Oil Service gone Wrong

Sonic said:

Steve_Jones said:

I think it is reasonable to want to confirm there is actually an issue before replacing a transmission that might not need it.  I also think a used one is fine, as that's what she had before.

They made a mistake.  It happens. Getting the vehicle back to the same condition it was before the mistake is what needs to happen, they don't need to be crucified.

The Subaru Dealer is not an independent party, they stand to profit on the repair.

 

All of this right here.  Yup it is a bummer it happened, now they need to get you back to where you were the day before you rolled into their bay.  Drive for a while, take an oil sample, see how it is.  Of course Subaru says to replace, that's a nice fat bill for them and no liability out the door.  

Reasonable people powers unite! 

In my mind, if an auto trans was run low enough on fluid that the pump was at least intermittently sucking air and the trans didn't feel normal, then there is no possible way that there isn't at least extra clutch pack wear that will noticeably shorten the transmission's life.  It may "work fine" for now after some fresh fluid and a new filter, but it's also likely to wear out far sooner than it otherwise would have. 

Personally, I wouldn't be willing to take "it's working fine now" as ok, as there's no possible way this didn't cause damage. 

rslifkin said:

In my mind, if an auto trans was run low enough on fluid that the pump was at least intermittently sucking air and the trans didn't feel normal, then there is no possible way that there isn't at least extra clutch pack wear that will noticeably shorten the transmission's life.  It may "work fine" for now after some fresh fluid and a new filter, but it's also likely to wear out far sooner than it otherwise would have. 

Personally, I wouldn't be willing to take "it's working fine now" as ok, as there's no possible way this didn't cause damage. 

Yeah, I agree with this. There is a very real risk of shortened life for that transmission now. Unless you could somehow get them to sign a contract stating that "if this transmissions fails in the next 150,000 miles under my ownership for any reason, the shop is responsible" I'd be pushing for a replacement. Used would be fine. 

Byrneon27 said:

Sonic said:

Steve_Jones said:

I think it is reasonable to want to confirm there is actually an issue before replacing a transmission that might not need it.  I also think a used one is fine, as that's what she had before.

They made a mistake.  It happens. Getting the vehicle back to the same condition it was before the mistake is what needs to happen, they don't need to be crucified.

The Subaru Dealer is not an independent party, they stand to profit on the repair.

 

All of this right here.  Yup it is a bummer it happened, now they need to get you back to where you were the day before you rolled into their bay.  Drive for a while, take an oil sample, see how it is.  Of course Subaru says to replace, that's a nice fat bill for them and no liability out the door.  

Reasonable people powers unite! 

The Subaru dealer isn't an independent party? Did they cause the damage? No. If it went to the trans shop are they an independent party? Someone here is going to make bank and someone is going to fork over that cash. End of story. Knowing the dealer or even an independent shop is going to have a warranty on their work, they aren't free from liability. All the insurance work I had to do at the dealership, I made sure as hell was as perfect as I could get.

No way would I take the "Just drive it it'll be fine. And if it breaks just lets us know and we'll fix it." bs. I don't care if it's on paper in writing, they will deny it everytime. "Sorry, they don't work here anymore and because they don't , we can't honor anything even in writing." You'll then have to get lawyers involved and they are just an expensive gateway to the court system.

Scott_H said:

68TR250 said:

New or New to her?  Agree with everything in writing or recorded.

 

This is important.  If it is new and still under factory warranty or an extended warranty, she needs to have all new parts installed.  A used engine cannot be warranted by Subaru at a later time.  Keep in mind that there are emission warranties that extend well beyond the 36 mo/36,ooo mi. base and 60 mo/60k mile warranties depending on where she lives.  

This would be relevant if this thread was about the engine. There are no emission components on the transmission.

Sonic said:

Steve_Jones said:

I think it is reasonable to want to confirm there is actually an issue before replacing a transmission that might not need it.  I also think a used one is fine, as that's what she had before.

They made a mistake.  It happens. Getting the vehicle back to the same condition it was before the mistake is what needs to happen, they don't need to be crucified.

The Subaru Dealer is not an independent party, they stand to profit on the repair.

 

All of this right here.  Yup it is a bummer it happened, now they need to get you back to where you were the day before you rolled into their bay.  Drive for a while, take an oil sample, see how it is.  Of course Subaru says to replace, that's a nice fat bill for them and no liability out the door.  

I experienced this back in '05 or so. Dealer didn't torque the plug on the FIRST oil change and it dropped. They filled it up wrote me a warranty and I drove it away.... 11 miles

before a rod left the chat

Peanu_Keeyes said:

A friend of mine just brought her new Subaru to Jiffy Lube

That is oil service done wrong, for sure. 

