This smells vaguely familiar.

So, just out of curiosity, was this before or after reading my post suggesting that solution?

Either way, I'm happy to hear that cooler heads prevailed.

Oh yea try Toyota. "We don't know if your computer is bad or the transmission is bad. You have to buy a computer to find out. No returns." Class action gave us refunds on two computers and paid for a new transmission.

+1 to you popeye. I was in San Diego last year when a friend had problems with his older Chevy truck conking out in a burger stand parking lot. He had it towed it to a nearby Chevy dealership for repairs. He got a $1,200 bill for the repairs which turned out to be a faulty starter relay. The shop took 3 days and installed several unneeded items before finally diagnosing it correctly. None of the unneeded parts were removed and replaced with the originals. I looked up a rebuilt starter on the website for a local auto chain store. It was about $85. Most starters take two bolts to remove. I haven't been into a dealership for repairs in a very long time and probably never will.

After, Hey- I'm teachable still.

I'll post on post build. It is stunning. A nude carbon fiber
With a translucent wine red color.

Glad I was able to help. Enjoy the new bike.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...LYbXcqdNMQYNHw

Fate is strange. I loved my Merlin, bought it in 2004. A few years ago someone here posted a pic of the exact same model and color and I was besotted by it. I lamented at my age (63), that I could never justify the cost. It was the same model and color, hell it might even be the same exact frame. So I wipe out, Merlin is toast, that day look on eBay as I really don't want to buy a total new bike and voila, frame for sale. Wine red translucent with cF fibers visable, very glossy finish and only the tiniest scratch on the lower posterior seat tube. Immaculate condition really quite hard to believe in a 2007 frame. http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/techns...list-number-3/

There is a difference between offering a product and offering a service. When you accept the offer of a service, invariably you are obliged to pay the associated expenses, regardless of whether you get what you were hoping for in the end. If the expenses are relatively high, as they were in this case, or unexpected (as they were not) the provider should confirm that the customer is willing to pay them first, but the way things went sounds totally reasonable to me. Disappointing at first, and a little peculiar, but reasonable in the end.

Not really sure about that one. If the service provided isn't what you contracted to receive, I'm pretty sure you aren't morally or legally obligated to pay.

But isn't the service to diagnose and fix the sound he heard?

In this case the guy gets an excuse to upgrade to the bike he has wanted for over a decade ... that's the end of the thread for me.

More or less, but in important ways. What's offered is ones time and expertise. If it turns out they are incompetent, you take your business elsewhere, and if they fail to exercise a reasonable standard of care and just make things worse you might have grounds to sue them. But I don't know anyone who would guarantee to fix anything they didn't make themselves without incurring any additional reimbursable expense. That would be way too risky - they'd have to charge exorbitant rates to cover all the unknown but otherwise unrecoverable costs. But a lot of people get the wrong idea because so many times when someone cannot repair something after spending time with it, they give away their service by not charging, or when the repair is simple they only charge for the cost of the materials. That's just generosity, or high overhead that you'll pay for in markups elsewhere. :)

Question is; exactly what was contracted? The classic example of paying for something you didn't want is the barber shop. You go in, asking for a haircut hoping that it will make you look good. He cuts your hair, but it turns out the style you asked for looks goofy on you. You still have to pay.

Agree with "what was contracted". I just had issue with invariably obliged to pay. In your haircut analogy, if you asked for a standard crew cut, but you got a Mohawk, you wouldn't be obligated to pay. We're on the same page.

Obviously Mechanics have cost. However, I think the point Ben is making is that to the extent the Mechanic is on salary, there is no variable cost attributable to this transaction.

Your argument here is actually the fallacy of sunk costs. The Mechanic's cost is already incurred whether he works on this bike or not ( and to the extent other repair work was not turned away there's not even an opportunity cost.)

Thus, there's a pretty good argument for not considering the Mechanic's pro rated salary in making the incremental decision of how best to extricate from this situation.

