Garage Surcharge on top of initial quote

e30_1989

I recently purchased a vehicle that has a known gearbox fault - since then I've been shopping for quotes to have it repaired/replaced.

This weekend I decided to with the company I felt was the best deal for me, I explained the full issue, that gear 2 was shot I don't know the ins and outs of the mechanics of it, but I expect the company who's primary business focus is transmisson to have a good idea.

The way they work is replace your gearbox with a pre-refurbished unit they have in stock. They hold onto your old one - as with most part exchanges for things like starter motors, etc.

They quoted me £1195 for the gearbox and £275 for the clutch. once they collected the car and taken it to their workshop the other side of London I receive a call the next day and he describes the condition of my old gearbox after his lengthy explanation he then tells me that because of it I have to pay a surcharge of £595.

At this stage I refused as I was not made aware of any additional costs. He shortly knocked £200 off the surcharge. After still refusing he listens to the initial call and lets me hear it through the phone, to which the guy final piece included something along the lines of 'damaged gears can incur extra cost' I then said 'ok cheers bye' and the call ended.

They are additionally holding me again their terms & conditions on section 8.
8. All units must be service exchange or surcharge may apply.

To me that term reads like this; The old gearbox is to be taken by the company as a service exchange, in the event I do not service exchange the old unit, a surcharge will then be applicable.
Nowhere in their terms does it state surcharges are applicable based on condition of old units or for that mastter, any additional costs other than when you do not exchange your old gearbox - I strongly feel that I was held to ransom as they told me I had to pay ~£400 to get the car back without any work being done.

They have agreed I pay half upfront and the remaining once I have tested the car upon delivery.

I would like to know where I stand with this surcharge, do I have any rights to not pay it, and where I would stand if I were to simply only pay the initial quotation without the surcharge upon delivery? (It's all bank transfer)

I hope this is in the correct section of the website, apologies if not and I'll happily move it.

AdrianC

A surcharge on a recon unit, if the core is unusable, is absolutely industry-standard.
Why wouldn't it be? The entire recon industry relies on cores for rebuild...

Their term 8 might not be well-worded, but to me (understanding that basic fact) it reads as stating it. Better wording would be "in a rebuildable condition" or similar - "servicable for exchange", perhaps.

And the recording of your phone call does indeed seem to confirm that that was explained to you. If you'd not understood that, then the time for clarification was then.

dogshome

Name the supplier

As AdrianC has posted, firms that offer a re-conditioned part in exchange for your broken one, will usually have a clause that covers them if your old part is mashed beyond repair.

However
As the company is always judge & jury as to the state of the item they are given, it is an opportunity for the less than honest trader, and to my mind though a gearbox is a heavy item, £400 for return carriage raises question marks - Put the name of the company into the public domain and see the responses from other customers

DoaM

Hopefully this isn't Engine Engineering in Paisley?

e30_1989

'The Transmission People' is the company.

I've also asked for photographic proof of the damage they claim to be present I've also asked to be given the old clutch as this was done based on their recommendation.

In response to AdrianC:

Whilst I understand now what I was told on the phone, I felt, based on the sheer speed he reeled off his final piece, it was a deliberate attempt to baffle me with information I wouldn't be able to process in full. I obviously didn't, otherwise I wouldn't be at this predicament.

There is no transparency on additional costs on their website or terms. Calling me up saying I owe X amount based on the word of chap I've never met without any supporting proof is obviously going to be questioned.

As far as I'm aware, they have said the gearbox is reconditionable, they have said that the surcharge is to cover their cost to recondition. Am I not right in thinking that when you service exchange parts you do not pay extra costs based on its condition so the manufacturer can refurb it? I've never heard of someone being charged extra for a starter motor, for example, that was 'damaged'. It's the whole reason the part is being replaced, you just get a refund once the old is sent back

esmerobbo

What did they say was the reason for the gearbox being scrap?

It would have to be a part that is not subject to wear. Which in a gearbox isn't much. basically the only none wearing part is the casing. Anything else in the gearbox would be classed as a wearable item, which would need to be replaced if it was below working tolerances for a gearbox to be reconditioned.

What car is it?

loskie

if they dont reimburse you for the old gearbox. Get it back from them. Even if it is of no use to you, If they arent willing to pay for it....

e30_1989

It's being classed as scrap because gear 2 is worn with chipped teeth and the rear housing is supposedly cracked due to that wear.

It's a 3.0 TDI A5.

Preferably I'd take the gearbox back, however I can only imagine that I'd be charged an even larger surcharge for that. It's also a giant box so unlikely to fit in the boot or collect without a van.

AdrianC

So whereas a rebuild would normally replace wear components like bearings and syncros, the gearset is damaged beyond reuse and so is the housing. It's not suitable for an exchange core - hence the surcharge.

Taking the box back is not going to happen, because it's already gone to the reconditioner, who've then stripped it for investigation and found the internal damage - then refused to credit the core charge.

e30_1989

That's fair enough, as long as it's the normal procedure I'm happy to accept it.

Only thing that is of concern now is that I specifically requested photographic proof of the damage they claim to be present. I've chased for it 4 times now and keep being told the workshop is aware.

The car is ~80 miles away in a workshop I've never seen as the car was collected by one of the employees.

Car is due back to me tomorrow. I'm obviously unlikely to see the car and old box in person as it's so far away. It seems somewhat easy for the garage to just claim there is damage that incurs extra costs without any proof.

Where would I stand if they fail to provide this proof?

AdrianC

e30_1989 wrote: »

Only thing that is of concern now is that I specifically requested photographic proof of the damage they claim to be present. I've chased for it 4 times now and keep being told the workshop is aware.

The garage aren't the ones who have stripped your old box down.
They merely removed it, fitted the recon, put your old one back in the box and shipped it back to the reconditioner.

What will some photos prove, anyway? There's absolutely no way you'll know if it's your box or not even if you do get some pictures of some knackered gears.

Where would I stand if they fail to provide this proof?

It doesn't affect the validity of the bill one iota.