Friction at the muffler shop

[Stuart]

I took my car to a local muffler shop to have a broken muffler hanger re-welded. (The car was hit hard by a hit-and-run driver, and our insurance declined responsibility.)

This is a trivial job if you have a welding rig. (I don't.)

Two men spent ten minutes working on the car. From what I saw, they did an adequate job. However, I was presented with a bill listing US$40 for parts (an exhaust tip), and US$475 for labor. (Total: US$515.)

If ten minutes is worth $475, that's over US$2800 per hour, rather steep, even for the pricey Silicon Valley. Even if the shop has a "minimum one hour" policy, that's still outrageous.

A few comments from the proprietor suggested that he didn't approve of my clothing (knee-length skirt, black hose, boots, turtleneck).

I questioned the $475 charge for labor, saying "that's really stiff." The proprietor said it was much cheaper than a new exhaust system from the manufacturer (true, if beside the point).

Not wanting to leave the car, I gave them a credit card and signed for the $515. I have since inquired with the credit card company about disputing the charge; they've agreed to look into it. I'll also file a complaint with the State of California Bureau of Automotive Repair.

Did I handle this correctly? Should I have done something different? Has anyone else had a similar experience?

I'll note that I consider myself an accomplished shade-tree mechanic, and I'm very certain I was grossly overcharged. I was expecting a bill between US$20 and US$100.

stuart

[Pleats]

Repair work should always start with an estimate of the cost. If the job looks like it will exceed the estimated price a good shop will notify you of additional charges before they get too far into the job especially if you are at the shop waiting. Without an estimate you are at their mercy as the work has been completed. The price they charged sounds excessive to me. I think they were taking advantage of you possibly because of the way you were dressed.

[skirted_in_SF]

Repair work should always start with an estimate of the cost. If the job looks like it will exceed the estimated price a good shop will notify you of additional charges before they get too far into the job especially if you are at the shop waiting. Without an estimate you are at their mercy as the work has been completed. The price they charged sounds excessive to me. I think they were taking advantage of you possibly because of the way you were dressed.

Actually, I believe in California the law requires a written estimate. I seem to recall wording to that effect at the bottom of my last work order. The Bureau of Automotive Repair might help if they're not the usual toothless state agency.

[Sarongman]

Here in Australia we have so called current affairs programmes that would love to take a couple of "in yer face" reporters and a cameraman and splash that garage and it's billing onto the television screens locally---and they would make Oprah's treatment of Lance Armstrong look like playschool. Think he deserves it? Sometimes the electronic gutter press can be useful.

[crfriend]

I had precisely the same job done on my car back in 2008, it took about 15 minutes and came to the princely sum of (US)$85. This, accounting for inflation, would now come to slightly over a hundred -- but certainly nowhere near $515!

In this writer's opinion, you got shafted. The correct response is to dispute the charge and file a complaint with the authorities. Getting the car out and clear was a good idea. I'll bet you won't be doing business there anytime again soon!

[Brad]

Let's address the part of Stuart's post which is how he was dressed at the time. One of the many reasons that I get wimpy about skirting in public is that I won't be taken seriously if I need to be. If I had a fender bender on the road and I'm wearing a skirt, will the police officer believe my story and take me seriously? Will parents with small children who see me in a skirt grab their child's arm and hold them a little closer as I walk by? These are legitimate concerns in the real world. There is often an unfortunate presumption in our society (at least in the US) that all males are potentially perverted and evil. Most criminals are men. I know men who would be very good as elementary teachers or other jobs involvng contact with children but have trouble getting jobs until they "prove" that they're not potential child molesters. It's hard to believe that in 2013 schools still have the same gender imbalance of teachers as they did decades ago. While women have become doctors and lawyers, I don't see more male teachers. Add skirts to this equation and society gets really nutty. I truly believe that this repair shop assessed Stuart's outfit and thought that they had an easy mark to take advantage of.

[crfriend]

I truly believe that this repair shop assessed Stuart's outfit and thought that they had an easy mark to take advantage of.

The acid test of this would be to have somebody go to the same shop, bringing in the same problem, and dressed as a "standard bloke". Then find out what he paid for the job.

There was quite a bit that went wrong in this situation, and Stuart did the best he could to make the best of it. Refusing to pay the charge would have left the vehicle in the posession of the mechanic as, under law, mechanics have a lien on a vehicle they have worked on until the bill is paid; the only way to take possession of the vehicle was for Stuart to pay the bill. He is now free to use the credit-card company as a lever on what certainly appeared to be an unreasonable bill.

Another thing that went wrong is that an estimate was neither given nor received for the work involved. Had I been quoted 500 bucks for that job I would have politely said, "Thank you, have a nice day." and taken the job elsewhere. Quite likely upon hearing that, the mechanic would have changed his tune (or maybe not, but if not it's his loss).

