Right to Repair Bill Proposed! LOVELY!

[Excaliber]

I started out at a Ford dealership, went to Chrysler as the years rolled by, never was a GM guy. The Corvette "sports car" thing always left me baffled and I couldn't help but snicker... My real career was in electronics/computers eventually as I left wrenching behind in due time.

"Back in the day" when electronics were first coming out, "Joe" didn't have a chance at competing with the big three. A diagnostic machine was 10 grand for instance, not to mention there was no way you could get decent information on the latest technology. Even WHILE I worked at Ford and Chrysler I knew the game was rigged, it wasn't right what they were doing to "Joe". Even if he bought the 10 grand diagnostic tool it was hell to use it, to get any decent information, changes were coming SO fast and still are. The factory had "Joe" by the balls, end of story.

Level the playing field, it's way past due! Heck look at Toyota, they got ONE lap top in the whole USA to read their "black box" after an accident? That info is super secret? WHY? Man, that is pathetic! Perhaps that is the very reason this new law is gaining support!

[Ralphy]

This bridge has already been crossed once some years back I thought.

Ralphy

[ou812545]

This is indeed an interesting topic.
As a consumer I clearly see why this legislation makes sense. I own a couple newer model European cars and I feel that I really don't have a choice as to who can service them. I feel that I'm locked into the dealers. I'm not always happy with the service levels or price at the dealers. I have no other real options and the dealers know this.
I see this as a step towards promoting more competition and if the dealers want to compete they will need to provide better value through service and price like everyone else.

[Double Venom]

Ultra prime example:
Wife's 97 Mountaineer developed serious engine problems. Ford Dealership estimate to repair $2,800.00 and up. I posted an add on Craigslist for an ASE certified Ford mechanic. A Ford MASTER Tech. responded, looked at the car. Estimated it at the same Ford service/repair hours, cut that in half, cut the parts costs in half. Then billed for actual time. (Now I did supply the shop and all necessities for the repairs.) Total actual repair to me was right at $300.00.

AND the Master Tech said he made more money fixing it out of Ford that he would have made at the Dealership! (By the way the Tech turned out to be from the same Ford dealership I went to for the originals estimate!) All of this in the last 30 days.

Now if the bill in question demanded the repair, even long out of warranty, be made at Ford then I would see a serious problem!

[IKE]

I for one hope this becomes law. I have always bought a factory repair manual for every car I own. Recently the Infiniti dealer refused my request to purchase a factory service manual/cd for an 09 infiniti.

[Dangerous Doug]

Could this legislation have anything to do with Toyota being the only group capable of reading the Prius black box with all the reported acceleration problems?

Yeah, I think so.

DD

[torre44]

I have convex mirror on drivers side , maybe that would help you.

Posted yesterday:

I bought a new SPF from Keith Craft last week, SPF chassis 2895. SPF sold the roller to dealer Jim Creel in January 2009, Jim sold the roller to Keith two or three months ago, and Keith put in a small block 427 and tranny. I love the car. The engine performance in particular is breathtaking. I bought the car new, with less than 80 miles, all of which Keith put on the car after engine installation, making sure everything was perfect. Keith is a real talent and has been a delight to work with. Did I mention? The engine is bad ass (Dyno'ed 580 horsepower, 590 torque).

The outside driver's side mirror was mounted by SPF improperly. From the driver's seat, it reflects the pavement, and even when I loosen the screw and move the mirror up as far as it will go, it still aims too low. Not a big deal, but I figured, after paying $55,000 for a new car, I should get a mirror that works. It needs to be remounted to be functional. And, while this is a small issue, I want the comfort of knowing that SPF will take care of defects in the roller that it built.

So, I called SPF Friday of last week, spoke with Michael, said I had a minor warranty problem, described the mirror issue, and asked what I needed to do to get it resolved. Michael said I had no warranty, that SPF extends a twelve month warranty, and that it begins to run from the date the car is delivered to the dealer (in this case, January 2009), not the date the car is sold to the customer. I told him that seemed wrong and asked: So if you sell a car to a dealer who has it in inventory for twelve months and then sells it to a buyer, are you saying the buyer has no warranty? He said, Yes.

The seems absolutely wrong to me. If Ford sells a car to a dealer, who then later sells it to a customer, the warranty runs from the date of the sale to the customer, not from the date of the Ford sale to the dealer. Michael's position also seems inconsistent with the SPF written warranty that I received with this car, which says: "This warranty begins on the date that the vehicle is delivered to buyer or put into service by the seller as a demonstrator."

Again, I like the car. And the mirror is small ball stuff. But this is a bad start to a new relationship. I did my due diligence. All indications are that SPF has a good reputation. But Michael's position on the warranty issue is wrong. I want to like these people, to trust them, and to have confidence that they will stand behind their product and work. This puts a bad taste in mouth at the start of what I hope will be a long relationship.

