Con artists - "Approved Garages"

Joe_Horner

hucker wrote: »

I'll believe my search result, not yours. ROFL, you claim it's in a 1988 traffic act. I doubt that very much. Almost every garage fitted customer parts 10 years ago.

I've just hand fed you a direct link to the exact wording of the law on the official website of UK law. So you'll believe "your search results" over the official record of what the law says?

Dear God!!!

Then the law should go after the people selling the substandard parts.

The law can and does also go after them, but they're generally a lot harder to track down because they tend to be mail order and often outside this country.

Although, technically, if you supply a part which the garage fits, which turns out to be sub standard, the law COULD "go after" you for supplying it to the garage.

That might almost be worth it in this case!

50% of cars have badly designed dazzling headlights anyway. Ever since LEDs were invented, and before that those xenon BMW things, they've been way way brighter than the standard 55/65W that used to be law.

No, all legal car headlights when correctly fitted, maintained, and adjusted avoid dazzle. On the other hand, when some bright spark fits some non-approved, over power, bulb with iffy filament design all bets are off.

Similarly, if you fit aftermarket xenon without leveling or washers, or fail to keep the lenses clean or the leveling working, on OEM fit ones, dazzle will result.
[/quote]

Spoilsport.

Yes.

So we agree on something.

Joe_Horner

hucker wrote: »

We already had our own vehicle laws. We don't need the EU ones.

"Our" vehicle laws effectively stopped developing independently in the late '70s / early '80s.

If you want to go back to needing one rear view mirror, no rear seat belts, no airbags, no ABS and so on then fine, but good luck finding a manufacturer willing to make such a thing when their production is entirely geared up to meeting the (almost universal except for America) EU standards. Oh, and if you do find one then be prepared to pay for your bespoke spec!

See, that's one of the side benefits of common standards - it keeps prices down by simplifying production.

System

hucker wrote: »

The only reason the garage won't fit my parts is so they can overcharge me for theirs.

No, it is because inevitably it ends up either being the wrong part or a cheap one which fails and in either case the customer doesn't want to pay the labour involved in removing the wrong one or fitting a replacement one when the cheap Chinese crap they got from Ebay doesn't work.

hucker wrote: »

There is no law stating a garage cannot fit customer parts, only that the garage can be held responsible if it fails (and when does that ever happen?).

No they can't be held responsible and its people like you who try to which has made many of them make the decision when you supply them crap, it fails and you expect them to replace it for free labour. And despite your belief they do fail quite often because they're either cheap "compatible" or fakes.

hucker

What I was told by the rip off group "approved garages" was "All are garages are covered under block exemption legislation and this provides full back up on any manufactuer warranty issues should they occur." So it's to do with warranties, not law.

There's no reason we can't leave the EU instantly. Anything else is our government !!!!!footing around.

Nobody knows what the law is. Everybody has a different interpretation. And since I can easily find several garages that will fit my own parts without question, either the law isn't known by a lot of people, or nobody cares. Requiring certain parts from certain manufacturers stinks of bribery. What we're ending up with is the smaller garages now charging as much as the mainstream ones. Ripoff Britain here we come.

Most garages don't even know what fails an MOT. Farmers actually failed my car last year because the boot wouldn't open, yet this year they said that wasn't part of the test. Same garage, different rules!

All you have to do is drive around and look at cars coming the other way. Half of them are about 3 times brighter than the others. There is no way 50% of cars have dodgily fitted headlights. The law has completely failed on this. As for them being on during the day, oh my god! If you can't see a car coming towards you in broad daylight, you shouldn't be driving. Adding lights simply causes a distraction. Yet another EU screwup.

I'd love to go back to not needing seatbelts and ABS. My last car had no ABS, and passed the MOT. My current car failed because it had a faulty ABS sensor. Clearly both cars had no functioning ABS, yet one passes and one doesn't. Absolute nonsense!

System

Quite clearly you don't know what the hell you're talking about as your seatbelt comment illustrates.

hucker

Tarambor wrote: »

No, it is because inevitably it ends up either being the wrong part or a cheap one which fails and in either case the customer doesn't want to pay the labour involved in removing the wrong one or fitting a replacement one when the cheap Chinese crap they got from Ebay doesn't work.

No they can't be held responsible and its people like you who try to which has made many of them make the decision when you supply them crap, it fails and you expect them to replace it for free labour. And despite your belief they do fail quite often because they're either cheap "compatible" or fakes.

People like me do not blame the garage when the part fails, I blame the seller of the part. I've never had a problem with my own parts being fitted. Not one single part failed.

I find it quite amusing that I come onto a forum called "money saving expert" and all I find are people trying to waste money. I suspect you're all garage owners who are trying to defend your cowboy practices.

hucker

Tarambor wrote: »

Quite clearly you don't know what the hell you're talking about especially with your seatbelt comment.

Just what is it you don't like about my seatbelt comment? A quote from a policeman who once stopped me for not wearing one - "At the end of the day you're only endangering yourself". The law should never EVER protect me from myself. It's to protect people from OTHER people.

Mercdriver

This is the most entertaining thread in a while. I haven't seen as much bullcarp spoken by an OP in some time.

hucker

Mercdriver wrote: »

This is the most entertaining thread in a while. I haven't seen as much bullcarp spoken by an OP in some time.

What are you doing on a money saving forum if you're happy paying cowboy garages extra cash for no reason?

Mercdriver

hucker wrote: »

Just what is it you don't like about my seatbelt comment? A quote from a policeman who once stopped me for not wearing one - "At the end of the day you're only endangering yourself". The law should never EVER protect me from myself. It's to protect people from OTHER people.

What about when you are in the rear of the car? You could kill the person sat in front of you.

You seem to want to have your own set of laws. That isn't how society works, thank God.