Service Repair Order Filing

[andigold]

Does anyone know if GM still requires the repair orders to be filed by vin number? We always have a filing issue because we cannot file by repair order number, which is must easier and faster. I think the requirement was made before we had computers.

[robc]

If there was a simple yes or no answer we wouldn't be talking about GM. There are always ifs and buts with GM.

Here is the rule:

The dealer must maintain one complete and accurate vehicle history file to account for all vehicle service events (warranty, policy, transportation, pre-delivery, recall, customer pay, internal and body repairs, etc.) performed by the dealership. The history file can be in the form of:
a physical paper file that includes the shop copy of the repair order.
an electronic vehicle history as part of an electronic repair order system
optically scanned paper repair order copies

The vehicle history file is to be retained in sequence by the model year and last six positions of the VIN (physical paper) or have the ability to be accessed by VIN (electronic or scanned storage).

Ok, hold on that last part ... the ability to be accessed by VIN. If you can run a vehicle history report in your system that lists every R.O. generated for that vehicle then I don't see the problem. You'd be essentially constructing a history folder for the auditor/rep upon request.

GM auditors are gaining acceptance of RO sequenced filing over VIN. But not all of them feel that way and most reps don't either.

Can I stand up with confidence and assert that it is ok for dealers to file by RO sequence? Sure. Does that make me right in the eyes of an auditor? Maybe not. Remember an auditor is nearly autonomous to make this call.

That being said, I've never seen a chargeback because a dealership filed something wrong. As long as you could find the claim in a timely manner you should be fine. At worst you'll just tick-off the auditor/rep (who remember is the one who can chargeback real money) and they'll tell you to fix it.

If it were my store, I'd file by RO number, but run it by my rep first.

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

[This message has been edited by robc (edited 07-16-2002).]

[flyboy]

I find it hard to imagine why you would want to file by the ro number. True, if you only need one ro, it may prove itself faster, but what happens when you want to look at tech notes or the complete history of a vehicle?

Anyway, to answer your questin, the P&P manual, which I assume you have, states at Article 1.6.3 section a:

"The vehicle history file is to be retained in sequence by the model year and last 6 positions of the VIN (physical paper) or have the ability to be accessed by the VIN (elcetronic or scanned storage)."

[jazdale]

Flyboy,

Actually, there are several dealers that have/want/wish their service files in RO order. Most of which have tech terminals where there is no written story that needs to be duplicated by a booker. For this reason, the terminal used to access history will show all repair orders and all corresponding detail.
The sweetest part of all this is when you wish to purge files, you simple go to the oldest stack and pull them out in one big chunk. The whole process takes about 1 minute.

[wopigsooie@aol.com]

A key thing to remember is that there are 3 types of system. Paper system, Electronic, and Hybrid. In order to eliminate the VIN History file you must be using a totally electronic system. This means that you do not generate a document (RO) at time of write-up, and do not use paper at all. If you do create a document at time of write-up then the policy of a Paper VIN history applies.

[ssoper]

I was a GM Auditor and a Regional Service Manager in my former life.......
GM Reps more than auditors tend to argue that history files be kept by VIN - however on an electronic system..... first it would be dumb and second unreliable.....
If you point out that w/ electronic history you can't possibly remove an RO you don't want them to see and can pull by RO # with all supporting documentation faster than they could put the ROs in sequence, they generally quiet down.... especially if you remind them that P & P specifically states....... electronic history is acceptable. Occassionally you may even need to remind them that they are not allowed to "rewrite" GM policies