Re: <REPOSTED> OT Re: Repair Fraud?

In article <43466F3D.57BADE7C@xxxxxxxx>,
"Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Um, the auto parts place down the street maintains a larger inventory,
> has employees who only deal with parts, and yet they still make a
> profit.
>
> The local small garage has a smaller inventory and does not (usually)
> have employees dedicated to parts, and yet they need to charge from
> 2x-4x what the parts place down the street charges? Total BS.

I guess it would be BS if a mechanic made the same wages as the
parts droid. It would also be BS if the parts droid were the one
who has to absorb the labor in the event that the part fails
while under warranty, something that happens quite frequently.
Do you know for a fact that this particular small garage procures
their parts from the parts place down the street? Or are you
comparing apples to oranges?

> > Any shop that allows customers to supply parts is ignorant of
> > liability and obviously lacks experience and hasn't considered
> > what happens (lost time) when the part is wrong for the
> > application, defective out of the box or needs warranty
> > consideration at some later point.
>
> No liability for customer supplied parts. The invoice states customer
> supplied parts, no warranty. They only have liability for the work they
> performed.

Something to make an attorney laugh.

> > The shop owner gets to set the rules, and more importantly, he is
> > responsible for maintaining control over that shop. Can't be done
> > with customers like Underwood who cart in their own cheap crappy
> > parts .
>
> The shop owner does indeed set the rules, and if he sets them such that
> it drives away customers, he fails.

If a customer is driven away because of something as inane as
mark up or book keeping, he wasn't a desirable customer to begin
with.

> >
> > Those who bemoan parts and labor being listed separately have
> > obviously never owned or run a business and are ignorant of
> > possible tax laws, inventory control and basic record keeping.
>
> Um, no, I ran a business for a while, although it was a service business
> with no inventory to speak of.

Is it the same in all states? was this discussion _ever_
qualified by a certain state?

> > If a job was done three months ago and needed warranty, wouldn't
> > it make sense for the shop to be able to refer to their records
> > in order to determine exactly what parts were involved or what
> > maintenance needs might be due?
>
> Records and an invoice are not the same thing.

In the auto repair business they are the exact same thing.
In my business, they are the exact same thing as far as what the
customer is privy to seeing (excludes my check book register and
charge card statements, etc.).

> There should be records
> for each time the particular customer has patronized the establishment,
> not just a mess of invoice copies with no way to cross reference them.

Okay, how about we cover the extra labor needed on account of
having to do extra book work by marking up the parts.
Printing two copies of form X takes a lot less time (actually, no
time) than having to generate copies of form X and form Y.

> > If you went into Best Buy and bought a DVD player, wouldn't you
> > expect the receipt to _actually_ list the product and stock
> > number, or would you be satisfied with a receipt that merely said;
> > Electronic gizmo......... $150.00?
>
> How exactly does that relate to a sale that includes services (labor) in
> addition to parts? Try purchasing a home theater systems *installed*
> from a retailer. Will that same DVD player that they sell uninstalled
> for $150.00 suddenly appear on the invoice as $300.00? Hell no, the
> parts will show the same parts price, and the installation labor line
> will show the labor cost. Anything other that this ranges from deceptive
> to fraudulent.

That point was addressing those who bemoan invoices that list
parts and labor separately instead of doing the invoice as a
canned job.
The home entertainment market is a whole lot more competitive
than auto repair, so using it as an example of why not to mark
parts up falls short, not to mention that the warranty labor
after the installation is a whole different animal. had it
occurred to you that the labor involved in replacing a speaker
with a blown voice coil is a lot less than (say) what happens if
a timing belt or water pump fails?

> >
> > Anyone who has a problem with these two concepts merely needs to
> > pony up to the pump, take the necessary classes, sink fifty or
> > sixty grand into hand tools, another forty grand+ into capitol
> > equipment and fix their own vehicle.
>
> I in fact do this since I have been unable to find an independent
> mechanic or dealer that is able to do quality work and have it done when
> promised. Two examples of this problem:
>
> Timeliness: Made an appointment a couple days in advance to have all
> brakes on my truck done, along with rear axle seals (5 min when you have
> the axle apart for the brakes). I told them that I would drop the truck
> off the night before so they would have it when the mechanic got in at
> 7am, and that it had to be ready for pickup by 5pm the same day. 10
> hours is enough time to do this job several times over, even working at
> a very leisurely pace. I got back into town at about 4pm and called to
> check on the truck only to find that they hadn't even started on it. I
> of course went down, picked up the untouched truck, and ripped them a
> few new bodily orifices while I was at it. They lost that business.

Of course there is no possibility that the job ahead of yours ran
into trouble, or that someone may have called in sick or had a
funeral to attend, is there?

> Quality: Brought my truck in to the dealer to get the clutch replaced.
> Why it needed to be replaced is another story of warrantee fraud as a
> clutch should not die at 25,000 miles. My other truck at the time was at
> 165,000 miles on the original clutch. At any rate I picked up the
> completed truck (on time amazingly) and proceeded to drive home. Along
> the way I periodically heard a rapid clunking sound. I stopped in a
> parking lot to take a look, but without fully crawling under the truck I
> didn't see anything obviously wrong. When I got home I got on the
> creeper to inspect more thoroughly and found the the center carrier
> bearing for the drive shaft was not bolted to the cross member. The
> clunking sound was the U joint smacking the side of the fuel tank under
> the appropriate loading (forget whether it was accel or decel). It
> chewed a hole through the plastic fuel tank shield, but fortunately did
> not damage the actual fuel tank.

I'd have to think that this was the result of the mechanic being
interrupted while doing the re-assembly, something which is a big
problem in the industry.
I went for a ride last fall with a friend who had just purchased
a 1969 GTO, he had new tires mounted on the wheels and hung the
tires and wheels himself (because he likes to putz), we got about
6 miles away and began hearing a clunking noise, the left front
wheel had but one lugnut left.
I guess it means that we're all human.

> >
> > > IMHO, to sum up what was best said by others is - you shop around for a
> > > good mechanic, when you find one stop shopping. Stick with him or her,
> > > because in the long haul you'll make out much better than researching,
> > > comparing, getting estimates, and wasting your own time every time you
> > > need a win nut tightened (sarcasm intended, if not apparent).
> >
> > Very good advice. price shoppers (choppers) receive very little
> > of my attention/time.
>
> I know there are good mechanics out there somewhere, but so far I
> haven't found one.

Problems occur in every aspect of life/business, it isn't the
problems themselves but how they are handled that is important.
Did you call the dealership and allow them the opportunity to
correct their mistake, or did you handle it yourself and resign
yourself to condemning them for what happened.

As for warranty fraud on a clutch on a new vehicle; I don't see
how such a thing can exist. No OEM that I know of warranties
their clutches, this is something that you agreed to at the time
of purchase.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... >> No liability for customer supplied parts. ... business then he must be in a good market. ... >>> Those who bemoan parts and labor being listed separately have ... I told them that I would drop the truck ...
    (rec.autos.tech)
  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... >>> that brake inspection has to go back together so the hoist can be ... That depends on what the customer is asking for. ... >> Simple because then you would have to increase your labor rate ... "Your" in this case is referring to a shop that is known to have a high ...
    (rec.autos.tech)
  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... now while we're saving the customer $5 on brake shoes ... >> and $7 on an exhaust pipe, workflow thru the shop is disrupted, ... Customer brings vehicle X in for brakes all around, ... > Simple because then you would have to increase your labor rate ...
    (rec.autos.tech)
  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... >> Fine as long as the options and costs are communicated to the customer ... > and $7 on an exhaust pipe, workflow thru the shop is disrupted, ... Simple because then you would have to increase your labor rate ... compare costs readily, inflating the cost there hurts the perception. ...
    (rec.autos.tech)
  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... Fine as long as the options and costs are communicated to the customer ... >> amount of handling cost. ... the labor rate was a bit higher it is unlikely he would be complaining. ... > I can think of but one repair shop in this county that still hand ...
    (rec.autos.tech)