Update #4

The saga continues — JL has attempted to skirt responsibility through email exchanges ranging from an offer to purchase her car, (thereby avoiding an insurance claim and probably selling it for profit), to requiring a third party CVT relearn procedure to see if that “cures it.” 

“…If the third party transmission specialist observes symptoms of damage and irregularities after a CVT software reset then we will move forward with sourcing a used transmission with 46k miles or less as is normal practice…” her car is a 2020 with 42k miles on the odometer.

My friend has been quite firmly standing her ground asking that they provide either a factory new transmission or used with 42k miles or less with an attached warranty. She called the transmission specialist that they are requiring her to use only to have the owner tell her that a CVT relearn would not do anything to fix the damage caused by driving with low fluid and that he already explained this to the JL manager.

Her lawyer is also prepared to send a “don’t make us sue you” letter free of charge if this fails to be resolved by next week. 

As always, thanks for the comments. Hoping the next post will be a positive final result.  

Problem with places like this is, average people don't understand the difference between a jiffy lube oil change and a basic lube service like I would perform.

Jiffy lube doesn't check for grit or filings in your oil, they don't check the diff or transfer case, don't give anything a basic check other than dumping the old oil out and putting in fresh with a new filter.

Then folks drive around thinking "I just had my car serviced" when all they got was an oil change.

An iffy lube tech probably doesn't even know what a grease fitting is, let alone how to get a clogged one cleaned out and working again.

In reply to Peanu_Keeyes :

The cvt relearn is even being mentioned because in the conversation between the "specialist" and JL, JL left out important information.

Ive learned that if a customer wants either a relearn/program or a fluid change or flush, it's already berkeleyed. Do not touch. Let the customer be unhappy unless they want a to be on the hook for a 4k rebuild and R&R.

In reply to Peanu_Keeyes :

I cannot wait.  Once you actually get a lawyer to make intent to sue letters up things change fast, the shops are suddenly more friendly and willing to help.  

camopaint0707 said:

In reply to Peanu_Keeyes :

I cannot wait.  Once you actually get a lawyer to make intent to sue letters up things change fast, the shops are suddenly more friendly and willing to help.  

Not necessarily, sometimes they slow down. Mention a Lawyer at some places  and suddenly it's "all communication must go through legal, here is the contact info". 
 

If the third party transmission specialist observes symptoms of damage and irregularities after a CVT software reset then we will move forward with sourcing a used transmission with 46k miles or less as is normal practice…” 

That seems reasonable to me. They want to try a fix and if it does not work source a used transmission with the same miles. Someone made a mistake, they're trying to verify any damages and get the car back to what she had before the mistake. How is that not reasonable?

In reply to Steve_Jones :

Yeah, you might be right.  In my recent similar deal with safelite though, that scared them enough.

There's a really important piece of information missing from this thread... age of the car, and model. 

If it's an STI S209 then $9000 for a transmission is a bargain. If it's a 1994 Impreza, then the price tag is a joke, and this thread is much ado about nothing. 

You said the car has 42,000 miles on it. That means it's not new.  So she bought a car with 42,000 miles on it with a transmission in unknown condition. The good news for her is that the car will now have some attention to the transmission, and may be better than when she bought it. 
 

Is her goal to have her car in the condition it was?  Then their offers are reasonable. If  her goal is to inflict pain on someone she thinks did her wrong, it's not gonna end well for her. 
 

She had 42,000 miles on her transmission.  It wasn't new, and they don't owe her new.  But a used transmission isn't necessarily better than the one she's got.

If she has lost confidence in the car, there is nothing wrong with accepting their offer to purchase.  And there is nothing wrong with them selling it with intent to make money on it. 
 

If she turns it over to the lawyers, she will be paying a lot in legal fees and may not end up with a better car than she has (and she won't end up with a better car then she had before they touched it).

SV reX said:

There's a really important piece of information missing from this thread... age of the car, and model. 

If it's an STI S209 then $9000 for a transmission is a bargain. If it's a 1994 Impreza, then the price tag is a joke, and this thread is much ado about nothing. 

You said the car has 42,000 miles on it. That means it's not new.  So she bought a car with 42,000 miles on it with a transmission in unknown condition. The good news for her is that the car will now have some attention to the transmission, and may be better than when she bought it. 
 

Is her goal to have her car in the condition it was?  Then their offers are reasonable. If  her goal is to inflict pain on someone she thinks did her wrong, it's not gonna end well for her. 
 

