Mechanic charging for norepair... what are my options please help urgent!! ** Satisfactory Result **

[Akinz]

I took my car to a garage and told them to inspect it for me. I paid them £80 for this inspection. They told me that the dual mass flywheel had seized and needed to be changed.i was told that if i repaired it with them they would credit the £80 into my repair bill.

 

i took my car in a few days ago to get it repaired and informed them that I had a warranty with warranty direct.

 

I called back to get feedback and they said they had gotten to the flywheel but that the warranty company required pictures before they will authorize and they have sent them the pictures and are awaiting authorization. the then calls me back the day after saying that the flywheel is perfect but that as they had taken my car apart my bill was £340 for the time spent on my car and he wont release my car until i pay.

 

i understand that a mechanic's lein makes that possible.

 

but i am not a mechanic and i was not told that my original diagnosis was inconclusive and that the cars flywheel might not be faulty.

 

also if the flywheel was perfect "in his own words" why did he have to send pictures to the warranty company. was he trying to put a bogus claim through

 

i have both bills, the 1st saying the flywheel was faulty after inspection and the second saying i owe them for further inspection

 

I approved the repair based on their original inspection. Do i have to pay this bill??? can i get my car back without paying it. or should i just count it as a bad experience with a mechanic and never use them again

[Conniff]

So no parts replaced, just a guess that the dm flywheel needed replacing and a bill of £340 for removal and replacement of the gearbox without a clutch change ??

[Akinz]

no parts replaced at all.... dm flywheel was fine, its 340 for getting to the dm flywheel to find out there was nothing wring with it. my issue is that i made the decision for them to replace the dm flywheel based on their diagnosis that it was faulty.

 

When he stripped the car down he called and said the flywheel was perfect but i would need to change the clutch soon. he said i had already incured a charge of 340 for the stripping and putting the car back and that changing the clutch would add another 300. i told him to just put the car back and not change anything.

 

my warranty would not cover anything because the flywheel was not faulty( which is fair enough). but i feel that the mechanic should have diagnosed the fault correctly the first time or otherwise tell me it was inconclusive and allow me the opportunity to make an informed decision

[Akinz]

but i had already paid them 80 for a diagnosis

[heliosuk]

The dealership is actuatly correct in the way they have handled this. They charged £80 for a diagnosis and felt that it required a further diagnosis which has cost you the additional amount.

 

With extended vehicle warranties, they are not warranties as such but are actually insurance policies against a physical failure. In your case you paid for a diagnosis. It was felt the DMF was at fault. In order to prove thisthey had to remove the gearbox. If the DMF at that time was faulty then you would still have to pay for the £80 diagnosis as the policy only covers the actual repair for the failure. Essentially you are liable for all of these charges. Whether or not the garage original diagnosis is correct might be open to scrutiny but this is a very grey area

 

So the question has to be....what is the fault with the car that took you down this road,what car, age and mileage. And what was it that led the diagnosing garage to believe it was the DMF?

[Akinz]

Hi, the car is a 2005 renault megane. The car was serviced in december and the mechanic said to have the dmf checked cos the car was vibrating, along with a few other things like the track rod ends and top strut mount. The garage that serviced it was a bit far away from me so i took it a a local garage when i got back and paid the garage £80 pounds to check it. The result of that check was that the dmf needs to be replaced. they didn't say it needed further investigation, they didn't say they needed to take the gearbox off to verify. my receipt says dmf needs replacing. so my taking the car back to them was not for further investigation it was for a replacement. If i had been told that they needed further investigation as their original investigation was inconclusive and that the further investigation would cost upwards of 300 pounds to be sure, then i would have been able to make an informed decision.

 

i believe that if the initial investigation was inconclusive i should have been told exactly that (warranty repair or not). I dont think i am being unreasonable. if the general consensus is that i am being unreasonable and that they have acted in good faith then i will accept that and assume it is my fault for not understanding that further investigation was needed and ask for clarification next time...

[heliosuk]

It's pretty obvious from what you post thatthe intial diagnosis was inconclusive as was the second garage but the opinion was the same. Whether it is further investigation or not, further investigation of a DMF and or replacement requires the same operation to be carried out. It's the same thing.

 

Sorry but thi nk you are not going anywhere with this. As a matter of interest what led you to belive there was a fault with the car as this could be significant given what you have posted. How did you see the vibration and where was it evident?

[Akinz]

Hi, as i said it was serviced in december and i was told to check a few items. i could not feel any vibration and had it checked because the servicing mechanic said to.

 

i understand what you are saying about further investigation and replacement being the same operation but they have a big bearing on my decision as that would affect whether i felt it would definitely come under the warranty or that i would be paying for it. I guess i am just a bit upset as i fee that i am having to pay quite a bit of money for what is effectively an investigation. but i guess that's how it is done... i personally would have thought that a simple we think it is faulty but wont know unless we take the gearbox out would have been a much better explanation. obviously i dont know too much about car engines and gearboxes and i would not have been able to make the connection.

 

Thanks for the information, i will go get my car and chuck it up to a lack of knowledge..

[crem]

It's pretty obvious from what you post thatthe intial diagnosis was inconclusive as was the second garage but the opinion was the same.

 

I don't see where you are concluding that the second check claimed to be inconclusive? Yes, the first advise was just a guide as the car wasn't in for any investigations and was simply a mechanics opinion on what the car felt like. The OP took it to another garage for an official diagnosis and was given one.

 

According to the OP this official diagnosis gave him a specific course of action to consider, which he did. The diagnosis didn't say, "well it might be this , or maybe that, or maybe we're just not sure. To check properly we'll have to take the gearbox out and charge you £300 anyway whether we're right or wrong".

 

If they had said that then the OP could have made an informed decision on whether to allow them to proceed or not. If the OP has a report stating the DMF needs replacing and is subsequently now being told it doesn't need changing, then I don't think they have any right to charge for the stripdown.

[Akinz]

That's exactly what i thought

[Akinz]

Its all sorted, thanks for the input guys.... i spoke with the garage manager and we decided to go halves on the bill.