Main dealer pulling down my pants
Discussion
grumpy52 said:
They always quote book time for jobs ,which is doing the process the manufacturer approved way .
I rather suspect the book time is body-off, and the gearbox-out route was offered as a shortcut. The third, shorter cut, was then tried to help save the OP more time - but failed, because of a pre-existing and unforeseeable problem with his car.
TooMany2cvs said:
I rather suspect the book time is body-off, and the gearbox-out route was offered as a shortcut. The third, shorter cut, was then tried to help save the OP more time - but failed, because of a pre-existing and unforeseeable problem with his car.
You honestly think they would've rung me up and said 'good news, we've managed to do it under the agreed time so we're not charging you as much as we agreed'???As I said, 2 options were given to me. When I originally rang up they quoted to take the body off, she then spoke to a tech and he said they can do it by taking the gearbox out.
I went for that option and was told 5 hours labour plus the cost of the part.
Its all very simple and this 'pre existing problem' you seem to keep saying would never have been an issue if they had just taken the gearbox out like they were supposed to.
TooMany2cvs said:
So there y'go. That's the book method and time. Everything else was an unofficial shortcut intended to save you money, and done on a time-and-materials basis.
I'm not sure if you're just being difficult or you work at that dealership but i'll say it one more time and then we can just agree to disagree.They gave me two options, I went with the gearbox out as would anyone else as it was cheaper and the result is the same.
They told me 5 hours to do this job, I said go ahead.
They then rang me and said the route they tried has failed due to a seized bolt so they will need to take the gearbox out to do the job.
I told them they were supposed to take the gearbox out to do the job as that's what I was told would be happening.
They now want an extra 5 hours so 10 in total whereas if they had removed the gearbox to start with, none of this would have happened.
rich12 said:
I'm not sure if you're just being difficult or you work at that dealership
Neither of those. I'm pointing out the reality here.rich12 said:
They gave me two options
Yes, they did. Book time/method, and a short-cut.rich12 said:
I went with the gearbox out as would anyone else as it was cheaper and the result is the same.
They told me 5 hours to do this job, I said go ahead.
And if they'd given you a third option, say three hours? You'd have taken that.They told me 5 hours to do this job, I said go ahead.
rich12 said:
They now want an extra 5 hours so 10 in total whereas if they had removed the gearbox to start with, none of this would have happened.
And if they found a problem removing the box, and had to do a bodylift anyway?Edited by TooMany2cvs on Wednesday 19th April 10:12
BlueHave said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
It's called a lien.
The thing to do would be to let them complete the job, pay, signing and writing paid under protest in as much detail as you want, then initiate small claims process, letter before etc. to DP.
It can't be that hard to track down the old employee and get a statement.
You will have absolutely no chance of getting any money returned once you have paid them in full.The thing to do would be to let them complete the job, pay, signing and writing paid under protest in as much detail as you want, then initiate small claims process, letter before etc. to DP.
It can't be that hard to track down the old employee and get a statement.
I'd also get a statement from the ex service advisor about what wS said and agreed. As an employee at the time she was authorised to act on their behalf. Also go in and talk to the new advisor try to get a look at the job card and if you can get a photo of it. Then go and park yourself outside the dealer principals office and demand a pre court chat!
I worked in a garage where we repaired a regular clients motorbike after a fatal accident (we advised him at the time to scrap it) but he had a fair sized injury claim ad was adamant he wanted the bike fixed to remember his lost gf, so we fixed it. when claim came in he decided that he didn't want the bike back afterall given the bad memories.
After a PITA process he ended up with the fixed bike minus an exhaust and a few parts we were able to return after 3months and we didn't get paid.
I think customer has good backing in law against leins, but don't know the ins and outs of it.
After a PITA process he ended up with the fixed bike minus an exhaust and a few parts we were able to return after 3months and we didn't get paid.
I think customer has good backing in law against leins, but don't know the ins and outs of it.
Do you have a written quote? Without it I suspect you are barking up the proverbial.
Did you sign a job card authorising the work? Normally this will be upto a certain limit over the quote. Without it the garage will be struggling.
I seem to recall (from a long ago course) that they are perfectly entitled to hold your vehicle in lieu of payment but that the Lien must be reasonable i.e. not holding a £20k car for a £200 bill. This may or may not be utter nonsense.
Did you sign a job card authorising the work? Normally this will be upto a certain limit over the quote. Without it the garage will be struggling.
I seem to recall (from a long ago course) that they are perfectly entitled to hold your vehicle in lieu of payment but that the Lien must be reasonable i.e. not holding a £20k car for a £200 bill. This may or may not be utter nonsense.
papa3 said:
Do you have a written quote? Without it I suspect you are barking up the proverbial.
Did you sign a job card authorising the work? Normally this will be upto a certain limit over the quote. Without it the garage will be struggling.
I seem to recall (from a long ago course) that they are perfectly entitled to hold your vehicle in lieu of payment but that the Lien must be reasonable i.e. not holding a £20k car for a £200 bill. This may or may not be utter nonsense.
No written quote. It should be marked down on the job card but with out seeing it, I have no idea if this was done.Did you sign a job card authorising the work? Normally this will be upto a certain limit over the quote. Without it the garage will be struggling.
I seem to recall (from a long ago course) that they are perfectly entitled to hold your vehicle in lieu of payment but that the Lien must be reasonable i.e. not holding a £20k car for a £200 bill. This may or may not be utter nonsense.
I've tried to contact the service advisor that has left but she hasn't got back to me yet and not sure if she would want to get involved.
For what it's worth, the car is about £24k and the bill they want me to pay to release the car is £690 for the labour.
Edited by rich12 on Wednesday 19th April 10:44
rich12 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
So there y'go. That's the book method and time. Everything else was an unofficial shortcut intended to save you money, and done on a time-and-materials basis.
I'm not sure if you're just being difficult or you work at that dealership but i'll say it one more time and then we can just agree to disagree.
Oh and bank holidays of course.
I've been sent this. Not sure if it is 100% correct but seems like it would be right..
If the customer is not given a copy of the garage’s terms and conditions before the garage agrees to repair the vehicle, those terms and conditions are highly unlikely to apply. (A lack of a signature is not fatal to the garage’s claim if it can show that the customer was given the terms and conditions and agreed to them beforehand.)
What if there is no contract between the garage and the customer?
If there are no terms and conditions (or they were not otherwise agreed), the garage cannot rely on those terms. However, the garage can still rely on the law of “bailment”.
A bailment comes about when the garage voluntarily accepts possession of a customer’s car (or van or bike or any other type of vehicle) such as when a customer brings his car in for repair. English law does not require a contract between the garage and its customer for a bailment to arise.
If the garage carries out repairs and this results in an improvement to the car (as opposed to its current condition merely being maintained), the garage is entitled to retain possession of the car until the customer has paid for the repairs (this entitlement being known as a “lien”). Once the customer has paid, the lien is lost and the garage must return the car.
If the customer is not given a copy of the garage’s terms and conditions before the garage agrees to repair the vehicle, those terms and conditions are highly unlikely to apply. (A lack of a signature is not fatal to the garage’s claim if it can show that the customer was given the terms and conditions and agreed to them beforehand.)
What if there is no contract between the garage and the customer?
If there are no terms and conditions (or they were not otherwise agreed), the garage cannot rely on those terms. However, the garage can still rely on the law of “bailment”.
A bailment comes about when the garage voluntarily accepts possession of a customer’s car (or van or bike or any other type of vehicle) such as when a customer brings his car in for repair. English law does not require a contract between the garage and its customer for a bailment to arise.
If the garage carries out repairs and this results in an improvement to the car (as opposed to its current condition merely being maintained), the garage is entitled to retain possession of the car until the customer has paid for the repairs (this entitlement being known as a “lien”). Once the customer has paid, the lien is lost and the garage must return the car.
TooMany2cvs said:
because of a pre-existing and unforeseeable problem with his car.
I think you'd have a job on to convince anyone that a seized bolt on a 6 year old car is 'unforeseeable'.They quote a price that includes an element of risk mitigation - the risk is on them as the professional and it's up to them to ensure the price they charge covers the expenses likely - be that labour, parts, contribution to fixed costs and some risk mitigation. Normally risk mitigation is not needed and they profit a bit more. Sometimes it is and they lose - never should it be the customer that loses in this situation, surely?
I'm happy that every time I pay for work done on my car I'm probably billed more labour than it probably needs 'just in case'. That's business. I'd therefore be outraged if something they 'didnt forsee' as skilled professionals caused the job to run on a big longer..
I can't believe 2CV is a genuine person and not a pedantic bot just trying to wind folk up.
If they quoted you, not estimated, then point blank refuse to give them any more money that the quote issued for the work requested.
That's how quotes work. When you get sorted, if they continue to be a PITA, just make sure you vote with your feet and bad mouth them to as many people as possible.
t aside) could disagree with you.
PS - I have a lot of difficulty believing a 6 year old seized bolt can cause such aggro. Especially on a car.
Cars have pissy little bolts that one of my electric guns could shear with complete ease.
The 'seized bolt' is just some BS excuse they've pulled out the drawer to get more money out of you, for whatever reason.
If they quoted you, not estimated, then point blank refuse to give them any more money that the quote issued for the work requested.
That's how quotes work. When you get sorted, if they continue to be a PITA, just make sure you vote with your feet and bad mouth them to as many people as possible.
rich12 said:
They gave me two options, I went with the gearbox out as would anyone else as it was cheaper and the result is the same.
They told me 5 hours to do this job, I said go ahead.
They then rang me and said the route they tried has failed due to a seized bolt so they will need to take the gearbox out to do the job.
I told them they were supposed to take the gearbox out to do the job as that's what I was told would be happening.
If the above is 100% accurate, I can't see how any sensible, reasonable, educated human being (2manyfrenchpiecesofsThey told me 5 hours to do this job, I said go ahead.
They then rang me and said the route they tried has failed due to a seized bolt so they will need to take the gearbox out to do the job.
I told them they were supposed to take the gearbox out to do the job as that's what I was told would be happening.
t aside) could disagree with you.PS - I have a lot of difficulty believing a 6 year old seized bolt can cause such aggro. Especially on a car.
Cars have pissy little bolts that one of my electric guns could shear with complete ease.
The 'seized bolt' is just some BS excuse they've pulled out the drawer to get more money out of you, for whatever reason.
Edited by TheLordJohn on Wednesday 19th April 18:14
It's a big, heavy, expensive car with a reputation.
It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
Willy Nilly said:
It's a big, heavy, expensive car with a reputation.
It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
He chose the quote which entailed removing the gearbox, they didn't bother.It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
Now they need to remove the gearbox after trying to take a short cut and they want more money.
More money over and above the quote they gave which included the removal of the gearbox...
Are you mentally sub-normal or just on the wind up...?
TheLordJohn said:
Willy Nilly said:
It's a big, heavy, expensive car with a reputation.
It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
He chose the quote which entailed removing the gearbox, they didn't bother.It's gone in for repair and you were given options and told the body really should come off. They tried to save you some money by not taking the body off. It failed. The body has to come off.
Let them get on with it, pay them, get your car back.
Now they need to remove the gearbox after trying to take a short cut and they want more money.
More money over and above the quote they gave which included the removal of the gearbox...
Are you mentally sub-normal or just on the wind up...?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff