goodwill vs empowerment

[Padams]

Does a service director/mgr have the authority under warranty empowerment to authorize repairs that are clearly not within the realm of warranty. The example is
our new service director authorized the warranty repair for fuel injectors that were rusted by contaiminated fuel. The vehicle was under the 3 /36 warranty. My take on this was that it was solely an AVM call not an inhouse dealer call. He stated that a service mgr empowrment was even over non warranty items. I countered and said so therefore if a customer comes in with a dent in a fender he could authorize it. he said no. I said then if the gas tank is full of full its the same. open for suggestions here

[ronc925c]

I think I am going to agree with you-only the manufacturer can make this decision.

My manufacturer specifically excludes contamination of fuel as the root cause of a component failure. Further, they define a goodwill claim as an extension of time or mileage for the original vehicle warranty. I read this as failure in defect or workmanship should exist that occurred after the expiration of the warranty period.

The contamination is the result of some one else's responsibilities. Although, hard to prove where the contamination occurred it is clearly not the manufacturer's responsibility under the warranty. Maybe this should have been directed to the customer's insurance company?

Ron

[robc]

I know of few manufacturers that allow service management to make non-warranty calls. GM is piloting a program that would allow a manager to do so, but that is very limited.

------------------
** Rob, Editor Dealersedge/WD&S **
Help is only a message post away!
robc@dealersedge.com

[fburrows]

I am not sure that this is as much a matter of covering a non-warranty repair as it is a matter of interpretation, since the vehicle is under the warranty period. You could make the argument that a properly designed and manufactured fuel system should not corrode during the first 3 years of operation. If this repair was in conjunction with a fuel system that was loaded with water or other contaminates and you had to remove the tank to clean everything out, replace the fuel pump, then the non warranty argument would be a lot more valid.

If the only issue was the injectors then I would make the argument that it was warranty since there is no way to assure when the contamination occurred. In other words it could have happened during manufacturer or on the dealers lot. I know that this is an aggressive position but you are supposed to give the customer the benefit of the doubt. I have done this many times and written notes to back up my position on the back of the repair order and survived lots of audits. I think it is the service managers responsibility to manage the warranty expense but also to be an advocate for the customer. Obviously you could take a CYA stand and let the rep make the decision.

Your mileage may vary!!


------------------
Frank Burrows ABS
fburrows@absdata.com

[FLAT]

Do the right thing for the customer,but on the repair order explain what you did and why it was done and state that it was a goodwill concern and not warranty defect even though it can still be under the 3/36 warranty it should state goodwill!!!! This is the way we are told by GM to handle these type of concerns!

[Fixedopsmgr]

I am a service manager in a VW store and have done my share of warranty repairs that maybe should have been considered non-warranty. My factory rep and I both believe that the customer must be informed that the the repair is being covered as a goodwill gesture one time only. Most customers appreciate it. In my mind the dealer needs to be able to take care of their customers (within reason).

[david byrne]

I might also offer the repair under warranty as a goodwill gesture for cust. satisfaction and I also agree with Frank.
I am a part of G.M.'s new pilot for "Goodwill Empowerment" and we really don't have any restrictions, we have the same authorization capabilities as an AVM.
And yes sometimes it is more of a policy adjustment than goodwill but as long as it is in the interest of cust. satisfaction / retention and you have a good story and documentation everything should be fine.

[robc]

See my problem with this is where exactly does GM tell you to handle claims like this? I am not being a jerk about it, but here's what I see happening all the time. The rep tells you to stop bothering him and make these decisions yourself. So you do. Then GM warranty specialist comes in and charges the claim back.

The point is, I know of no where - in writing - where GM gives anyone at the dealership level to cover a non-warranty repair.

Oh, and let's not get caught up in the "it might be warranty argument". Every manager knows how to write the ticket so it would be considered a warrantable failure. You can certainly lean in the customer's favor when the cause of failure isn't absolutely known. But in this case, the beginning statement was the damage was the result of contamination (I mean if the fuel tank had a split seam that allowed moisture to enter, then that would be a warrantable failure on the tank with resulting damage of the injectors.) Covering a non-warranty repair is beyond a dealer's authority level and requires the involvement of the factory.

------------------
** Rob, Editor Dealersedge/WD&S **
Help is only a message post away!
robc@dealersedge.com

[fburrows]

Rob:

In an ideal world there would be a factory rep available all the time but you can spend an eternity trying to track them down. I dont think it is possible to reduce every circumstance to writing. The second issue is the secret warranty problem that all the manufacturers have. The third issue is that the customer should not be hurt by the lack of clear instructions.

I have never been burned by sticking up for the customer and properly documenting the reasons for the decision. I have seen lots of repairs go down the tube for no documentation. A service manager will sometimes get second guessed on a call, at least I know my employees sometimes questioned my decisions.

The real issue is that if a dealership is going to take care of its customers then the service manager is going to have to stick his or her neck out once in a while and take an aggressive position. Every factory executive I have ever spoken with would back me up on this statement. I also understand that some rogue auditor can make some bad decisions but that is why they have supervisors and managers.


------------------
Frank Burrows ABS
fburrows@absdata.com

[robc]

That would be a great in a customer based world, but unfortunately I spend my most of my working hours fighting for exactly these types of situations for dealers. It is amazing how many times (much more often than not) the good buddy rep will suddenly have amnesia when it comes to their previous verbal instructions. Everyone is agreeable until there is a $100,000 audit result on the line. I am not saying that is going to happen to any more than one in thousand dealers - but just because you get away with it 999 times doesn't make it right by the factory's eyes.

The problem here is it isn't the service manager's neck that is being stuck out - it is the dealers.

If you do this you are operating off the book and you can't write "goodwill" on the ticket and make it all better.

Just as an example, I am working on today. Ford store - couldn't get Ford rentals 100% out of their Enterprise location - Ford rep said sure sneak one in every now again to "make customers happy". Sure enough - audit, absolutely off the rules, had written on every claim offered alternative rental for customer satisifaction, every rental chargeback - times eight (we're talking a full Ford audit here). The end result over $18,000 of the dealer's money gone.

------------------
** Rob, Editor Dealersedge/WD&S **
Help is only a message post away!
robc@dealersedge.com