Labeling the Auto Repair Industry

by Bruce Pearson

Here is a draft of a letter that I wrote to a the Toronto Star, it actually got printed. My fifteen minutes of fame, I guess. Recently there was a thread concerning a large automotive repair chain that was getting a bad rap. Although it's not my particular organization, I am employed by one of the larger, more well know repair chains myself. I couldn't help but notice that the disgruntled consumer was labeling, or at least addressing the whole chain, for an incident that occurred with only one branch - perhaps even with one sole acting individual. I think sometimes people are a little paranoid about successful enterprises and tend to feel that a simple mistake by one individual is corporate policy. I realize that you were probably expecting, or looking for contributions more related to hot rodding, it is, however, related to educating the individual that must, or chooses to seek professional assistance.

Dear Mr. Lai,

Today I was handed a photocopy of an article that you wrote in the Toronto Star on July 3, 1999. After reading it, I can't tell you how good I felt to hear a word on the behalf of auto technicians and auto repair facilities. The article was about how ghost cars are sent out to try to trap crooked technicians. I have been in the auto trade for twenty years now, and I've heard just about every "crooked shop" story going. Each time I can't help but think, "What is the real story?".

It never fails to amaze me how people are so quick to claim that they were ripped off, when chances are they are only misunderstood or misunderstanding what was done to their vehicle, or what was recommended. It seems the more people that are involved in relaying the information from the consumer to the technician, and back again, the worse the the misunderstanding becomes.

The reason that I bring this up is because I feel that its important to educate the consumer that the repair facility requires as much accurate information as the customer can give. They also need to be educated to the fact that cars are very sophisticated, and that plugging them into a scope or scan tool is not going to pinpoint an exact, definitive cause of their problem.

They also have to be aware that many times the technician is looking down the road to upcoming problems that may arise in the near future, of which the customer will most certainly blame on the last person to have worked on their vehicle.

I believe that many of the customer complaints that I've heard over the years are due to lack of communication between the technician and the consumer. I feel that the automotive trade is partly to blame for this problem. One of the biggest challenges that I encounter on a daily basis is getting a work order handed to me that reads "tune up", with no follow-up information as to why. Is it a maintenance tune up, or does it have a drivability problem? The same is true for front end alignments, or brake inspections. The first rule for the technician is to verify the customer complaint. That's hard to do if you don't know what it is.

Again, some education on behalf of the service writers, service managers, and even the public would go along way in preventing the customer from feeling less than satisfied with their auto repair experience. Perhaps you could write another article on that topic, so I could post it somewhere in my place of employment, so all the above mentioned could clearly see it. Thanks again for the article.

Bruce Pearson