Out of the Crisis.Org Forum Index Out of the Crisis.Org
Applying W. Edwards Deming to Small Business Management
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups    
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The Right Stuff

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Out of the Crisis.Org Forum Index -> Small Business Management Topics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Louis Altazan



Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 774
Location: Baton Rouge, LA

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:00 pm    Post subject: The Right Stuff Reply with quote

The proliferation of oil, lubricants and fluids in recent years has left many shops screaming ENOUGH! There are dozens of transmission fluids, coolants and even engine oil viscosities. Just keeping up with what goes into what can be a challenge, let alone stocking all of the different varieties. It almost seems like a battle between what engineers can dream up and what shops can deal with.

If it were a battle, I believe it is one most shops are ill equipped to fight. In today’s litigious society, can a shop afford to not follow OEM guidelines in this regard? I have heard several arguments, on both sides and for me the answer is no. The majority of arguments against using the OEM product revolve around cost. Either it cost too much to stock the recommended products or older vehicles don’t justify the expense.

I don’t feel this is a decision a shop should make. While the client may balk at the higher price, many courts hold they were not qualified to make that choice. Rather, they depended [paid] the shop to advise them. While I don’t always necessarily agree with this line of thought, it may be a hard to defend against. This is particularly so if the plaintiff “does not recall” the advise to the contrary.

Most judges and juries for that matter know little or nothing about a vehicle. On one side we have a person, they see much like themselves. This person has a "damaged" vehicle, documents from the manufacturer stating only a certain product should be used and an “expert” stating they were not. On the other side we have a business, that is supposed to know what should be used, arguing they substituted it to save a few dollars? The other argument might be that the plaintiff, who has no knowledge of the vehicle, told the [expert] shop to use the wrong product?

It is not possible to avoid all risk in business. There are some risk that can be avoided. In this case, is the savings worth the risk?

_________________
Louis Altazan
Owner/Manager AGCO Automotive Corporation
Baton Rouge, LA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Out of the Crisis.Org Forum Index -> Small Business Management Topics All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Back to top
copyright 2007-2009 outofthecrisis.org, all rights reserved