Has anyone else tussled with SPF on this issue? Is SPF right and I am just missing something? Should I just forget about my relationship with SPF, pay for any repairs/adjustments for defects in the roller, and move on?[/quote]

[Great Asp]

Originally Posted by Woodz428

I think that you may be misreading it, if this is the complete text of the legislation. Using your example it didn't appear to me from what was posted that it would affect any "tricks" of the trade that you referenced. I know I have many,many tricks I have accumlated over 40+ years and freely share them...with whom I choose. they would have a tough time making me share anything that I don't wish to. I believe it is mainly aimed at repair info, as a Patent holder , I don't see how that would impact anything as far as patents go.
My interpretation,and I am extremely constitutional, is that it would prevent manufacturers of any item from being able to withhold info anyone that are not dealers. Since very few cars wind up in dealers after a year or so I can see where there may be an adjustment for a couple year period, but the problem I see is that the dealers themselves put sales ahead of service, so they need to clean up their act before they could attribute any loss of revenue on this legislation.
Now, from a purely observational point, I would think there are already some laws in effect that would cover this. It reminds me of the girl that hit a bicyclist(locally) while she was downloading ringtones... the police didn't even ticket her because there was no law that addressed that. I seemed to think wreckless driving would have been one. It seems to describe wreckless driving to a T.
I don't believe they can force any company to release the info for free and they may have a charge for some of that info. But if you are making money off of it then you should be willing to pay. Again, at some point the length of time that they can charge for that info should have a determined period, just like a Patent. Recall and update info is pretty easy to get in this area and I don't know how this would alter that.

I agree with Woodzie!

The dealer will always have the largest database of warranty and repair tips since it's their car. Most "non-dealers" that repair cars today charge something less than the dealer does. So there is already competition.

It would be hard for a single mechanic, or even a single independant repair center to be good at many brands. Even with the data in hand, experience still wins.

I am against the government getting involved, just more laws, more inforcement, more paperwork, more money.

E

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Dangerous Doug

Could this legislation have anything to do with Toyota being the only group capable of reading the Prius black box with all the reported acceleration problems?

Yeah, I think so.

As this situation is already prevalent and, as cars get more and more complex (computer-control of multiple powerplants, active suspension and steering, and even lighting and convenience features - my 2003 E500 was COMPLETELY controlled by three computers that failed frequently) the ability of non-factory mechanics to work on them, no matter how much experience and expensive test and repair hardware they have, will diminish.

There was a time when a competent mechanic could repair nearly any car based on experience and ability. We're well into an era where very specific tools and knowledge are required to fix major system components. Car manufacturers either have to fess up, in large print, at the time of sale that NO ONE except a factory service center will ever be able to work on the car, or share the necessary diagnosis and repair information with the entire trade. I'd be happy with either solution as long as the first one is meaningfully implemented and enforced.

Leaving buyers with the vague historical notion that "anyone can fix their car" only serves the manufacturers, who know better and profit from it without disclosing their special bias.

[Excaliber]

We have all kinds of "Government control" of monopolies, securities, bank regulations, investment regulations, the list is endless. And the list doesn't mean it's a "bad thing", it would be a nightmare of a market place without controls!

In this case I just don't see where the Guv is trying to "control" or "manipulate" an industry, it's opening up an industry to greater competition. Gunner makes a valid point, giving "Joes Garage" access to basic information about a product doesn't mean "Joe" will be able to compete.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Gunner makes a valid point, giving "Joes Garage" access to basic information about a product doesn't mean "Joe" will be able to compete.

Most Joe's will never be able to compete, they can't afford 10 to 20 grand diagnostic machines to maybe do a few cars a month and charge less than a dealer.........

One local garage invested in some of this equipment and he charges 1/2 what the local dealers charge, he says it's still not worth the expense he put out (even if he charged the same as a dealer) and his equipment doesn't do nearly all that a dealer's equipment does!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dealerships have the factorys behind them with the best and latest equipment, and their techs are specifically trained on this equipment for their brand auto..........

I don't believe the "average Joe" will ever be able to compete with them.......

David

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by DAVID GAGNARD

I don't believe the "average Joe" will ever be able to compete with them...

Possibly not; unless a shop specializes in one make and puts everything into that, it probably doesn't have the capital to invest in every machine that does every important job for every make.

But Joe is only one level. Joseph Garage Inc. is another... and a bigger operation might well have the money to stay equipped to compete with dealers.

It's not some sort of welfare program where Ford *has* to make Joe competitive. It's an open market where anyone competent and capable should be able to compete. Manufacturers hoarding essential diagnostic and repair data come very close to anti-trust violations. Fixing that only benefits the entire market.

