Admit Nothing

Andyprius is right. When I took mine in because the CD changer would not play, the first thing out of the service writer's mouth once he saw my Sirius plugged into the aux jack; "I wonder if that could be causing the problem?".

I don't advocate lying at all, nor do I personally engage in such, but sometimes I think it's best to keep my mouth shut.

I guess where I would draw the line is if I tried one or more things to fix a problem that I knew in advance, or discovered afterward, could itself cause damage, I wouldn't try to sweep it under the rug. If I truly had no reason to think what I did was harmful, I wouldn't feel the need to share the information lest it be "used against me". In either case, if I were asked if I had tried something specific, and I had, I would answer truthfully.

 

Certainly volunteering information may be bad. But, OTOH, I think there's a certain 'reasonableness' question (for me anyways). For example, let's say the Sirius WAS causing the problem - my answer would be "Gee, that's a bad design - it's an AUX IN jack and I was using it for it's intended purpose."

In Ginnie's case, I'd pay for it, and then take it (the dealer, as the agent for Toyota) to small claims court, where it's on THEM to prove in some kind of reasonable way that I caused the fault. I would say the court is pre-disposed to favor the consumer to start with, and unless they were there, or have an expert to say the "ONLY" way it could have failed is due to the operator. My experience has been, btw, that sending a certified letter to notify of the intent to sue and request payment usually gets people to do the 'right thing'.

Not an attorney, don't play one on TV - but DO stand up for my rights, and recommend others not ignore small claims when necessary as a means to get justice. I went through that EXACT scenario with a carwash who managed to dump enough cleaner inside the console of my car to short out a $600 computer, and then tried to say it was my fault. Notice of intent to file for the repair plus my additional costs as a result of the damage got them to cough it up.


But, when in doubt, DON'T volunteer any information is always good.


pat

 

I am an attorney and you have it EXACTLY backwards. The burden is always on the plaintiff to prove their case. If she sues, she has the burden. Well intentioned, but bad advice.

 

hey guys, uh, on behalf of the guy who has to figure out what's wrong with your car i'd like to mention that they usually don't get paid much for the time they spend finding out the problem. sure you could conceal a critical bit of information. and sometimes that critical information, once discovered, makes the situation plainly obvious anyway. but at that point the tech has spent a day or so tracing wires and whanot for peanuts when he could have been doing 60k max services that put food on the table. so now he's pissed, and has time to make up for because you could have just told him in the first place...

just a thought to ponder.

 

I agree. So many companies try to blame the user/customer first.

Here's an idea for those who consider themselves "too honest": Have your wife or SO or a relative bring the car in and deal with the service people. You can limit your contact with the dealer to over the phone and if they start asking too many questions, you just tell them to call back later, because you have to get back to work or your kids or whatever...

:rockon:

 

Are you talking about dealer techs ? Are you serious that "concealing information" will make the poor techs kids go starving ? Is that how it works at stealerships ?

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for "poor dealers". If the techs are going hungry, that's the evil dealers' "fault", not mine...

 

yes, i am talking about dealer techs. and by withholding pertinent information you are wasting the time of a professional. that is a sign of utmost disrespect in any professional community, and the favor will be returned.

the flat rate system's flaws are not your fault. but yes, the lost income opportunities are your fault if you choose to waste someone's time by not revealing something pertinent and obvious that would save several hours of diagnosis time.

 

well, unfortunately the non-experts are usually the ones with the biggest mouths when it comes to dealership employees... have seen that more than a few times on this site alone.

he did see a handful of cases of blown inverters (well, dc-dc converters, but that requires inverter replacement) due to reverse polarity jumpstarting. we first reported it on the site in 2006. one inverter survived with a ton of blown fuses throughout the rest of the car, the others were toast. non warranty.

 

Stealerships.....that's what I am talking about...thanks for who ever mentioned that....Pretty sure the tech's are paid by the hour not by how many cars they service in a day. And we customers get to pay by the hour...............seems if the stealership can tell you there is a $3500 part you need instead of a $350 part guess they will do it........so where is their conscience.

I never dreamed my car would not be covered by the warranty. The tech I talked to even lead me to believe all would be covered under warranty. It never occured to me to withhold information from them. At this point I am just praying that the truth will win out..................if you find any other cases like mine please post on the "I blew up the inverter" thread................thanks Ginny

 

Auto repairs are done by the flat rate book. If the book says a repair takes one and a half hours then you are billed for that amount and the tech is paid for that amount. The tech who gets it done in less time gets to move on to another project to make more money and the customer spends less time in the waiting room but pays the same. The down side is that if the tech gets bogged down in a repair and spends more time than allotted he looses because his average rate of pay falls when he can't move on to the next project.

Naturally the tech wants any clues he can get as to what preceded or precipitated the failure. A nice description of the exact complaint helps too.

 

Partly devil's advocate here ....

I'm sure Evan will agree that patients withholding information about their medical history or current problems can make his diagnosis more difficult or prescribed treatment inappropriate. Galaxee's Prius "doctor" seems to suggest the same for cars.

 

Hey, what a coincidence, my 69 y/o knee hurts.
Oh....never mind.
:focus:

 

My policy has been always to suggest where the problem may be. Althoug Toyota Dealerships may not be run the same way, I was told that at a large GM dealership, the Service Manager etc. were paid in part on a commission basis. THis meant that if one came in and said that my car needs a valve job - they did a valve job and that was it - even if the problem was the car needed rings. That way the customer was charged twice for taking the engine apart and they couldn't blame the Dervice since they had originally instructed the service what to do.

On the other had, at the dealershop in question, when the techs were slow, they gave them cars were someone provided a general complaint and ran up the bill for general troubleshooting.

I hope that this process was unique to that dealership - (I was told the same story by two individuals who had previous worked at the dealership.

 

That is the ethical position; sad to say a lot of customers will not be moved by the argument. But forthrightness is also in the customer's interest. On average, the more the tech knows the sooner the customer will get their car back.