Faulkner Collision Center of Lancaster

February 8, [redacted] has a [redacted] VIN [redacted] that was involved in a collisionThe date of loss is 12/01/ [redacted] was the insured and used his own insurance carrier, [redacted] to pay for the repairThe estimate we followed is enclosed for your review[redacted] 's vehicle sustained suspension damage as a result of the collisionRepairing involved replacing the right front wheel, the right front tire, right control arm, right strut, right axle and right inner and outer tie rodsDue to the complexity and mechanical, in nature, repair, we outsourced this to our sister company, Faulkner [redacted] An alignment, including adjustments to bring to factory specifications, was completed, closing out the mechanical repairs on 12/14/Faulkner Collision repaired the body damage that the vehicle sustained subsequently to the mechanical repairs being completed.During the repair process, the check engine light on, We scanned with our diagnostic too! and detected an sensor that needed to be replaced to remedy the check engine fight condition [redacted] denied the sensor with the reasoning that it was not a result of the collision and, therefore would not cover chargesRyan Z***, our Physical Damage Appraiser, advised [redacted] there was a check engine light on and it needed and osensor and that [redacted] refused to cover that repair[redacted] refused paying for it, and demanded to pickup his vehicle.At time of pickup, we provided [redacted] the estimate of repairs, disclosing what repairs were completedWe also provided the alignment machine printout for his review[redacted] came on 12/15/to pick up his vehicleOn this day we experienced very heavy inclement weatherhour later he called us and said he was sliding all over the road and the vehicle was unsafeHe said the tires were spinning and he was sliding, also heavy snow and ice that day at delivery.He drove back to our Collision Center and left the vehicle for us to check outWe road tested the vehicle on dry roads next day and found none of the concerns he described on drivabilityi called [redacted] and advised I would pay for another diagnosis because he demanded his check engine light is related to ciaim and he vehicle be checked againFaulkner Collision paid Faulkner [redacted] the diag fee to have the check engine light concern & alignment recheckedFaulkner [redacted] found that the sensor was visibly brokenUpon reporting to ***, they agreed to pay for the repair[redacted] advised me that his tires were less cost effective were wearing out and might be some of the problem that the steering was still pulling [redacted] rotated tires adjusted wheel and the concern was minimized as much as can be done on tires that were just above state safety specificationTires that are near minimum specifications are not overly effective on wet roadsTires are minimum specifications are not as a result of collision damage, rather wear and tearFaulkner will not pay to replace [redacted] 's worn tiresA vehicle requiring replacement tires are a cost of ownershipTires that sustain a blow out in an accident are eligible for insurance claiming, less a prorated usage based upon tread depthIn this collision, a blowout did not occur, therefore [redacted] not funding the replacement either.Respectfully,April L.Collision Center Manager

February 8, 2018[redacted] has a 2011 [redacted] VIN [redacted] that was involved in a collision. The date of loss is 12/01/2017. [redacted] was the insured and used his own insurance carrier, [redacted] to pay for the repair. The estimate we followed is enclosed for your review.[redacted]'s...

vehicle sustained suspension damage as a result of the collision. Repairing involved replacing the right front wheel, the right front tire, right control arm, right strut, right axle and right inner and outer tie rods. Due to the complexity and mechanical, in nature, repair, we outsourced this to our sister company, Faulkner [redacted]. An alignment, including adjustments to bring to factory specifications, was completed, closing out the mechanical repairs on 12/14/2017. Faulkner Collision repaired the body damage that the vehicle sustained subsequently to the mechanical repairs being completed.During the repair process, the check engine light on, We scanned with our diagnostic too! and detected an 02 sensor that needed to be replaced to remedy the check engine fight condition. [redacted] denied the sensor with the reasoning that it was not a result of the collision and, therefore would not cover charges. Ryan Z[redacted], our Physical Damage Appraiser, advised [redacted] there was a check engine light on and it needed and o2 sensor and that [redacted] refused to cover that repair.[redacted] refused paying for it, and demanded to pickup his vehicle.At time of pickup, we provided [redacted] the estimate of repairs, disclosing what repairs were completed. We also provided the alignment machine printout for his review.[redacted] came on 12/15/2017 to pick up his vehicle. On this day we experienced very heavy inclement weather. 1 hour later he called us and said he was sliding all over the road and the vehicle was unsafe. He said the tires were spinning and he was sliding, also heavy snow and ice that day at delivery.He drove back to our Collision Center and left the vehicle for us to check out. We road tested the vehicle on dry roads next day and found none of the concerns he described on drivability. I called [redacted] and advised I would pay for another diagnosis because he demanded his check engine light is related to ciaim and he vehicle be checked again. Faulkner Collision paid Faulkner [redacted] the diag fee to have the check engine light concern & alignment rechecked. Faulkner [redacted] found that the 02 sensor was visibly broken. Upon reporting to [redacted], they agreed to pay for the repair.[redacted] advised me that his tires were less cost effective were wearing out and might be some of the problem that the steering was still pulling. [redacted] rotated tires adjusted wheel and the concern was minimized as much as can be done on tires that were just above state safety specification. Tires that are near minimum specifications are not overly effective on wet roads. Tires are minimum specifications are not as a result of collision damage, rather normal wear and tear. Faulkner will not pay to replace [redacted]'s worn tires. A vehicle requiring replacement tires are a cost of ownership. Tires that sustain a blow out in an accident are eligible for insurance claiming, less a prorated usage based upon tread depth. In this collision, a blowout did not occur, therefore [redacted] not funding the replacement either.Respectfully,April L.Collision Center Manager