Page 2 of 2

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 16th, '10, 08:36
by billinom8s
Funky wrote:I agree with that moose, but I'm referring to when THEY think it is something independently and THEY get it wrong.

you getting moose and deej mixed up again funky ?

moose won't be happy :D

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 16th, '10, 08:45
by deej
billinom8s wrote:
Funky wrote:I agree with that moose, but I'm referring to when THEY think it is something independently and THEY get it wrong.

you getting moose and deej mixed up again funky ?

moose won't be happy :D
that was what i thought

detox and diet for me then :wink: :wink: :lol: :lol:

its easy for us to sit here and criticisie,THEY are still only as good as the information given, they will have made their decisions on what info is given to them in the first place,same as when doctors misdiagnose,is it their fault or the patients for not describing it correctly in medical terms :?:

repiv if you knew it had been stood for a while and had the manual to hand why didnt you check the spare key/immobilizer before ringing the workshop :?:

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 16th, '10, 11:58
by Funky
deej wrote:
its easy for us to sit here and criticisie,THEY are still only as good as the information given, they will have made their decisions on what info is given to them in the first place,same as when doctors misdiagnose,is it their fault or the patients for not describing it correctly in medical terms :?:

repiv if you knew it had been stood for a while and had the manual to hand why didnt you check the spare key/immobilizer before ringing the workshop :?:

If a doctor does a mis-diagnosis he is to blame. Thats why they're one of the most commonly sued groups. It's really more about knowledge basis...

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 16th, '10, 14:55
by jam
Their liability takes over as soon as the bike is in their possession, and ends when you take it off their forecourt. As for incorrect diagnosis, they sound pretty lax in their approach to me, I usually try to get as much information from the owner as I can, although to be fair some owners have very little technical understanding and can confuse the issue. If a bike with an alarm/immobiliser will not start then the first thing to do is to check that along with any spare transponders/keys etc and then rule that out. If it is an aftermarket alarm/immobiliser then there is unlikely to be a specific fault code for that as there are so many on the market it doesn't become cost effective to build this facility into the ECU. To be honest electrical problems are often the hardest and most time consuming to diagnose correctly, shops are reluctant to swap expensive components over to see if one is as fault as the same components can easily be rendered useless. Many manufacturers will not accept returns on electrical components for this very reason. You have been bitten so next time you'll know to try the other fob etc before taking it to a dealer/shop etc. Unfortunately that's life and shit happens, it may be the dealer at fault but unless you recorded the condition of the bike with him when it was collected you have very little chance of winning the argument.

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 16th, '10, 16:53
by Sixth Gear
So it wasn't BikeWorx, so that leaves Bridge, SP, Greenlane, Speed, or CMS :wink: I'm not sure if they all do repairs?

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 17th, '10, 01:12
by Funky
Got to listen to the Oracle that is Jam on this one.

Just chalk it up to experience mate. We've all been there.

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 17th, '10, 11:22
by billinom8s
Sixth Gear wrote:So it wasn't BikeWorx, so that leaves Bridge, SP, Greenlane, Speed, or CMS :wink: I'm not sure if they all do repairs?

don't start a witch hunt andy - leave it alone now

Re: Is this reasonable?

Posted: Apr 20th, '10, 20:54
by MacGyver
Yeah, I'll make sure to check the key next time!