Mavis Discount Tire review: Unsatisfactory brake work

On the morning of March 14, 2024, I brought my Toyota 4-Runner into the Mavis store (#1217) for brake work. I picked up my vehicle that afternoon before heading home after paying $813.18. The next morning (March 13, 2024) I heard a grinding sound resonating from my vehicle. I took my vehicle back to the same Mavis store with the complaint of the grinding sound. The technician who worked on my vehicle drove my vehicle to the service bay to “fix” the problem. I left the Mavis store without the grinding sound resonating from my vehicle. However, the next morning (March 14, 2024), the sound had returned AGAIN.

I entrusted the brake work to Mavis. I returned a second time to Mavis for them to address the problem of the grinding sound that presented after the brake service. When the sound presented yet again, I no longer had confidence in the service I received from Mavis. Therefore, I took my vehicle to the Toyota service department where I had to have the brake work redone costing me $1387.88.

I requested that the Toyota service department return the Mavis parts to me. I contacted the Mavis store Manager to inform him of my dissatisfaction with the work done at his store. I requested a refund, and I returned the rotors and brakes. He informed me that he had been in contact with his General Manager. On March 28, 2024, the manger informed me I would be refunded for the cost of the parts (brakes and rotors), but I am liable for the cost of labor. According to the manager, his General Manager stated that because I did not give Mavis the opportunity to remove their brake work, I must cover the labor for the brake service.

This is where I question the rationale of this matter. Because Mavis did not properly service my vehicle the first nor the SECOND time, I was supposed to entrust the care of my vehicle to Mavis a THIRD time for them to remove the brakes? I was not going to trust service from Mavis a THIRD time. Where is the logic in having Mavis remove their brake work for me to have an immobilized vehicle at their store? The vehicle would have no brakes. Lastly, where is the logic in having the consumer responsible for inadequate service? The brake job was not done satisfactorily as evident by the grinding noise resonating from the brakes. Mavis expects me to pay for the labor on work that Mavis did unsatisfactory. This is unreasonable and irrational.

I am requesting a full refund for the cost of the entire brake job including the labor performed on March 14, 2024. As the consumer, I should not have to absorb the cost of labor for a brake job that was not performed satisfactorily. There were TWO opportunities to suitably perform the work and Mavis did not solve the problem resulting from THEIR brake job. Mavis has inconvenienced me enough with something that should have been addressed properly the first time. I ask that you take what I have presented in this letter into consideration and refund me the total of $813.18.