The comparison may sound a little incongruous, but I must say that authorized automobile service centres are like private hospitals. They make every effort to jack up your bill through unwarranted services and procedures.
After utilizing the first few free services offered by the manufacturer, you get ready for the paid service and hand over your car to the company’s authorized service station. The manufacturer’s manual tells you the maintenance requirements and their website gives you a rough estimate of how much it costs. However, when you get the bill, you realize that it is two to three times the costing given by the manufacturer. When you protest, you are told that the company’s website from which you picked up the estimate is outdated!
A consumer recently complained about how he had specifically told the service centre that they should not go beyond what is prescribed by the manufacturer in the service manual. Yet, when he got the bill, there was an additional amount of ₹2000 for engine decarbonizing. He says he protested not only because it was not required –the car had done only 20,000 kms- but also because it had not been authorized by him, but eventually paid up.
In fact there are many complaints about service centres undertaking (or claiming) engine decarbonization - a process to remove carbon deposits on the cylinder head, piston and other working components of the engine- when it’s not even required. In one case, the car had barely run 3,500 kms, yet the bill included decarbonization! Since there cannot be carbon deposits on the engine after such short run, the service centre obviously just added that in the bill!
{{/usCountry}}In fact there are many complaints about service centres undertaking (or claiming) engine decarbonization - a process to remove carbon deposits on the cylinder head, piston and other working components of the engine- when it’s not even required. In one case, the car had barely run 3,500 kms, yet the bill included decarbonization! Since there cannot be carbon deposits on the engine after such short run, the service centre obviously just added that in the bill!
{{/usCountry}}Like private hospitals that suggest unnecessary tests just to put to good use the diagnostic equipment that they have invested in, authorized service centres add wheel balancing to the work required to be carried out and charge a steep price for it. Here again, there are complaints of extracting payment for wheel balancing, without actually undertaking the work.
Another trick is to call the customer after she or he has left the car for servicing and say that the vehicle requires additional work not provided in the earlier estimate. Since most car owners are not automobile engineers and want their car to run without any trouble, they agree. Ironically, Covid is also being used by some service providers to their advantage- they blame the steep bill on the additional services required to get the car into order after a long spell of inactivity or low use!.
This kind of fleecing of consumers by authorized centres has to stop and that can only happen if automobile manufacturers exercise stringent control over them and not have a mutualistic relationship. This requires regular auditing of the work of authorized centres and it should include consumer feedback and also regular consumer surveys. Those who indulge in unfair practices should lose their authorization. Manufacturers in fact need to remember that they can also be held liable for the unfair trade practices of their authorized centres.
The service centers on their part, should respect the consumer’s right to information, informed choice and maintain complete transparency in respect of their work and billing. In this age of digital communication, it does not take much effort to Whatsapp a picture of the part being changed or a service being undertaken, to the customer. Returning the replaced parts is also a must.. So also an independent customer complaint redress system.
I am not aware of consumers going to consumer court on some of these issues, but it’s time they did. In this context, I must refer to an interesting case quoted in the Australian consumer magazine-Choice, about a service centre found guilty of making false representation to the consumer and fined $ 5000. The service centre had told the customer, who had taken his car for servicing, that it required new break pads and discs at a cost of $798. A subsequent independent inspection of the vehicle found both unnecessary!