She had 42,000 miles on her transmission.  It wasn't new, and they don't owe her new.  But a used transmission isn't necessarily better than the one she's got.

If she has lost confidence in the car, there is nothing wrong with accepting their offer to purchase.  And there is nothing wrong with them selling it with intent to make money on it. 
 

If she turns it over to the lawyers, she will be paying a lot in legal fees and may not end up with a better car than she has (and she won't end up with a better car then she had before they touched it).

 

 

Stop being so sensible lol

As a former Subaru dealer, my experience had been that JL drains the transmission, over fills the engine, and replaces the transmission filter with an engine oil filter, thus guaranteeing the failure.  We used to do one trans a month until a new manager came in.  They would tighten up the work, wait a few months, everyone would slack off, and we're back in the transmission replacement business again.  It's been 10 wonderful years since I was in the business, but some traditions never change. 

In reply to chandler :

Haha!  
 

You're right!  Burn the witch!!! 

Steve_Jones said:

Not necessarily, sometimes they slow down. Mention a Lawyer at some places  and suddenly it's "all communication must go through legal, here is the contact info". 
 

When I worked at State Farm as a claim rep, this is exactly what we would do. You say you're going to hire a lawyer, "Here is legal's phone number. And we'll mail you a letter with your claim and policy numbers, legal's contact information, and all further contact will go through legal. Have a nice day."

I know it's not quite the same scenario, but you hit the nail on the head. Not sure why so many in this country think "I'll sue your ass" is always going to bring about the desired outcome. 

In reply to SV reX :

Rebuilt vs used.

My only problem with this is while a used part can be had, at what cost? LKQ, multiple locations across the USA, and while they ship between these locations for probably less than normal freight prices, how long will it truly take? You want it faster, you'll pay the normal freight price which can be $500 or more because it's irregular and non stackable typically. If this turns into a total price within a few hundred dollars of rebuilt, but waiting awhile, why does someone choose to be penny smart but dollar stupid? 
I paid $2500 for a used 90k mile 6l80 for my Avalanche because I didn't have a week to gather up the parts to rebuild it. This is after having to fork out 4500$ for a trans rebuild in the suburban a year prior. Btw, I'm having some part throttle or programming issues with my used unit with an additional 40k on it while my rebuilt one is humming along issue free. YMMV.

z31maniac said:

I know it's not quite the same scenario, but you hit the nail on the head. Not sure why so many in this country think "I'll sue your ass" is always going to bring about the desired outcome. 

Because nobody acts in "good faith" anymore and thinks everyone is "out to screw them", both sides.

I agree a 42k trans is not new.  When the OP said it was a new car I was expecting something under 5K.  That is just a used car at this point.  A good used trans of equal or less millage with some sort of warranty or a rebuilt with a warranty is all she is entitled to.  I don't know these transmissions so I don't know what is better. A carefully worded letter from legal counsel can sometimes get things resolved as long as what they are outlining as the desired resolution is reasonable. I would also hope that legal counsel would advise her on what the is entitled to and not blindly wright a letter that paints her as a petulant child.  That will do no good and just get the situation handed over to the quick lube places legal team.  I would not even mention court and sewing them  as a "or else" in the letter.   A carefully written letter outlining reasonable and fair compensation that makes her whole is what it should be.  At 42 K on the car, there is no way anyone is going to give her a new trans.  They will fight that or just stonewall her until she comes back to earth.

Losing faith in the vehicle is her problem, not theirs.  If the vehicle is fixed to a condition pre the event and she is given a warranty one the fix that is the same or better than what she had they have made her whole.  If she is hung up on this then sell the car and get the value for it that would get her into the same/similar car with the same mileage.  Easy to do with online comps.

Ranger50 said:

z31maniac said:

I know it's not quite the same scenario, but you hit the nail on the head. Not sure why so many in this country think "I'll sue your ass" is always going to bring about the desired outcome. 

Because nobody acts in "good faith" anymore and thinks everyone is "out to screw them", both sides.

Taking it further only the lawyers win if it gets that far. 

I worked at a Jiffy Lube (mumbles indistinctly) a few decades ago. I'm sure nothing has materially changed with regards to policy since then, but they absolutely will have an insurance policy and provisos in place specifically for this situation. You'll have to file a claim.

In reply to Peanu_Keeyes :

That made me laugh. It's like the lawyer saying "what shape do you want this as it is flying up your (obscene gerund?)

Drum roll:

The CVT relearn did nothing to correct the issue. 

They are installing a 15k mile transmission, all expenses paid.

Many good lessons from all of this