Oh dear. Kwik-Fit took a mauling from BBC Watchdog last night. As Annie put it, for their dishonesty and negligence. After the disappointing Which? garage findings so recently isn’t it time that the bad businesses are named and shamed so that trusting motorists can favour the honourable ones and not be put at risk and overcharged in this way? Surely this is a ‘super complaint’ moment for the OFT to finally take regulatory action on behalf of consumers?

Admittedly the Kwik-Fit screened sample was small – 3 rip off instances at Kwik-Fit Reading, Southend and Hastings but with a further 10 branches which failed to service one car correctly between them.

Understandably Kwik-Fit’s response is robust and impressive; their nationwide garage business is under threat.

But the garage industry won’t sympathise with them because for years this is what Kwik-Fit has done and we all have our stories to tell. To this day they still owe FOXY for the manifold we sourced for them to fit to one of our members’ cars (needed as a result of their brute force to an exhaust repair). We dealt with HQ and their Area Manager; I haven’t forgotten how unprofessional they were and they didn’t pay us despite saying they would. Their card was marked indelibly as it is for many women when a business behaves as badly as this one.

But no surprises for the Kwik-Fit hierarchy surely because their staff are incentivised to sell motorists products and services (inevitably things they don’t always need, want to buy or get, as per Watchdog’s findings) to supplement modest income. What did the top jollies (and other national chains who also pay commission) expect was happening on the shop floor?

I must admit I was surprised to see Kwik-Fit staff completing ATA training requiring them to sign the IMI Code of Conduct – a commitment to the highest level of ethical behaviour. I was hopeful of a renaissance of course but ethical behaviour and tempting commission to prop up income aren’t natural bedfellows in my book. This may well be the case with Kwik-Fit Reading, listed as an ATA employer, who charged Joanne £650 for safety brake repairs for her Mitsubishi when none were necessary. And she nearly paid as many will do. Granted they sent her £250 in vouchers but would you want to go back to a dishonest business? I’d much rather spread the word via women drivers within FOXY Lady Drivers Club .

After the Which? garage investigation this is yet another nail in the garage industry coffin of self regulation – it hasn’t worked for the last 60 years, once again it’s supported by the franchised dealers but not the garages that need it most… Why would a new service and repair code work now when it hasn’t previously? Ipso facto.

And the reason it doesn’t work? Because of what we saw last night – endemic dishonesty and shoddy workmanship in the motor industry. Tinkering at the edges of this industry isn’t enough – we need regulation so our cars are safer, we need to outlaw the cowboys to give the garage industry an ethical image to be proud of and then hopefully the mediocre businesses will either pull their socks up or pack up and go.

Let’s get real about garage services and sort it out for the trusting motorists who don’t read good garage guides or watch BBC Watchdog perhaps.  The time is surely now.

FOXY Steph

I have just received a shocking email titled ’14 million UK motorists feel ripped off by their garage’ from Motor Codes who organise the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code. They have 6200 subscribers of which the lion share (>70%) are franchised dealerships.

I now realise that their research turns out to be based on 1194 motorists which they have extrapolated, for headline reasons perhaps, to suggest that over 14 million motorists ‘feel short changed by their local service and repair garage’.

On reflection whilst this is probably a highly misleading statistic no matter the qualifying asterisks in the Press Release if we assume that this is a sufficiently representative sample to be meaningful in any way, then the following findings are very worrying on their own:

• Almost half of UK motorists (45%) feel they have been ripped off by garages (allegedly representing some 14,063,614 motorists).
• UK motorists feel out of pocket to the tune of an estimated £2.4 billion
• Young drivers are hit hardest with 41% of 16-24 year olds feeling ripped off by local garages to the tune of £51 – £150… which could be explained if they ended up in dealerships without realising they are more expensive than garages of course – whose fault would that be?
• Some 30% of motorists aged 25-34 and over 55 were dissatisfied with their local garage
• Over a quarter of all motorists who felt ripped off believed they paid between £51 and £150 more than they needed to… which could be explained if they ended up in dealerships without realising they are more expensive than garages of course – whose fault would that be?
• 5% of motorists felt they had been ripped off to the tune of more than £300.
• Those who felt more than £500 out of pocket claimed to be on average £1,408 worse off following their latest service.
• The East feels the pinch the most where a third of motorists claimed to have been short changed, compared to just 17% of motorists in Northern Ireland.

If anything was to convince me that there is a case for regulating the UK garage industry, this research is surely it and may prove to be the tipping point for the likes of the Office of Fair Trading who will surely see that this is a quality hurdle too great for any Code of Practice to tackle, unless it’s compulsory…

Not serious at all according to Motor Codes however –  instead they think  it’s time to launch an upbeat Golden Garage competition using £16,000 prize money to reward the really good garages out there (and there are many, see the female friendly FOXY Choice website if you are in any doubt…).  Whereas I feel it’s time (and has been for some 50 years) to rid the industry of the really bad garages so that motorists can look forward to paying value for money prices for measurably good garage services in future, having understood the difference between dealership and garage standards and prices so they can choose the solution to suit them, their car and the occasion.

If that means regulation then so be it.

What I’d really like to know is the strategy behind this garage competition and how it will help outlaw the really bad garages who are as likely to cut safety corners to cut their costs as they are to rip off motorists.

Surely an industry scheme MUST DO MORE to ostracize those garages and dealerships that could be putting lives at risk and are certainly harming the image of this industry…

Yet by concentrating on good garages, Motor Codes seems intent on ignoring the cowboys.

FOXY Steph

Does the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code/garage market itself to women and encourage them to pay over the odds in car dealerships? Yes I think it does.