Of course in the long run if you don't account for the mechanics' cost you go out of business. But there's a decent argument that Ben is implicitly making that you don't let that sunk cost drive your decision here.

You might strengthen your economic analysis before calling people dumbasses.

Why are we assuming the mechanic is salaried? I would expect that to be an hourly position. In any case, I'd argue his costs aren't actually sunk; the owner recoups them via work orders, and in the case of new bikes, rolls the mechanic's cost into the sale price. On a per-job basis, though, the costs are very small - almost negligible in this case.

Well said, [MENTION=38651]merlinextraligh[/MENTION]t.

If you choose to debate with facts, that's fine. If you choose to debate with insults, that path isn't as wise. Be careful, [MENTION=175674]wheelreason[/MENTION].

If the mechanics are hourly and work a set schedule the costs are incurred regardless. So, there is no real cost to the company other than an opportunity cost for billable hours lost.

If the mechanics are paid based on actual work you might have a case for your argument, but your personal attacks invalidate it so you are wrong.

Lost in the mostly reasonable and sensible debate is the fact that the OP voluntarily took a financial hit in order to save his relationship with the LBS.

That business, whether it pays the mechanic in Unicorn pixie dust or some more conventional medium, is doing something pretty right.

In this instance, paying part seemed only fair. We both erred, we both learned, we both will conduct ourselves differently in the future, and we both value each other's position in this equation.

How did you err? The shop made the mistake in the diagnosis, and assumed that was the only issue.

As they say, "you can stop pumping once the water is flowing".

The OP and shop settled this to their mutual satisfaction, and there's nothing to be gained by sowing seeds of discontent now.

It's a business proposition to the LBS. You gave him another frameset to build up so he agreed to eat some of the cost of this issue but in the big scheme he's made his money.


Yeah, I don't get how you made a mistake.

Little picture/Big picture.

Maybe who was right or wrong is not as important as the ongoing relationship with the shop? Maybe the good will he has bought will pay off when he visits them periodically for the rest of his life? if they are the shop nearby where he feels the most comfortable (and quite obviously he values their services) The he Ciouykld have said "Screw you, eat the cost of your error!" but he would have been screwing himself.

As we all claim to know and believe, a long-term relationship with a reliable bike shop in your vicinity is a huge positive. There is no precise numerical value, no calculable dollar value, to put on that relationship. It could be anything from getting a call when someone wants the shop to sell a bike the guy would particularly like (he gets first right of refusal before it goes on the floor at a higher price;) it could be getting quietly moved to the head of the queue when he shows up for some unexpected repair and wants to go on a group ride in an hour; it could be the free repair, when he is standing there with his wallet in hand and the mechanic says, "Nah, forget it;" It could be the mechanic saying, "Yeah, while I was changing you brake pads I noticed the cables were pretty corroded, so i replaced them, and one of the pads had a little sliver of metal embedded in it which was sticking out and barely hitting your sidewall ... it had already cut about halfway through by the time I found it--so I threw another tire on there, we had one that was returned unused which we didn't want to put back on the shelf. No charge."

This guy thought it out, decided he wanted all that, and decided that the cost of that service was half the cost of the fork less the profit, he was good with that. Over time, it could very well turn out to be a tremendously wise investment.

Me, I''d have been loud, self-righteous, definitively Correct, and I would never have been able to go back to that shop.

You decide.

Totally disagree. A bike that was wrecked and taken in to be analyzed. They should not have assumed the fork was the only problem. They misdiagnosed the total problem. They found a bad fork and stopped diagnosing. They are a business, not a neighbor giving you advice or a helping hand. You are using their service because of the supposed expertise above and beyond advice you would get from you biking friend neighbor. That concept is what separates a professional business from a co-op or a buddy. Not much different than you taking it in with a flat tire and them not noticing the nail stuck in the tire or the rim strip is torn and it blows 10 minutes later.