RE: Do it Properly
Thursday 14th August 2003
Do it Properly
Garage deemed liable for fatal crash after faulty brake wasn't fixed
Discussion
jonnyhilfiger said:
Suppose it depends what type of service it was. If it was one where brakes should have been checked (major service) then it should have been picked up and rectified
I would hope that the condition of the brakes should be checked at each and every service - does the garage know how hard you drive your car? pdV6 said:Too bloody right... Nissan do check my brakes at every service, irrespective.
They only change the brake fluid on 'A' services though (except when I ask them to because I boiled it - somehting they've never heard of on a Primera before
)All we have to go on is the article quoted in this thread which is very vague. You could assume that when it says `service` it's a full vehicle service, brake condition included, yet we (I) don't know this, for all we know the service might have been a cheap and cheerfull service that didn't inspect brake condition. Who knows? One would again assume it did otherwise the garage wouldn't be being sued, so perhaps I'm talking (typing) bollox.
I guess if the garage has been sucessfully sued then checking the brakes was part of the work they should have carried out.
Most of them will have insurance for this - will put their premiums up a bit though and the bloke that missed it will probably have got the sack but considering it has left one guy dead and a woman in a wheelchair they got off lightly IMHO.
Most of them will have insurance for this - will put their premiums up a bit though and the bloke that missed it will probably have got the sack but considering it has left one guy dead and a woman in a wheelchair they got off lightly IMHO.
I've always done all my own servicing so this is a bit new to me but my wife's car came with one of those extended warranties that required it to be serviced by a "VAT-registered" garage. Accordingly she went to our local Halfords and was pleasantly surprised by how much they appeared to have done. All the brake disc AND pad thicknesses were recorded on a summary sheet as well as the brake fluid boiling point (albeit presumably sampled at the reservoir). I guess this is a big back-covering exercise on their part as well as good service. OK, they also checked the battery and pronounced it "unserviceable" but that was three months ago now so it might still die one day soon...!
As a manufacturing engineer, working on assembly methods for automotive components, I am constantly aware that I have a moral and legal responsibility for a large number of safety related Issues. I have to make sure an Idiot with half a brain cell can't put a product together in such a way that it becomes defective - We call this POKE YOKE, but in fact its idiot proofing.
I also have to make sure the equipment I provide does not injure them, even though they are using it in a way they were not shown. We do risk assessments and FMEA's and I am relatively paranoid when it comes to thinking what might go wrong.
I go home knowing that I have do my best to make everything the best it can be.
You take your vehicle for a service and they only do half a job ?
Were they only doing an engine service? So what ? If I ran a garage I'd offer a free brake and suspension check with each and every oil change. So in this case, I'd have phoned up the van owner and told him that his brakes were fecked and I'd have 50 % chance of getting the business for fixing them. But I'd also record on the reciept that they needed doing.
I recently, due to lack of time, paid to have brake pads and discs replaced, and I asked if at the same time they could replace the brake fluid. The back street place I went to asked why? and thought I was wasting my money, but I explained that it was my wife's car, and having had the car more than 3 years and inspecting the previous service history (we were given the car by her dad) I could find no record of it being changed. I also explained that I was about to take my family in said 11 year old cavalier on a trip to the alps and surely they could see the logic, as brake fluid lasts about 2-3 years.
My point? It takes about 15 mins to check the brakes and fluid and there's money in finding a proper fault and fixing it, but most garages don't see the need, and they also don't see the business opportunity.
I also have to make sure the equipment I provide does not injure them, even though they are using it in a way they were not shown. We do risk assessments and FMEA's and I am relatively paranoid when it comes to thinking what might go wrong.
I go home knowing that I have do my best to make everything the best it can be.
You take your vehicle for a service and they only do half a job ?
Were they only doing an engine service? So what ? If I ran a garage I'd offer a free brake and suspension check with each and every oil change. So in this case, I'd have phoned up the van owner and told him that his brakes were fecked and I'd have 50 % chance of getting the business for fixing them. But I'd also record on the reciept that they needed doing.
I recently, due to lack of time, paid to have brake pads and discs replaced, and I asked if at the same time they could replace the brake fluid. The back street place I went to asked why? and thought I was wasting my money, but I explained that it was my wife's car, and having had the car more than 3 years and inspecting the previous service history (we were given the car by her dad) I could find no record of it being changed. I also explained that I was about to take my family in said 11 year old cavalier on a trip to the alps and surely they could see the logic, as brake fluid lasts about 2-3 years.