[KM480]

There are all kinds of good reasons for some legislation like this.
For one thing, as someone that works in the emergency/rescue field we have had extreme difficulty getting car companies to give us the most necessary information about air bags, tensioning safety belts, side impact bars and the like. This is information that helps the fire departments extricate YOU and YOUR FAMLIY from a smashed car and helps us be safer. Profit and concern for proprietary design trumps those worthy concerns!

When I want to change the diff. gear oil or cabin filter in my newer car I would like the manufacturer to be required to tell me the type and grade of gear oil and so forth.

This would only help people that use this forum... think if hot rodders never got any factory information and spec... would we be using factory fuel injection and motors right out of new cars for some of our projects? I just watched a show where Troy Ladd of Hollywood Hot Rods was using the brand new 5.0 Ford motor for a street rod. Without a little factory insight it would never come together. This motor hasn't even been sold to the public yet.

When you freak out about GOVERNMENT CONTROL in favor of unregulated industrial giants all you do is trade one kind of control for another. A world in which CEO's of all the major corporations got everything they ever wanted would be a terrible society.

[Great Asp]

I can still perform most of the work on my F250 PS, or my wife's Edge, and I do not have anyone helping me besides the local auto parts place or my local Ford dealership where I bought the vehicles.

I am sick of new laws+bigger government=more taxes.

The OP started this off with Boxer's idea in California, hasn't California gotten tired of their state government writting checks that the tax payers have to back?

Today it's Joes Garage, tomorrow it's something else, and the day after there is another new emergency or an un-fair process that needs to be righted. All the time we walk further into tyranny.

A good example is the Amber Alert system in Missouri. Now including myself, who could be against protecting our children? Yet the system of electronic billboards goes widely unused for the purpose for which they were built. In St. Louis proper, they have only been used once, and that was a false alarm. Instead we get "You Drink, You Drive, You Loose", or the popular "Click-it, or Ticket" on the billboards. What do those cost? Now you can sign up to get Amber Alerts on your cell phone (I signed up on the first day), which costs almost nothing to operate. The billboards however...

But it seems like a good idea......

E

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Great Asp

I am sick of new laws+bigger government=more taxes.

The solution is fewer people making fewer demands. Contributed lately?

[Excaliber]

OK, let's put the hyperbole aside for a minute, I really don't understand the "rant" here about how Guv is intruding on the lives of citizens, raising taxes and creating unecessary laws with this bill. Frankly, I just don't get what the problem here is. Can someone explain it without going "all radical wing nut paranoid" in simple terms.

Here's what I see as the most important fundamental issue with this bill, "TSB's". Technical Service Bulletin's. As a professional wrench I used to live or die by those things! New TSB's are almost a constant flow from the factory to the field reporting on recent issues with a new car and proposed fixes. Now "Joe" can go down to the local Ford dealer and BUY those TSB's, at a reasonable price so he too can be up to speed on the latest info. Maybe he wants it for HIS own PERSONAL car in fact, rather than be held hostage by the dealership.

IF Toyota had made TSB's readily available, to the public, the current issues may have come to light a lot sooner than they did, with fewer deaths. Some of the TSB's are "junk", some are really important. Typically the service manager would appraise the mechanic of which ones were really important. "Joe" is on his own to figure that out, until he see's a news report about "unintended acelleration", then he might want to specifically request THAT TSB. The dealer can still screw him over though, play games, give Joe the wrong one, mess with him in general.

[Great Asp]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

OK, let's put the hyperbole aside for a minute, I really don't understand the "rant" here about how Guv is intruding on the lives of citizens, raising taxes and creating unecessary laws with this bill. Frankly, I just don't get what the problem here is. Can someone explain it without going "all radical wing nut paranoid" in simple terms.

Who you calling a radical wing nut?, ya moonbat!

"I really don't understand the "rant" here"

Then I can't explain it to you. I don't think it's a radical idea to keep government out of my life, and at the same time out of my wallet.

"Contributed lately?"

For the first time, yes.

E

[Excaliber]

Then I can't explain it to you.

Thats the answer this thread started with, some mysterious "decoder ring" like logic. Some conspiracy theory that can't be talked about in public. In other words, you don't know. Just a knee jerk reaction that "some how", "some way", "big Government" is doing something evil here. But ya'll can't quite put your finger on what it is...

Actually, that kind of reasoning comes very close to the clinical definition of "paranoia".

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Actually, that kind of reasoning comes very close to the clinical definition of "paranoia".

Says WHO?

[Great Asp]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

In other words, you don't know.

No, thanks for the second insult, but I am not going to argue with you.

E