For starters the Motor Codes website,  blog and recent press releases state….

“Don’t risk a rip-off, you can trust a Motor Codes garage.”

“Consumers, why go anywhere else? Don’t risk a rip off, look for the logo and have confidence in your choice of garage by using the Garage Finder facility on the Motor Codes website.”

[Click here to find out] ‘How the Service and Repair Code solves your cowboy garage concerns….’

“Franchised and independent garages who subscribe to the Code surely have the edge over those that don’t – or won’t.”

“Businesses that commit to the Code are demonstrating their willingness to provide consistent levels of customer satisfaction and the more that subscribe, the easier it is for consumers to find the good guys.”

Yet these marketing statements, intended to influence men and women drivers alike are misleading because…

1   the likes of the ATA, BSI Kitemark and OFT approved Stage Two schemes operated by Bosch Car Service and VBRA are higher standards than the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code

2   the majority of manufacturers expect higher service and repair standards of workmanship from their franchised dealers than the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code states

3   only a small percentage of subscribers to the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code have been inspected (142 compliance checks in Q1 2009 gives you an idea of how many of the 5500 subscribers have been vetted during the full year…) so this is an EXTREMELY CHEAP promotion at just £75 a year for any business to get on the quality bandwagon and claim to be better than others without having to prove anything…

4   most of the businesses listed (iro 80% I estimate, probably more) are franchised car dealerships. Check out your nearest town via the Motor Codes website for starters. Is it a coincidence that this scheme is run by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders who exist to represent the best interests of the main manufacturers? How can they put the best interests of motorists first (but someone must)…

5   female motorists on a budget (ie most of us in a recession) choosing a Motor Codes subscriber are likely to feel tricked into paying more than we need to because the website suggests Motor Code subscribers are better…

For example and as at today…

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Glasgow only 2 out of 50 are independent garages…

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Newcastle upon Tyne only 1 out of 42 businesses is an independent garage

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Manchester only 3 out of 33 are independents

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Birmingham only 3 out of 35 are independents

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in London only 6 out of 46 are independents

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Shoreham-by-Sea (my nearest town in Sussex) only 3 out of 33 are independents

If you wanted to choose a Motor Codes subscriber in Exeter only 2 out of 23 are independents

and so on…it’s the same skew across the UK. Draw your own conclusions.

As I see it, this means that many men and women drivers, choosing a Motor Codes subscriber (as a result of lavish marketing budgets) could end up paying over the odds in car dealerships without realising they could have had an informed choice of a good independent garage…

AND that the majority of Motor Codes subscribers have neither had a welcome visit or a Compliance Check yet. The fact is that these subscribers don’t have to be good garages, they just have to say they are.

If it was me and I found this out, I’d feel cheated by the very industry and OFT- backed code that is promising me and other women drivers like me better car servicing, MOT and repair value for money services.

And isn’t this the very reputation that the motor industry wishes to change – for overcharging motorists?

Undoubtedly manufacturers jumped on board because Ford signed up first and told its dealers to subscribe a year ago… but I remain amazed that so many manufacturers ever thought that their authorised dealers needed to subscribe to such a basic Motor Code… have they read it?  Their dealers MUST have been doing more than this in the aftersales department…

Of course I support attempts to raise standards in the motor industry, but this code is not the salve to all garage problems yet. It isn’t ready for consumer marketing and it could mislead and increase industry complaints not reduce them as it set out to do.

And many, many garages and dealerships are offering much higher and female friendly standards  – let’s set the quality bar much higher in future.

FOXY Steph

According to a survey carried out by Lloyds TSB’s Insurance Services www.insurance.co.uk comparison site some 50% of motorists, including women, believe that they have been ripped off by car mechanics. Allegedly these ‘scams’ cost the nation £8 billion in overcharged, unnecessary or poor quality work, claims the poll.

We aren’t told what sort of garages or where they are. Nor is there any mention of road safety implications when buying cheap and from a garage you don’t know.

A third of car owners questioned believe they have paid £100 more than they should have done for the car to be serviced while 1 in 2 estimate that they have been overcharged a massive £500.

A total of 12% say their bills have been stretched by an additional £1,000, but 3% put the figure at £3,000.

Asked if they felt they had been cheated by a mechanic, 48% of those polled said they had. I read this in the Daily Telegraph last week.

Forgive my cynicism (I am feeling sad for Kevin and my fellow Geordie fans tonight) but I find this sort of sensational reporting a tad hard to believe when there’s a total absence of support data.

I have racked my brains to think of people I know who would know what they should have paid and then paid £500 more…

Of course you could take your life in your hands, take a chance on an unknown back street garage and shave a £100 off a standard servicing bill but £500 – I am at a loss to figure that one.

And who are the c200 idiots claiming to have paid £1000 over the odds and a further 60, allegedly, who paid £3000 more than was necessary?

Probably an opportunity to plug the new Motor Industry Code of Practice. At least their subscribers sign up to ‘open and transparent prices’ and ‘invoices that match quoted prices’. It’s a start.

Failing that, a plug for FOXY Choice because businesses listed there have all signed our FOXY Promise which includes the statement ‘we will never knowingly overcharge, patronise or sell our customers services they neither need or want’.

Of course this won’t stop dealerships charging more than independents to reflect their overheads and amenities, much as Waitrose and M&S do compared to Tesco and Asda, but somehow we female shoppers seem to know what to expect.

Perhaps the motor trade can do more to help motorists understand the pricing differences too?

Why is it that good news rarely makes the news?

Which reminds me about Kevin and the certainty of another year without a trophy…

FOXY Steph