Right-to-Repair Law is Right On

[PaleMelanesian]

Bill would eliminate dealers' proprietary diagnostic tools, making them available to independent shops.

Chuck Squatriglia - Wired - May 21, 2009

Competition is a good thing for the customer. I hope this bill goes through. -- Ed.

Computers play an increasingly important role under the hood of our cars, which can make repairing your ride a nightmare. Troubleshooting and repairing problems requires specialized equipment and - more importantly - diagnostic codes that automakers jealously protect. That means you’re usually stuck going to a dealership and paying through the nose for repairs.

Congress wants to change that.

The Right-to-Repair Act would allow independent repair shops to compete for business that currently goes only to franchises and dealer-approved establishments. The bipartisan bill, introduced in the House of Representatives, would drastically increase the number of shops that could service late-model vehicles and make those repairs significantly cheaper.

By limiting the number of shops that can service your car, dealers drive up the cost to owners of those vehicles by 34 percent, according to a study Lang Research conducted for the Automotive After Market Industry Association. The study found consumers pay $11.7 billion in excess costs annually.

That is unacceptable. [Read More]

[Kacey Green]

As long as this doesn't interfere with the ability of the franchised shops to provided the level of care I was promised when the vehicle was sold to me (never mind that I've sold myself 3/5 of my cars)

This last software update was nice, but if this makes Honda or Toyota reluctant to make improvements it sounds creepy, if it just increases competition and allows me to get more X-Gauges on my SGII then I'm all for it.

[PaleMelanesian]

I see your concern there. If they (manufacturers / dealer shops) answer this by not doing any repairs instead of sharing secrets, that could be a bad thing. Hmmm...

[JusBringIt]

shop manuals. put them on the market. Diagnostic tools, put them on the market too.

[ALS]

I gave my tech a call yesterday to update him something and he said thank god I thought you were calling saying the car had broken down. I asked why? He said I don't have a single place to put the car. His parents, his sister, his techs all have customer cars parked in their driveways. He is getting slammed and he has no idea where all these people are coming from. They just show up and say hi can you fix my car. He has been at work for four days straight working until 2-3 am fixing cars. He sleeps in the office until his mechanics get in and pops home to get breakfast and a shower. He is hoping he can catch up over the weekend with Monday being a holiday. Lucky for him we have a wholesale parts warehouse that is open 24 hours. His dad is a regular up there at midnight picking up parts for him.

[Kacey Green]

True, selling the tools could make them some extra money, that and the subscription for the updates to the computer based tools. Also the training fees.

[msantos]

Such a law would have to be crafted carefully since the tools alone are not a guarantee the job will be done safely and correctly. Most independent and even some smaller shops can probably afford the tools, but can they afford the training? Heck, even some dealers cannot afford that and look at the unsavory results and botched jobs. Adding more to that frugal pool of mediocrity is the last thing some of us need.

Frankly, I don't really care about the tools as those can be rushed from most distribution centers, but you cannot always rush technical proficiency when you've got an advanced platform sitting on bay 5 and its owner fuming for a few extra days.

The way I see it, "experience" still plays a very important role but as it is been proven over the last 10 years, technical proficiency (or lack of) can be the real deal breaker.

Can a small shop be held liable for a job that was performed improperly? If not, is the manufacturer going to be held liable? I can see the manufacturer stepping up to the plate when a failed job was performed by qualified technicians, but will the manufacturer be forced to do the same when Joe mechanic did not receive the right training because his independent boss wanted to undercut the prices of the nearest dealer at all costs?

If they address these issues as well as several others I did not mention then I would welcome the much needed competition, but it better be accompanied with minimal standards of adequacy that small and independent shops MUST meet. And that includes frequent and up-to-date training that will at least match the quality of service the average dealer provides today.

Cheers;

MSantos

[Kacey Green]

Well said as usual Manuel.

[JusBringIt]

I believe that customers generally go to the dealership throughout the warranty period. Not all of them do, but a wide majority.

I suspect that once the cars are out of warranty(usually the car gets traded quite quickly), owners generally by that time either knows a local mechanic, heard a good thing or two, and brings the car into their local mechanic. For the few who bring their brand new cars to a local mechanic for servicing, some are either told that they don't have the ability to fix that car, or they may be the few who run into some trouble because the local mechanic doesn't have the necessary tools, (physical and mental/technical).

A shop that would work on a car the technicians aren't really qualified to work on I suspect are those with low business volume.

[ALS]

I know around me with the dealers once the car is out of warranty the customer is never seen again unless the local mechanic can't fix the problem. So with the longer warranties the dealer is seeing the cars for a longer period before the customer bails for a local shop.