-
Is it time for a new warranty model?
We are in a small town in northern Michigan, smaller than many. Customer retention is not a choice and part of our strategy is a strong warranty offering to our customers. Essentially, if it should not have happened, we take care of it with no charge to the customer. Our stated is 24/24 but we regularly go well beyond that. We are also not ones to hide behind our knowledge of the products. We don’t blame parts if it was tech or service adviser error. Last week we ate a CVT transmission, that we had done a service to 40k ago, used the wrong fluid and now it has a problem at 140k on the trans. We could have hidden it, blamed the mileage, but it’s not how we go to market and it’s not the culture i want in my shop. My manager made that decision himself, and it was exactly how i want my folks to think.
That said, if i am responsible I will take responsibility and if i am not, then i expect my supplier/manufacturer to take care of lost profits if it is obviously a parts issue with a failure outside my control. They usually do, to a point.
My problem is that I have come to realize that my profit model is not based on warranty repairs and my profits suffer substantially when I have to tie up a valuable technician, service bay and equipment on a service that “might” net me 1/2 the gross profit dollars per hour, if i get all that I ask for in a warranty claim.
The problem is time. I have none to give away(especially during our busiest week ytd, and this is exactly when this happened).
I have attached an explanation of the warranty claim I submitted recently. It was a problem with a hard part that had no moving parts and no electronics. It was a harmonic balancer that caused the car to quit after 10 or so minutes of running. Would only try to restart (like very bad timing), until it cooled down and then would start like nothing ever happened and then the whole process started again. This issue did not occur until two weeks after initial installation. Nothing fancy here, typical design with two tone rings for the non adjustable crank sensor.
This failure, along with many I have covered in the past, has caused me to realize that it is time for a new warranty model in my store. We have “sore spots” that seem to cause much of our warranty issues. They are either manufacturer driven, part type driven and/or automotive system driven. In most cases, these failures are related to aftermarket parts.
We are not the OE only guys, we are not specialists. We are general automotive repair in a small rural community. We try to use parts with a history of acceptable lifespan, and we frequently us components that are not OE or OE equivalent. We don’t use bottom of the barrel anything, we can’t afford to with our warranty. So we walk the line and hope for the best. Unfortunately, the line used to be fairly distinguishable and if you stayed with quality manufacturers, you were usually OK with aftermarket parts. Less and less so all the time, it appears.
What I have come to notice all to often, is that during the warranty process we are upgrading the parts we use to OE or OE equivalent, since we do not want a repeat failure. We do that at our cost, unless we absolutely know we had the conversation with the consumer about the parts quality and they have chosen that part to save money, and we have declined the quality part in writing on the repair order. We did not do that on the balancer in question. No moving parts, no electronics, no failures, right?
If we don’t have the conversation with the consumer, I believe it is fair to say that they assume(and rightfully so) we are using the best quality parts available on the initial installation.
It appears we can not assume anything anymore. We will be moving to a system where we more often have the conversation with the customer and we do decline oe quality parts on the work order. More importantly, we will be advising the customer that if any parts failure occurs outside of our control(where less than oe quality parts are chosen), we will be upgrading the parts to oe quality at additional expense to them. At least we should get paid for the upgrade.
Without the conversation and documentation at the initial install, I believe it causes more harm then good to try and up charge them during a warranty issue.
The truly valuable part (IMO) of the attached description for the balancer issue is not the technical part at the beginning, but the educational part for our suppliers and manufacturers towards the end. We have to get them to understand this. We need to understand it first, as an industry.
Thoughts?
Log in to reply.