I got a workshop appointment at short notice before Christmas from Autohaus Martin. Reason, missing control voltage on the radio. The appointment as well as the error automatic was made by phone. Based on my error description, I was told that a component was probably defective and this would have to be ordered first. On the day of the appointment, I handed the vehicle over to the workshop, which wanted to replace the "defective" part, but upon closer inspection determined that the component to be replaced was OK. So everything was reassembled and an invoice was written for the work involved. I left the dealership and and wrote the customer service representative a few days later, after the error case was eliminated elsewhere, an e-mail, in which I expressed my displeasure about the course of the repair and asked for feedback, happened for a long time nothing, until I got on 12.day a call from the said customer service representative, in which I was asked for a personal interview.
It turned out that my error diagnosis was misinterpreted and therefore the component should be ordered and replaced. Due to the "only component exchange" I got the appointment at short notice. Also the delayed feedback was due to the fact that I reported with my name but not with the name of the invoice recipient. Last but not least, 12 days had passed between the mail and the reply, but only 5 working days.
The result of the discussion was that the invoice would be credited to me and that they regretted the course of events.
My problem is to give a really objective evaluation about this incident. The negative part was caused by coincidence, timing and misjudgement, but in the end it had a positive outcome. So I am left with a "thumbs up" rating in the end.
In any case, it teaches me to discuss repairs personally with the responsible employee to rule out misdiagnosis.
Show original
Translation
