Automotive center ordered to pay R$100,000 charged up to 10 times more for services, says MP

Among the abusive charges, the chassis alignment service stood out in the budget of the aforementioned client, whose case led to action by the Public Prosecutor's Office. She went to the unit just to change tires and ended up paying R$11,700 for unsolicited services. This alignment corrects vehicle measurements based on the factory standard, ensuring that the car is within original specifications. According to the invoice obtained by the MP, there were five charges of R$819, divided between different axles and sides of the car, without the customer's authorization. The MP consulted workshops in the region and found prices between R$150 and R$400 for similar services. In these companies, the charge was made per rear and front axle, including both sides, which shows the discrepancy in the values ??applied by Rede Muniz. It was also found that the consumer paid R$900 to repair a wheel, an amount higher than that of a new one, which cost between R$350 and R$750. She also paid R$658 for engine parts valued at up to R$280 and R$549 for a steering terminal found for up to R$240. Car mechanic - Illustrative photo Malte Luk/Pexels The agency also cited amounts charged for other services: Cleaning the brake system: the company charged R$850. In a workshop consulted by the MP, the same service cost R$160; in another, R$ 380. Cleaning the power steering system: charged R$ 600, while the workshops reported prices between R$ 185 and R$ 350. Adjustment of the steering box: Muniz charged R$ 990. Workshops in the region reported prices between R$ 310 and R$ 900. The MP highlighted that the prices of the workshops consulted refer to the months of April and May of 2025, almost two years after the case involving the consumer. Guidance At the request of g1, lawyer Rafael Quaresma, a specialist in Consumer Law and unrelated to the case, gathered tips provided for in the Consumer Protection Code to guide residents on how to act in similar situations of abusive charges. According to him, it is abusive to carry out services without a prior quote and without express authorization from the client. The workshop must inform the value, notify the consumer and wait for approval before starting any repair. If the need for a new service arises during the vehicle analysis, the company must wait for authorization. The cost of the estimate, such as dismantling the car, may be charged, but needs to be informed in advance. Otherwise, it is assumed to be free. He highlighted that the consumer can cancel the service after receiving the quote, requiring the item to be returned. "He received the assembled car, so he needs to return the assembled car to the consumer," he said. If the workshop improperly retains the vehicle, it is possible to call the police to register the incident and, if necessary, go to court to recover the asset. "You paid, did you agree?" According to him, payment alone does not mean that the consumer agreed with the values. In cases where customers pay only to be able to collect the car, they may seek compensation for the improper service. Quaresma highlighted that, as provided for in the Consumer Protection Code, consumers can go to court and request a refund of double the amounts unduly charged. The lawyer advised gathering all possible documentation, such as WhatsApp conversations, photos, recordings, proof of payment, invoices and receipts, to facilitate proof of the consumer relationship. When leaving the vehicle at the workshop, the consumer can also request documents indicating the date, time and service contracted. This record helps to prove that the car was at the establishment in case problems occur, such as fines or accidents. Conviction The São Vicente Court sentenced two Rede Muniz companies to pay R$100,000 for collective moral damages following abusive practices in an automotive center. According to the Prosecutor's Office, customers were attracted by tire promotions and induced to hire unauthorized services and parts. In the decision of the 2nd Civil Court, judge Renato de Almeida Mascarenhas concluded that the episodes demonstrate a “predatory nature” and the search for excessive advantage. He highlighted that the conduct undermined consumer confidence, generated a waste of time and violated basic rights provided for in the Consumer Protection Code. The ruling, published on June 29, set compensation of R$100,000 to the State Fund for the Defense of Diffuse Interests and imposed obligations on companies, such as obtaining express authorization, presenting a detailed budget, maintaining an after-sales channel, publishing the decision for two years and carrying out annual training. VIDEOS: g1 in 1 minute Santos