Re: <REPOSTED> OT Re: Repair Fraud?

aarcuda69062 wrote:
>
> 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?

The garage should be procuring parts from the area wholesale supplier.
They should be able to pass that part along at roughly the same price
that it would cost from the local ACME/NAPA/Whatever quality parts
place, and still have a reasonable markup on it to cover the small
amount of handling cost.

>
> > > 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.

Attorneys will litigate anything where they feel they will get paid,
regardless of the merits of the case.

>
> > > 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.

If said owner feels he has enough business to not be concerned with
loosing customers due to deceptive invoicing practices and can stay in
business then he must be in a good market.

>
> > >
> > > 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?

It is substantially the same in all states, except perhaps for CA and
MA.

>
> > > 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.).

Perhaps for auto repair businesses that are still in the stone ages.
Basic contact/customer management software for small businesses is not
that expensive.

>
> > 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're still doing "book work" that's where your problem is. With
proper software you don't have to generate forms X and Y, you only have
to enter the details of the work (parts/hours/supplies) once and then
print the invoice. The customer record will store all the information.

>
> > > 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.

I don't recall anyone complaining about that. My point was the
receptiveness of excessive markup on parts to cover what should be
included in the labor rate or listed separately as shop time. This is a
deceptive practice to allow the posting of artificially low "labor"
rates.

> 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.

I never said not to mark up the parts, however that markup should be
comparable to the quality auto parts store down the street. You should
be purchasing the parts at wholesale cost and marking them up to retail
cost, not 2x-4x retail.

> 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?

Actually, I did stereo / VCR repair at a shop for a while and I can
assure you that the labor costs are higher than you think. As for the
blown voice coil, that is considered abuse and would not be covered
under warranty anyway. Blowing your amp by shorting the speaker wires is
also not covered under warranty.

>
> > >
> > > 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?

No possibility whatsoever. The shop had my cell and pager numbers and
could easily have contacted me to let me know they would not be able to
meet the original deadline and to request instructions on what they
should do. They also did not give any such excuse when I picked up the
truck.

>
> > 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.

Certainly a possibility that the mechanic was interrupted, but it still
shows the lack of a final QC review before taking the truck off the
lift. It also calls into question whether they did a road test after the
repair. I would certainly expect a once around the block after a clutch
replacement and if they did that they certainly should have noticed the
clunking. They were quite lucky it didn't puncture the fuel tank and
send the truck up in flames.

> 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.

I take it he didn't use a torque wrench. I just did the brakes on my
truck and I used the torque wrench on every fastener that had a torque
spec. listed in the factory service manual.

>
> > >
> > > > 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.

Both of the above stories were at the same dealer. The had a second
chance and failed that one as well.

>
> 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.

They aren't warranted for wear, but the certainly should be covered for
defects in manufacturing. A clutch on a 1T truck should not fail 25,000
miles. My other truck did 165,000+ miles on the original clutch, and in
this case the failure was not related to wear, in fact the problem was
failure to release fully. Nobody made any claims that the failure was
due to wear or abuse. At any rate a company that fails to stand behind
their product when there is a clear manufacturing defect will get no
further business from me.

Pete C.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT Re: Repair Fraud?
    ... while under warranty, ... > No liability for customer supplied parts. ... >> Those who bemoan parts and labor being listed separately have ... I told them that I would drop the truck ...
    (rec.autos.tech)
  • Re: Is anyone happy at their job?
    ... phone call to/from the boss. ... The boss is even making money with the airplane business we ... My big customer is among the most profitable in their industry and while the ... > a new truck in September; just got its first PM a couple weeks ago. ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • 3 Chicks & The Mouse TR#1
    ... Jenny, 40 something, married to "John Wayne", owner with DH of organic ... We got up at 2:00 a.m. on the 9th and had the Big Yeller Penske Truck ... entire trip, after having a temper tantrum before we left and refusing ... We unloaded quickly except for one customer who was not there. ...
    (rec.arts.disney.parks)
  • Re: Single Person Sole Proprietorship Catch-22?
    ... a business that relies heavily on trucks (landscaping) who ... buys a truck in December, takes delivery in December, sends the truck to get ... June and don't have any business activity till April, ... pretty much determine whether or not there was any "conversion from ...
    (misc.taxes)
  • Re: Chrome for Mac is here
    ... would literally go out of business ... Timmy McVeigh rented a truck to blow up the Federal building in Oklahoma ... want a driver's license. ... One local disposable phone network ...
    (comp.sys.mac.apps)