It is often said that comebacks and repeat repairs can be blamed purely on the complexity of modern vehicles. However, despite the increasing complexity of modern vehicles, the fact is that there is much that we, both workshop owners and technicians, can do to reduce the incidence of comebacks, if we cannot eliminate them altogether. Dealing with comebacks is without doubt one of the most unpleasant aspects of our jobs, so in this article, we will discuss various ways and means of reducing comebacks and their hugely negative effects on us and our customers, starting with this question-
In this writer’s experience, there are two types of comebacks and /or repeat repairs. The first type is those that often happen through no fault of ours, such as the result of parts failures, while the second type is those that are largely preventable, and it is on the latter type that this article will focus.
As a practical matter, comebacks are expensive in terms of both time and money lost, and while it is always tempting to blame someone else (the technician that worked on the vehicle, for instance) for the screw-up, the fact is that many, if not most comebacks are the direct result of failures on the part of management. Let us look at some of the mistakes we make as managers, and other reasons why comebacks occur-
As technicians, we often forget two very important things. The first is that customers know their vehicles better than anyone else does, and the second is that customers always have certain expectations when they bring their vehicles to us to have them repaired. Moreover, while the average customer may not always understand the technical underpinnings of what makes their vehicles run, they are almost always very quick to recognise that something does not “feel right”, and they expect us to fix it right the first time, and it is on this point that we sometimes drop the ball.
Customers do not always know what exactly it is that does not “feel right”. In some cases, it may be an annoying noise that not everyone can hear, while in other cases, it may be an odd vibration that only occurs under certain operating conditions- conditions that for various reasons, we cannot always replicate during our first contact with the customer.
The biggest mistake we, including service advisors/writers, can make in these cases is to say to a customer “Don’t worry, we’ll take a look and let you know what we find”. This is a sure recipe for a comeback, so what the service advisor should do is to test-drive the vehicle himself until the problem manifests itself, or, he should ask a technician, workshop supervisor, or another knowledgeable person to engage with the customer in an effort to identify the actual issue with the vehicle.
The object of this exercise is to identify and define the problem clearly in order to satisfy the customer’s expectations that the issue will be resolved quickly and definitively. Put simply, we cannot fix issues that are not clearly defined on the one hand, nor can we fix issues and problems that we think the customer is complaining about, on the other.
An excellent example of this type of misunderstanding occurred in this writer’s own workshop a few years ago during an exceptionally busy time. Here is what happened-
A new customer that had just moved into the area brought his vehicle in for us to identify and possibly repair a weird “knocking-type of sound” sound in his engine that varied with engine speed. The customer was also at some pains to point out that he knew less than nothing about cars, but since we came highly recommended, he thought he’d take the chance to drive the few blocks to the workshop; thus, the engine was cold when he presented his vehicle.
Long story short; the technician I had assigned the job to had identified a dry/damaged/worn drive belt as the cause of the issue, and accordingly applied a coat of belt dressing as an interim cure until we could replace the belt in a couple of days. The belt dressing made the “knocking” sound go away, and the customer left happy in the assumed knowledge that his vehicle was in good hands.
Long story shorter; the next day the previously happy customer had his vehicle delivered to us on the back of a recovery truck, his vehicle having suffered a catastrophic engine failure. Investigation revealed a disintegrated water pump, and during an extremely difficult conversation with the customer, it emerged that the engine had begun over heating at about the same time that the “knocking” noise first appeared.
Moral of the story? We had failed to meet the customer’s expectations; he expected us to identify the real cause of the problem, and to fix it definitively.
This very unpleasant situation could have been avoided had the right questions been asked on the one hand, and had proper diagnostic procedures been followed, on the other. The proper questions would have been about the history of the vehicle; such as had the engine over heated before (given that a presumed damaged drive belt was driving the water pump), and was the vehicle losing engine coolant?
