Full account

This is the long version. It follows the same order as the statement I prepared for my card issuer. Photo numbers refer to the photos page.

1. The car and the job

The car is a 2026 Toyota GR Supra used only for track days. It runs MCS coilovers on Ground Control camber/caster plates. The job was to install a complete set of Verkline adjustable arms with spherical bearings: front lower control arms, front caster arms, bump steer tie rod ends, and all five rear arms per side. Also a Whiteline rear sway bar, which requires dropping the rear subframe, and a Verus oil cooler kit. All parts were new and purchased by me.

Verkline arms are adjustable in length and must be set to a baseline before installation, then adjusted during alignment. The arms use torque-to-yield fasteners at the knuckle and subframe. These are single-use: once torqued through their angle step they stretch and cannot be reused. I supplied a complete set of new Toyota OEM fasteners with a parts list keyed to each location.

2. What the shop was given on August 10, 2026

• All parts, in their boxes, with Verkline’s and Verus’s printed installation instructions, which include torque specifications for every bolt.
• New Toyota OEM torque-to-yield fasteners for every arm, with a parts list.
• A written instruction sheet: ride height targets front and rear, alignment targets (front −3.5° camber, +8° caster, zero toe; rear −2.2° camber, 0.15° toe-in per side), match the camber plates side to side before adjusting the lower control arms and adjust them as needed for the alignment, bump steer to be flattened, roll center corrected, torque to manufacturer specification, thread locker, paint-mark every fastener, and clearance checks. I repeated the camber plate instruction verbally and asked for the adjusters to be moved slightly inboard from the strut tower edge.
• Late August, when the oil cooler kit was dropped off: a verbal request not to remove the front bumper, which the Verus kit does not require.
• Verbal, at drop-off: an estimate of about two weeks for the job. I told the owner I had a paid, registered track weekend at MSR Houston on September 19–20 and needed the car back with time to tune it and put shakedown miles on it first.

3. First return, September 12

After five weeks, a week before the track weekend, I picked the car up and paid invoice 14435. Driving home the car pulled hard right and clunked from all four corners. In the driveway I found the driver’s front lower control arm bolt and the driver’s front caster arm bolt completely loose at the subframe. The lower control arm nut was a few turns from falling off (photos 1 and 2). Ride height had not been set. The oil cooler had a slow leak. Paint marking had not been done.

I returned the car on September 14 with a new set of Apex wheels fitted, about 25 miles old and undamaged, and asked again for a clearance check. I missed the September 19–20 weekend and the registration was forfeited. I later also missed the October 17 NASA track day at MSR Cresson that comes with the purchase of a GR car. A Verkline arm kit, a sway bar, and an oil cooler is a few days of work for a shop that does this regularly; my opinion, based on the dates, is that the car was not a priority until I pushed.

4. While the shop had the car, September 14 to October 2

On September 18 I emailed the shop a diagnostic write-up on the pull. The owner replied that they had added 200 lb to the driver’s seat and realigned, tried wheel swaps and tire pressures, and adjusted toe to drive left. I sent an updated write-up on September 19; he replied “Ok. Let’s run with that.” On September 21 I revised the ride height instruction by email. On September 28 I emailed restating thread locker, paint marking, return of leftover spacers, and a request to document any changes made to the rear.

A second alignment was performed September 30. The printout shows rear camber at −2.5° against the −2.2° requested. The invoice for this visit, 14456, paid October 1, lists adjusting the dampers, corner balancing, and alignment to fix the right pull, and carries the shop’s own note: “still moving to the right.”

5. Second return, October 2

At pickup I was told the pull was fixed. It was present pulling out of the lot, and the steering wheel sat off center. I did not return the car again.

6. Inspection, October 2 to 7

6.1 Fasteners

With a click-type torque wrench I checked every fastener the shop had handled. Results are in the table on the summary page. In short: the driver’s caster arm was still very loose after being reported at the first return; the passenger lower control arm had never received its angle step; both rear traction links were completely loose at the subframe; both rear upper lateral links were nearly loose at the subframe and at about half torque at the hub; both rear damper bolts broke loose at 60 Nm against a 100 Nm + 90° specification; all four end links were at roughly half torque. Only the arm-to-knuckle bolts registered as already torqued.

Torquing the driver’s caster arm reduced the pull by roughly half. That arm had been running loose in its mount through both of the shop’s road tests and both alignments.

