had a new fault code the previous ones 33DF and 33FF were not existing. That was done on invoice completed on October 2, 2007.
When you came back to me you did express that you felt it was the oil pump solenoid that needed to be replace. I stated I was not comfortable with replacing that because I couldn’t guarantee that that was going to fix the problem. There are other factors involved. For example a faulty engine wiring harness could of made this fault code appear. Not the small one we replaced but the main engine wiring harness. You insisted that you wanted the work done despite me recommending that I couldn’t 100% verify at that point, replacing the oil pump solenoid was going to fix the issue. You said that you understood and that you would like to try it anyway. So we did replace the oil pump solenoid, and it ended up fixing the issue. It is my practice that I do not replace parts that I cannot 100% verify going to fix the problem.
As far as the oil leak issue is concerned, when you brought the car back in to us you told us that you had cleaned it before it got to our shop. So without being able to verify where the oil leak was coming from, and as a goodwill gesture to you, we remove the oil pan and resealed it. Now after looking at the pictures you supplied it doesn’t look like the oil pan was ever leaking. Just as a water doesn’t flow up a waterfall but down, oil will do the same.In the picture you supplied it looks like the front main seal is leaking and running down but we could not determine that at the time you brought it back because you had cleaned it.You are right it’s not that hard to seal an oil pan but when you cannot determine where the leaks coming from you maybe addressing the wrong issue as was this case I believe.
As far as the engine mounts that you wanted replace, as I’ve stated before I’m not in the custom of replacing things that are not broken. I have literally driven THOUSANDS of MINI’s so when I test drove your car there was nothing standing out to me that would make me think or feel that you needed all three mounts. As you stated your old mounts had cracks in them which is typical on a car this age. Rubber will crack over time but the mounts were not torn or ripped. Aas far as the hardware that was provided by you one of the bolts you provided was missing, so yes we did reuse one old bolt. These bolts are hardened steel just like your lug bolts that hold your wheel on, and are meant to be reused, you provided them so we used all that were supplied. But it was not necessary to replace them. And as far as the torque specs I am a bit confused, were they over torqued? Or under torqued? It’s very easy to say something was not torqued to spec or improperly installed. How were they improperly installed, were the bolts cross threaded? Were the nuts cross threaded? Were the heads of the bolts/nuts stripped out? I feel a lot of this is just he said she said.
Now let’s address the walnut blast service. I will repeat myself again, I am NOT in the custom of doing needless work, we are fixing problems and performing services for our customers. I know there was a lot of dialogue that wasn’t via text message. It was in person or over the phone. And I had asked you not to text me but if there was a concern please call the shop because I’m not always available via cell. I do apologize for not getting back to your last text message. I do feel that a reasonable person would try again to call the shop like I asked. The N18 engine does not have the carbon build up issue that the N14 engine does, there is not even a test plan developed to check for it. You said that you wanted to bring it back for that service and that was the last we spoke of it. As far as the side skirts it’s not my character not to say I’m sorry about something especially when it has been brought to my attention. We had already spoken about the issue in person. After we had discussed that situation, THAT’S when I received the picture you sent via text message. We had already discussed it. Still, I got back to you to reassure you that I will handle the situation by having a conversation with my technician. I too have put pictures up of your side skirts this was done on a following visit. We never put your car back on that lift again, so this would not/did not happen again.
I can see you are trying to make me look like someone I am not. If there were any miscommunications I am sorry. Again this was news to me since you left my shop a happy customer.