In terms of diagnostics, the drive belt should have been removed for inspection, and all the pulleys and ancillary equipment, including idler pulleys and tensioners should have been checked for mechanical damage. Had this been done, the defective water pump would have been identified as the cause of the “knocking-type of sound”. It would also have been found that the damaged water pump had damaged the drive belt as a result of the pump’s pulley being slightly out of alignment with the other pulleys.
This particular comeback was the result of a misdiagnosis that was made while the responsible technician was under severe pressure, and while this can never justify a mistake of this magnitude, it is understandable that the technician was reluctant to spend more time on this vehicle than was absolutely necessary, given the time constraints he was facing at the time.
While there is no shame in not knowing something, it is incumbent upon us as workshop owners/managers to equip ourselves, and our technical staff with as much technical information about new vehicles and their control systems as we possibly can.
However, this is often easier said than done for independent operators, but then again, there are many excellent online resources, such as discussion forums for professionals that can be used to both obtain and share technical information. Similarly, there are many online resources that publish technical service bulletins, recall notices, and even the results of investigations into safety and reliability issues for almost any make of vehicle on the roads today.
Given the above, there is really no way to justify comebacks and/or repeat repairs on the grounds of “I did not know this, that, or the next thing about this vehicle”. While surfing the internet may not teach us everything we need to know about everything, the fact is that many comebacks can be prevented simply by Googling an obscure fault code or other issue that may not be common on a particular vehicle make and/or model.
The image above represents a typical situation that can benefit from effective management, in the sense that a technician or mechanic should never be allowed to handle a difficult situation by himself.
This image can be interpreted in two ways; either the customer is unhappy about an explanation of her concerns by the technician, or, the customer is unhappy about the fact that despite having received an explanation of the issue before work started, she is now back with the original problem still unresolved.
The sad fact is that many mechanics in many workshops all over the country are often reluctant to ask for advice and/or guidance on complex diagnostic issues because they fear being looked upon as being inexperienced, unprofessional, or not capable of doing their jobs. All effective workshop owners or managers however, will recognise that nobody knows everything about everything, and will therefore encourage mechanics and technicians to ask for second, or even third opinions from colleagues if they are not sure about something.
This writer can list any number of examples of comebacks and repeat repairs that were the direct result of technicians thinking they were doing the right thing, when in fact, they should have asked for guidance, or recommended referring the vehicle to the dealership or to a specialist repairer. However, such a list of examples would be pointless, since we can all recount such instances- even though we all wish they had never occurred.
While all well-managed workshops have systems in place to ensure that all repair work is carried out professionally, it often happens that the verification of repair work is not performed efficiently, or sometimes, not at all.
While we might be tempted at times to argue that if we as managers or workshop owners have to check and verify everything our employees do we might as well do the work ourselves, the fact is that if we don’t check everything, we are actually creating fertile ground for comebacks and repeat repairs.
Of course, the above is not saying that all mechanics and technicians are incompetent hacks: far from it, but the fact is that mechanics are human and therefore honest mistakes, misunderstandings, and miscommunications will happen- and especially when your staff is under pressure during exceptionally busy times.
Therefore, in this writers’ experience, the best way to avoid mistakes that have the potential to become comebacks is either to-
The cost of such an appointment or preventive measure should be weighed against the cost of time lost working on comebacks, the loss of revenue when customers take their business elsewhere, and the costs that customers sometimes incur when they have to bring a vehicle back for repeat repairs of the original problem- costs you might have to reimburse.
When you do this calculation, you will wonder why you never appointed a dedicated quality inspector long ago.
Failure of replacement parts forms a significant percentage of legitimate comebacks, but only using OEM parts or aftermarket parts that are known to meet OEM specifications will largely prevent comebacks that result from parts failures.
However, as we all know, many customers not only complain about the high cost of high quality parts; many customers also often supply their own parts of uncertain provenance, which, if they are used, often results in unhappiness for all involved.