6.2 Steering rack

Exposed thread on the inner tie rods measured 32.5 mm driver and 21.9 mm passenger, an 11.6 mm difference (photos 3 and 4). With the steering wheel at true center the front wheels point right. Full lock left and full lock right differ visibly. The steering angle sensor had been calibrated to this position, so the car’s electronics regard the off-center wheel as straight ahead.

Correction, October 31: I originally described this as the steering rack having been set off center. The second shop found the actual cause: the front camber plates had been set unevenly side to side. My written instructions, and I verbally at drop-off, had told the shop to match the plates before adjusting the lower control arms and to adjust them as needed for the alignment. With the strut tops offset, the shop set the lower control arms to unequal lengths to get matching camber, and the tie rods then had to be unequal to get toe. The measurements and the damage that followed are unchanged; the mechanism is corrected here and in the statement provided to my card issuer.

The alignment printouts show mirror-image maximum steering angles left and right. Those are specification values printed by the alignment software, not measurements; the rack was never checked.

6.3 Wheel and caster arm damage

Because the steering is offset, the passenger front wheel contacts the caster arm at full lock. Three of my four Apex wheels are gouged into the metal at the inner mounting pad and the backs of the spokes (photos 9 to 11). Both caster arms are damaged, the passenger side badly (photos 5 to 8). Three wheels damaged in the same place means three different wheels were fitted to that corner while it was contacting the arm, consistent with the owner’s description of trying wheel swaps to cure the pull. The wheels were undamaged when the shop received them.

6.4 Geometry settings

• Rear camber −2.5° against −2.2° requested.
• Ride height not set to the written targets; the rear sits lower than the front, the reverse of what was instructed.
• Front bump steer spacers at the maximum 15 mm on a corner with a 5 mm roll center spacer. The two settings should be set together from a measured toe curve. The owner could not say how either was chosen.
• Paint marks only on some arm adjusters; none on any hub or subframe fastener (photos 15 and 16). Thread locker visible only on some adjuster nuts.

6.5 Oil cooler and bumper

A borescope inspection on October 4 showed oil seeping at the distribution plate on the engine block (photos 18 and 19). The front bumper had been removed and refitted with visibly uneven gaps.

6.6 Missing parts

The spare Verkline roll center spacers and rear lockout plates supplied with the kit were not returned. I had asked for them by email on September 28. Replacements were purchased from Verkline.

7. What this means for the car

Both alignments were measured with arms loose and the steering rack off center; in my assessment neither represents the car’s geometry. Every torque-to-yield fastener the shop touched must be replaced, because there is no way to know whether it was torqued to specification and then loosened, or never torqued at all. The subframe mounting points and spherical bearings at every location that ran loose need inspection for damage. The entire installation, ride height, corner balance, and alignment are being redone elsewhere with new hardware.

8. The refund

On October 5 I called the owner and went through everything above. He offered no explanation. He asked to have the car back a third time; I declined on safety grounds. He agreed to refund both invoices in full and asked for two weeks to collect the money. I agreed.

The two weeks ended October 19. My calls on October 19 and October 23 were not answered or returned. On October 23 I emailed; he replied the same day: “We had an agreement and I intend to stick to it,” and that he would “need to do several payments back.” No amount, no schedule, and no payment have followed. Both transactions have been disputed with my card issuer.

9. Second shop inspection, October 31, 2026

The car is at a second shop for teardown, inspection, and reinstallation. On October 31 that shop reported its inspection findings to me. The findings below are the second shop’s, relayed as given.

• No damage found to the suspension arms, spherical bearings, or front or rear subframes from the arms having run loose. This is the best outcome available.
• The front camber plates were set unevenly side to side, and the shop had compensated with unequal lower control arm and tie rod lengths. This is the cause of the off-center steering described in section 6.2.
• Several spherical bearing dust boots are damaged and need replacement from Verkline, including the passenger rear traction arm and the driver’s rear toe arm.
• Every adjustable arm, front and rear, had to be reset to Verkline’s factory baseline length and the setup started over. The front cause is described above. In the rear, the toe arms and traction arms had been set longer than they should have been, which pushed the other rear arms out of their intended range.
• Ride height has to be reset. The rear of the car is being raised to restore the forward rake the previous shop had reversed.
• The oil cooler installation has to be redone entirely. The lines were not routed properly and are rubbing on wiring harnesses, coolant hoses, and air conditioning lines (photos 21 to 23). The lines were installed twisted, which the shop says is working the fittings loose. Oil is leaking at the distribution plate on the engine block, as I had found on October 4, and also at the oil cooler itself (photo 20).