My point? It takes about 15 mins to check the brakes and fluid and there's money in finding a proper fault and fixing it, but most garages don't see the need, and they also don't see the business opportunity.
Ah yes! That'll be it!
But alas no, it has holes in the top for putting electrolyte in (and no, it doesn't need any!) I think someone might have noticed that it was the original battery and at four years old it must be a reasonably safe bet. I do fully expect it to die this winter...
But alas no, it has holes in the top for putting electrolyte in (and no, it doesn't need any!) I think someone might have noticed that it was the original battery and at four years old it must be a reasonably safe bet. I do fully expect it to die this winter...
On the other hand though (and I don't speak as a member of the "trade") it also strikes me that these guys can't win. If they try to tell us about all the stuff they think needs replacing, they're ripping us off replacing bits with some life left in them. Anne Robinson's postbag seems fit to burst with complaints about garages that try to sell us brake discs when ours are only half worn, or two dampers when only one is leaking. I presonally like to change things (even tyres) in pairs but I've heard planty of people moaning at the suggestion that the "other side" needs doing too!
And then we (at least the public - maybe not PHers) also moan if they DON'T tell us we need to spend more money with them!
Just a thought...
And then we (at least the public - maybe not PHers) also moan if they DON'T tell us we need to spend more money with them!
Just a thought...
jacko lah said:
You take your vehicle for a service and they only do half a job ?
Were they only doing an engine service? So what ? If I ran a garage I'd offer a free brake and suspension check with each and every oil change. So in this case, I'd have phoned up the van owner and told him that his brakes were fecked and I'd have 50 % chance of getting the business for fixing them. But I'd also record on the reciept that they needed doing.
But where do you stop? Sure, in and ideal world you would have the brakes checked every time the car is in the garage. Want this CD changer installed in 10 minutes sir? Yes, but first we're going to spend half an hour pulling all your wheels off so we can check the brakes.
But the important point here is not the possible extra business of fixing brakes when doing an oil change, but wether you have a legal responsibility for the car's brakes when you are not doing a brake related job.
What if you are a busy computer technician. You are called to some incompetent (Volvo 340 driver)'s house to install Microsoft Office for them as they can't do it themselves. A 10 minute job, hello goodbye. So if that person rings you up 3 days later whining that they've got a virus and Gerald has lost his spreadsheet for his fine wine collection, are you to blame because you didn't do a virus scan?
You're only responsible if the work required included anti-virus work. And even then there remain factors out of your control.
>> Edited by pentoman on Saturday 16th August 12:41 because apparently I can't use tags properly
>> Edited by pentoman on Saturday 16th August 12:43
This debate could go on and on. I have been responsible for training hundreds of mechanics in a past life and for more than 10 years this issue has been of paramount importance. I once lambasted a teacher training assessor who declared my student teacher to be "of the old school" because he failed to have his class in a horseshoe and did not encourage them to suggest alternative ways of tackling the problems. When she told me she taught counselling, I informed her that as the subject was brakes, there were some subltle differences. If the student made a mistake because they thought the job could be done a different way the two possible results were a) Hundreds dead... b) someone got upset. I suggested this needed to be taken into account when deciding the teaching method. Clearly it was, because he passed. It is right and justified that in the ordinary course of events serviceing vehicles leaves the profesionals doing it liable for the consequences of their work and of course they should carry indemnity insurance. If this pushes the cost of serviceing up at non franchised garages, well tough. The manufacturers have, as an earlier contributor said, to provide failure mode and effect analysis for both design and manufacture so why should the garage get away with a "Dun mattoh mate Righeet" Attitude?
This debate could go on and on. I have been responsible for training hundreds of mechanics in a past life and for more than 10 years this issue has been of paramount importance. I once lambasted a teacher training assessor who declared my student teacher to be "of the old school" because he failed to have his class in a horseshoe and did not encourage them to suggest alternative ways of tackling the problems. When she told me she taught counselling, I informed her that as the subject was brakes, there were some subltle differences. If the student made a mistake because they thought the job could be done a different way the two possible results were a) Hundreds dead... b) someone got upset. I suggested this needed to be taken into account when deciding the teaching method. Clearly it was, because he passed. It is right and justified that in the ordinary course of events serviceing vehicles leaves the profesionals doing it liable for the consequences of their work and of course they should carry indemnity insurance. If this pushes the cost of serviceing up at non franchised garages, well tough. The manufacturers have, as an earlier contributor said, to provide failure mode and effect analysis for both design and manufacture so why should the garage get away with a "Dun mattoh mate Righeet" Attitude?
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff