Paying for new parts that aren't used

Hi All,

I just brought my 92 tercel into the shop because it was severely
misfiring. The mechanic installed new wires and a rotor...and only then
did he discover that the engine is toast (no compression in 1 cylinder
and little in another). The additional repair isn't worth it. The car
is headed for a scrap yard.

I didn't expect to be charged for the new parts that were installed
unnecessarily. I thought they'd be returned to the supplier. If I
purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.

After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
the rotor.

Am I off base here? Any comments anyone?

Darryl

There is usually no return on most electrical parts.

If he did the wires right, he put dielectric grease under the boots.
This makes them an obviously used part.

Same deal for the rotor, it now has electrical arc marks on it.

If I was the parts guy, I wouldn't take them back, sorry.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

Darryl Minard wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I just brought my 92 tercel into the shop because it was severely
> misfiring. The mechanic installed new wires and a rotor...and only then
> did he discover that the engine is toast (no compression in 1 cylinder
> and little in another). The additional repair isn't worth it. The car
> is headed for a scrap yard.
>
> I didn't expect to be charged for the new parts that were installed
> unnecessarily. I thought they'd be returned to the supplier. If I
> purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
> if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.
>
> After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
> the rotor.
>
> Am I off base here? Any comments anyone?
>
> Darryl

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 11:04:22 -0500, Darryl Minard >
ran around screaming and yelling:

> I thought they'd be returned to the supplier. If I
>purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
>if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.
>
>After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
>the rotor.
>
>Am I off base here? Any comments anyone?
>
>Darryl

in most cases if you buy electrical parts that you "don't need", then
you have "spares".....

JT

Mike Romain wrote in rec.autos.misc

> There is usually no return on most electrical parts.
>
> If he did the wires right, he put dielectric grease under the boots.
> This makes them an obviously used part.
>
> Same deal for the rotor, it now has electrical arc marks on it.

So what? The problem is the mechanic's, not the customer's. The
mechanic installed the stuff on an engine that had a problem. The
customer should not have to pay for parts the mechanic mistakenly
installed. And with an engine that is no good, putting the parts on
it is a mistake. It would have been one thing if the customer had
bought the parts and installed them himself, but he took the car to
a mechanic, who is supposed to know better.

>
> If I was the parts guy, I wouldn't take them back, sorry.

That is between the mech and the parts guy, not the customer and
the mechanic.

>
> Mike
> 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> Darryl Minard wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I just brought my 92 tercel into the shop because it was severely
>> misfiring. The mechanic installed new wires and a rotor...and only then
>> did he discover that the engine is toast (no compression in 1 cylinder
>> and little in another). The additional repair isn't worth it. The car
>> is headed for a scrap yard.
>>
>> I didn't expect to be charged for the new parts that were installed
>> unnecessarily. I thought they'd be returned to the supplier. If I
>> purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
>> if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.
>>
>> After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
>> the rotor.
>>
>> Am I off base here? Any comments anyone?
>>
>> Darryl



--
Dick #1349
Damn it . . . Don't you dare ask God to help me.
To her housekeeper, who had begun to pray aloud.
~~ Joan Crawford, actress, d. May 10, 1977
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email:

In article >,
Darryl Minard > wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I just brought my 92 tercel into the shop because it was severely
> misfiring. The mechanic installed new wires and a rotor...and only then
> did he discover that the engine is toast (no compression in 1 cylinder
> and little in another). The additional repair isn't worth it. The car
> is headed for a scrap yard.

Sheesh.... My brother in law and his three teenage boys in
succession could not kill a 92 Tercel.

> I didn't expect to be charged for the new parts that were installed
> unnecessarily.

Depends on the exchange that took place between you and the shop
at the time the service order was written up. i.e., what exactly
was your complaint?

> I thought they'd be returned to the supplier.

Why, did the supplier do something wrong?

> If I purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
> if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.

Yeah, you and others because I keep getting parts delivered that
have already been installed. Parts stores are not a freebie
place to get known good parts to try out to see if they fix the
problem.
This practice just drives up the cost for everyone and delays
legitimate customers getting their vehicle back when promised
because your used parts when delivered to me get rejected and
then new unmolested parts have to be re-sent. This screws up
thru-put in the shop. Of course I compensate for this on a
regular basis by raising my labor rates.

> After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
> the rotor.

Did you authorize the wires and rotor to be installed?

> Am I off base here?

Yes on expecting a supplier to take back parts that have already
been installed then determined to not have fixed a problem. No on
your expectation that the failure be properly diagnosed without
shot gunning parts at it.

> Any comments anyone?

Be more diligent in choosing your repair shop.

A real mechanic would have:

1: Did the necessary tests before purchasing any parts.

2: Explained the costs associated with the repairs needed with the customer,
and any other hidden repairs that might be needed: ie: cracked cylinder
head.

3:inspected the overall car and advised the customer if it were in the
customer's best interest to repair or to replace the vehicle.

4: Told the customer that guarenteed minimum $2,000.00 to $3,000.00 trade
ins are the biggest ripoffs in the auto sales industry, It would be better
to use a smaller cash dowh payment and negotiate a better price, because
that minimum trade in is all pure pork in the price.

Refinish King


"Darryl Minard" > wrote in message
...
> Hi All,
>
> I just brought my 92 tercel into the shop because it was severely
> misfiring. The mechanic installed new wires and a
rotor...and only then
> did he discover that the engine is toast (no compression in 1 cylinder
> and little in another). The additional repair isn't worth it. The car
> is headed for a scrap yard.
>
> I didn't expect to be charged for the new parts that were installed
> unnecessarily. I thought they'd be returned to the supplier. If I
> purchased the parts and tried them out myself I would simply return them
> if they didn't meet my needs...I've done it in the past.
>
> After arguing with him the mechanic agreed to return the wireset but not
> the rotor.
>
> Am I off base here? Any comments anyone?
>
> Darryl

On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 19:11:21 -0600, Dick C >
ran around screaming and yelling:

>So what? The problem is the mechanic's, not the customer's. The
>mechanic installed the stuff on an engine that had a problem. The
>customer should not have to pay for parts the mechanic mistakenly
>installed.


there was no "mistake" installing those parts, they are common parts
that go bad and cause the symptoms...they are also standard on the
troubleshooting order...you can't find unknowns untill you start to
eliminate the obvious....
JT

Joey Tribiani wrote in rec.autos.misc

> On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 19:11:21 -0600, Dick C >
> ran around screaming and yelling:
>
>>So what? The problem is the mechanic's, not the customer's. The
>>mechanic installed the stuff on an engine that had a problem. The
>>customer should not have to pay for parts the mechanic mistakenly
>>installed.
>
>
> there was no "mistake" installing those parts, they are common parts
> that go bad and cause the symptoms...they are also standard on the
> troubleshooting order...you can't find unknowns untill you start to
> eliminate the obvious....

That may be, but assuming that the OP said the standard things when he
took the car in, he asked for the car to be fixed. Even if he didn't, the
mechanic still installed parts that were not needed to fix the problem.
The customer should not be forced to pay for repairs and parts that were
not needed to fix the problem.

--
Dick #1349
Damn it . . . Don't you dare ask God to help me.
To her housekeeper, who had begun to pray aloud.
~~ Joan Crawford, actress, d. May 10, 1977
Home Page: dickcr.iwarp.com
email:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 09:38:33 -0600, Dick C >
ran around screaming and yelling:

>The customer should not be forced to pay for repairs and parts that were
>not needed to fix the problem.


and the customer should not expect troubleshooting and work for
free....these kinds of "disputes" are ignorant...if you don't want to
have it done by a "pro" then do it yourself...
JT

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 09:38:33 -0600, Dick C >
ran around screaming and yelling:

>That may be, but assuming that the OP said the standard things when he
>took the car in, he asked for the car to be fixed.

assuming...hmm.....standard things? you mean like "it used to run
good, but now it don't"?...."no i don't know when the last time it was
tuned up was"......"what are sparkplugs"....usually in the
realworld(not the perfectworld ie usenet) the mechanic hears "my car
isn't running right, and i have to have it to get to work...if i can't
work my wife will leave me and my kids will starve...it needs to be
fixed NOW...".....and that is usually what the mechanic has to go on,
if there are no stored codes or if the vehicle is older....sorry to
disagree(and i do) but sometimes there will be "un-necessary" parts
involved in troubleshooting....a mechanic can spend hours verifying
that tune up parts are good(which will equate to more dollars in labor
than the tune up parts cost) than replacing parts that the car owner
can't remember the last time it was done....tune up parts are cheap
and the declining quality of tuneup parts these days, all but requires
them to be replaced whenever a complaint of "loss of power" comes
in...
JT