We brought 1996 Chevy K1500 to have it looked at because the Check Engine light was on. A diagnostic inspection of the truck’s engine was performed and we were told that the engine had misfired due to that cylinder's spark plug being fouled. So, to repair for this problem, a new spark plug and engine induction was recommended by the shop advisor, which we authorized.
At this point, we were under the impression that this was the root/source of the problem, and the appropriate remedy/repair for it based on the initial inspection - no other considerations were mentioned as to why it was fouled at this time. In addition to this, other work was done that was not directly related to the spark plug / engine induction procedure. We authorized that additional work because we believed that the actual root of the Check Engine light had already been identified and solved.
This turned out to not be the case. The very next day, the engine was again idling rough and the Check Engine light was back on, so we brought it back to the shop. After a second inspection, it was revealed that much more extensive repairs would be required to fix the initial problem - my question being, why wasn’t this discovered or discussed after the first inspection?
The first inspection and testing should have included figuring out why the spark plug failed in the first place as this would have been essential information for our decision making, and at the time I assumed the root cause had already been investigated. Once it was revealed that more work was necessary, it seemed to me that this question of “why” was never investigated or brought to our attention the first time. My frustration lies in the fact that this additional work, which is what actually lies at the root of the original problem, was either missed, ignored, or the initial inspection was not thorough enough to discover it. Now, we’ve been told that in order to fix the original problem, another $2k-$3k in repairs must be performed.
A similar situation happened before, in 2019 with your shop where our vehicle failed directly after repair; we brought the same truck and repairs were made, and the next day the truck was dead in my driveway. It turned out that the alternator had died and needed to be replaced. Giving the shop the benefit of the doubt, we authorized replacement of the alternator (which we paid for) and were happy with the outcome.
I understand that the truck is very old and the situation is complicated and costly. However, we were misled with really bad advice after the first inspection. I feel I was sold a band-aid solution for the problem with fingers crossed that it would fix it, with unnecessary extras tacked on. Again, if the original inspection had told me the full story of what was needed, like it should have, vastly different decisions would have been made.
After reviewing the company’s job postings and finding that the service advisors are paid on commission, I now understand why they would be incentivized to provide bad advice which could lead to additional repairs.
Brown's Automotive Reviews
We brought 1996 Chevy K1500 to have it looked at because the Check Engine light was on. A diagnostic inspection of the truck’s engine was performed and we were told that the engine had misfired due to that cylinder's spark plug being fouled. So, to repair for this problem, a new spark plug and engine induction was recommended by the shop advisor, which we authorized.
At this point, we were under the impression that this was the root/source of the problem, and the appropriate remedy/repair for it based on the initial inspection - no other considerations were mentioned as to why it was fouled at this time. In addition to this, other work was done that was not directly related to the spark plug / engine induction procedure. We authorized that additional work because we believed that the actual root of the Check Engine light had already been identified and solved.
This turned out to not be the case. The very next day, the engine was again idling rough and the Check Engine light was back on, so we brought it back to the shop. After a second inspection, it was revealed that much more extensive repairs would be required to fix the initial problem - my question being, why wasn’t this discovered or discussed after the first inspection?
The first inspection and testing should have included figuring out why the spark plug failed in the first place as this would have been essential information for our decision making, and at the time I assumed the root cause had already been investigated. Once it was revealed that more work was necessary, it seemed to me that this question of “why” was never investigated or brought to our attention the first time. My frustration lies in the fact that this additional work, which is what actually lies at the root of the original problem, was either missed, ignored, or the initial inspection was not thorough enough to discover it. Now, we’ve been told that in order to fix the original problem, another $2k-$3k in repairs must be performed.
A similar situation happened before, in 2019 with your shop where our vehicle failed directly after repair; we brought the same truck and repairs were made, and the next day the truck was dead in my driveway. It turned out that the alternator had died and needed to be replaced. Giving the shop the benefit of the doubt, we authorized replacement of the alternator (which we paid for) and were happy with the outcome.
I understand that the truck is very old and the situation is complicated and costly. However, we were misled with really bad advice after the first inspection. I feel I was sold a band-aid solution for the problem with fingers crossed that it would fix it, with unnecessary extras tacked on. Again, if the original inspection had told me the full story of what was needed, like it should have, vastly different decisions would have been made.
After reviewing the company’s job postings and finding that the service advisors are paid on commission, I now understand why they would be incentivized to provide bad advice which could lead to additional repairs.