Did Stuart's attire make him look like a "mark"? Perhaps. This, however, does not excuse what happened, and since money changed hands there is now a vastly stronger case against the mechanic in question, if, for nothing else, questionable ethics and failure to provide an estimate. The latter is for the State to decide following a formal complaint and investigation; the former will then be for the mechanic to contemplate on his own time following the hassle from the State and the potential fine involved (which likely would be much more than 400-odd bucks).

[Zorba]

From everything I hear, the Ca State BAR is someone the average mechanic does NOT want breathing down his neck...

[Sinned]

My wife has been a partner in a small garage and MOT testing station and I would agree that you have been well and truly cleaned out. Our garage would have charged about £50 for the welding plus parts and VAT. Not having seen the work I'll be generous to the garage and say about £100 tops. If this was part of a larger job such as service and repairs then it may not have been charged at all and "lost" in charges for the other work. If we had tried to rip off a customer like you had just been then a complaint to the local Trading Standards would have probably meant a visit from them and the side effect of a visit from the MOT inspectors with a possible loss of MOT trading. Consumer protection laws can be pretty strict in England. Just not worth it for a few hundred quid. You would be right to pursue this through whatever Trading Standards agencies you have in your country. Also we have TV reporters associated with consumer issues programs ( such as Dom Littlewood ) who love to go after overcharging issues such as this especially with trades where overcharging can be a problem with unscrupulous people damaging the reputation of the majority honest and good ( garages, plumbers, builders etc ).

[couyalair]

... we have TV reporters associated with consumer issues programs ...

That would be really good, going on national tv in a skirt to show you can stand up to the cheats in trousers!
-- and winning, of course.

Martin

[renesm1]

I'm sure there are some quite stringent discrimination laws enacted within the state of California. Check with an attorney for better advice!

[skirtingtheissue]

Did this happen at an independent local garage or a nationally known muffler chain (Midas, etc.)? If the latter, there might be a national office you could call to report the problem.

Getting an estimate first is a must, and if necessary more than one estimate.

And yes, technicians can base their behavior on the customer's appearance. I've advised my daughters to ask certain questions to car mechanics (such as May I have the worn/broken parts back after you replace them?) because of the stereotyped perception that girls may not know much about cars. And what environment is more macho than an auto repair facility?

[skirted_in_SF]

I've advised my daughters to ask certain questions to car mechanics (such as May I have the worn/broken parts back after you replace them?) because of the stereotyped perception that girls may not know much about cars.

Good idea and a yes answer is required under California law

And what environment is more macho than an auto repair facility?

Depends on where you live. I understand there are women owned and operated auto repair shops here in SF.

[Stuart]

Thanks to all for all the sympathetic comments. Here is the rest of the story.

I contacted the California Bureau of Auto Repair (CA BAR). The BAR rep called and got my side of the story, and then visited the shop. BAR negotiated a new, lower price for the services I received: US$100. IMHO that's right at the boundary between "reasonable" and "unreasonable." BAR called me and I agreed to it.

Since I had paid with a credit card, I watched my card statement for a refund (US$415). None arrived. After a month or two, I called BAR and inquired; the BAR rep drove right out to check for me. BAR called me back to say that the shop had repudiated their agreement, and no refund would be forthcoming. BAR told me that they couldn't give me a copy of their case files, but if I filed a claim in Small Claims Court, the court could subpoena those case files. BAR hinted that those files would be helpful in establishing my case against the shop. BAR made it clear that they had already done everything they could do for me.

Before filing in Small Claims Court, I called my credit card company. They listened to me whine for a long while, took notes, and promised to look into the matter. Apparently the usual policy in these matters is to refund the customer's money until the merchant/shop shows the customer is in the wrong. After a month went by, I called the credit card company to inquire.

The credit card company told me they agreed that I had been mistreated, and if the shop neglected to appeal, the refund would be permanent as of 2013may23.

I apologize to the members of this forum for neglecting to finish this story promptly.

In answer to a posted question, the shop is a family business, established 1965. I went there because they did some work on my wife's car a few years ago, and she was well-treated (and their bill was much less than I expected). Alas, the father who serviced my wife's car retired, and I was dealing with his son.

Anyway, now I have an ethical question to resolve: Should I return to the shop and give them the previously-agreed US$100 ?

stuart

[Sinned]

How much was the refund for? If it was the full $515 then it all depends whether the credit card company claim the charge back from the garage. If they don't ( and for a small amount they might not ) then to offer them another $100 would be adding insult to injury. If they do then I would leave it to the garage to contact you to claim the $100. If they don't then put it down towards the expenses of phone calls etc. I presume that you won't be using that garage again since how could you trust them not to treat you like that again? If they do claim the $100 then pay by cash - in cents!!!! And get a receipt signed in blood and preferably not your own. If you only got $415 back then the $100 is already taken care of. There's no ethics involved in this decision really - just common sense. After all they upset you by trying to rip you off so why should you worry about their feelings?

In England the credit card company is jointly liable with the retailer for the supply of goods so generally if there's no joy with the retailer then the credit card company will generally refund automatically providing the complaint is justified.