The use of substandard parts that are supplied by customers is a tricky issue that has to be approached with a great deal of circumspection. The trade off is usually the loss of that customers’ business when you refuse to install such parts, but this should always be weighed against potential liability issues should damage or injury result from the use of substandard parts.
Use your best judgment when you encounter this kind of issue, but keep in mind the fact that successfully avoiding a comeback, repeat repairs, and the general unpleasantness of these types of situations is always worth more than the amount the customer would have paid you to fit the substandard parts that he supplied.
While a comeback is upsetting to everyone involved, there is no point in getting angry, pointing fingers, or threatening a technician with dismissal, and especially not in the presence of an already upset customer, or worse, other staff members.
Ranting and raving is the surest way to both destroy your staff’s morale and to lose a customer. Instead, obtain as much information about the problem from the customer as you can, and review the matter with the responsible technician in a calm and rational manner. Remember, no technician starts a repair job with the intention of screwing it up, but chances are that you do not have all the facts, and the problem may not even have been the technician’s fault- however much the irate customer may want this to be the case.
You may discover several things during this review process, which must include all relevant details about the job- from the time the customer arrived, to the way the customer was assisted, the manner in which his concerns were recorded, as well as what the technician did to diagnose and fix the problem. During this discussion, you may discover one or more of the following issues-
The customer’s concern may not have been defined clearly
While we all know that this happens often, the pertinent issue should be about who is at fault. Did the service advisor/writer gather enough information about the issue from the customer; was the vehicle test-driven, and if so, was it possible to replicate the problem? Again, if so, was the problem clearly expressed on the work order?
The obvious solution to this kind of problem is to review, and if necessary, to adapt the way service advisors/writers engage with clients when they gather information about a customer’s concerns. If necessary, your front-office staff should engage senior technical staff in these critically important discussions as a means to avoid misunderstandings, or simply to clarify technical issues for clients who may not know how their vehicles work, or what may be required to fix the problem in terms of both time and costs.
The technician did not understand the instructions
This writer once experienced an issue with an instruction on a work order that simply stated, “Check engine over heating”. This kind of wording on work orders is ambiguous at best and confusing at worst and should therefore not be tolerated in a well-managed workshop, since in this particular case, the work order did not state under which conditions, and to what degree the engine tended to overheat.
As it turned out, the technician sought clarification on the issue before a comeback, or worse, damage to the customer’s vehicle could have resulted, but the point is that instructions on work orders must be clear, complete, to the point, and without any ambiguities that could be misinterpreted by technical staff.
The customer pulled the “Since you...” swindle
While the vast majority of customers are honest, decent, and upstanding people, there are always a few that are less so on all counts. These people will always try to get something for nothing and one of their favourite swindles is to complain that “Since you guys did “X” to my car a week ago, this, that, and/or the other thing no longer works as it used to”.
We have all had such customers, and their claims are sometimes very difficult to disprove in the absence of incomplete records of all the faults that existed on their vehicles at the time “X” was performed. Thus, the only reliable way not to be scammed in this way is to have all the technicians in the workshop record all the obvious and visible mechanical faults, defects, and abnormalities on the work order when they perform a pre-diagnostic check and/or a test drive on all vehicles- no exceptions allowed.
It is also a good idea to record all dents, scratches, flaws, and abnormalities in the paintwork and glass, as well as the condition of the tyres. This does take some time, but the advantage of having a complete record of the condition of a vehicle is that it prevents comebacks on spurious grounds, which can take more time to refute than it takes to compile a record of a vehicles’ condition in the first place.
This article does not pretend to be the final word on the fine art of preventing comebacks altogether, but if it can add one more point to the general discussion, it would be this-
Comebacks will always be with us, but having said that, there is no point in getting hung up on the possibility that one could happen to you today, or tomorrow, or next week. If it happens, handle the situation calmly, rationally, and intelligently: identify the root cause of the problem, formulate a suitable remedial strategy, implement it, and move on with your life.
