Brake repair service near Annapolis Junction, MD

1.0 star rating 7/10/2019 I dropped my 1982 VW off at Hartloves in August 23,2017 to have John get the engine running (as it was not running for 7years)if he could and get it roadworthy. After many months he and crew got the car running and contacted me so I went to MVA got tags ,insurance in February 2019. When coming to pick up vehicle the mechanic said he had it on the road doing 80 mph and ran like a top but ran the gas tank empty and the new fuel injection system and filters had to be cleaned and repaired/replaced. i went to the facility and inquired as to why they didn't replace fuel tank,oil filter before road testing and was told by John that NOW the engine is smoking. I chalked up after $1,000 into this that lets just rebuild the engine at my expense,replace gas tank and sending unit April 15,2019.As of now July 10,2019 have tried to contact John to no avail. My wife and I went to his office July 10,2019 where his secretary could not contact him or give us any information as to parts ordered,where the engine is rebuilt,time frame,looking at vehicle engine is out no new gas tank installed at this time, car sitting outside same place. I have all conversations recorded and will keep everyone posted as to resolution. Anyone can contact me 410-980-5881 if needed. Mike Gnip USMC Veteran

My son bumped a curb parallel parking he broke a tierod this garage wanted to charge 1350 dollars for all new suspension parts be aware of this place care got fixed for 250 dollars shame on you

This review is specific to the Tune and Lube on Windsor Mill Road. In July 2010, they replaced my lower ball joint, and other related parts, at the cost of $550. January 2011, I noticed a noise coming from the front end, and returned to Tune for a diagnosis. Fortunately, the owner failed to remember me. The diagnosis was a problem with the same ball joint that was replaced in July. Once I reminded the owner of his work only 6 months earlier, and produced a receipt, he appeared stupefied. His proposal: Maybe he could "cut a deal on the part" (the part's cost was $67). Essentially, he proposed that I pay again for the same work performed 6 months earlier. To explain his decision, he cited legalities such as his 90-day warranty. Dismissed was the basic premise of customer service, which would impel a conscientious businessperson to correct work that was obviously faulty in some manner. He actuallly expected me to pay again for the same work he was responsible for completing just 6 months earlier.