Bike Forums - LBS dilemma.

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Road Cycling (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/)

- - LBS dilemma. (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/1116199-lbs-dilemma.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by u235 (Post 19750179)

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.

We can argue until the swallows return to Capistrano, but we can't know the details that this turns on.

With the obviously broken fork, it might not have been possible to test ride the bike and diagnose what else, if anything, might be wrong.

So, to say someone is at fault for failing to do what's not possible is asking an awful lot.

If we apply your standard to medicine, then we'd be saying that doctors don't get paid unless the patient is cured, or that surgeons don't get oaid if the patient dies on the table.

Information isn't perfect, sometimes you don't or can't know everything, and have to act based on the knowledge available at the time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by noodle soup (Post 19749074)

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

Not much of an err but I could have had foresight and said, don't cut the tube. In the future I will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 19749485)

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.

That's not how the 41 works.:deadhorse2:

Quote:

Originally Posted by surgeonstone (Post 19750348)

Not much of an err but I could have had foresight and said, don't cut the tube. In the future I will.

The shop should have known not to cut the fork, until after they determined that it was the only problem.

Now let's see a photo of the Crumpton frameset. What year was it made?

Quote:

Originally Posted by noodle soup (Post 19750847)

The shop should have known not to cut the fork, until after they determined that it was the only problem.

Now let's see a photo of the Crumpton frameset. What year was it made?

2007. I'll get one on when I can figure how to upload onto Flickr then to here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by surgeonstone (Post 19752099)

2007. I'll get one on when I can figure how to upload onto Flickr then to here.

Does it look like this?

http://i33.tinypic.com/2mnmbs7.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by noodle soup (Post 19752263)

Does it look like

http://i33.tinypic.com/2mnmbs7.jpg

Yes but a darker more purple red.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maartendc (Post 19746474)

Well, if the fork is broken, fine. But I read here they took the frame to a "carbon fiber specialist", presumably to get it scanned.

If a customer came into a shop with a CF bike that had some kind of horrific crash, I would have the carbon fiber specialist scan the frame FIRST, BEFORE attempting to make any repairs. If the fork is horribly broken, chances are that some other damage, potentially not visible with the naked eye, was sustained to the frame as well.

They could have foreseen that if the frame was cracked too, you would have to consider the bike a total loss, and hence not need the fork replaced.

Poor judgement on their part I think, for rushing to fix part of the problem without getting all the facts in first. They should eat the cost of the fork for their mistake.

Let me put it this way: I do computer repairs. If I know that a catastrophic power surge has fried some of the computer components, I would FIRST test each component individually for damage. I would not replace the hard drive, just to find out that the motherboard has been fried as well, and then charge my client for the hard drive anyway, because I can't sell it as 'new' anymore.

This is what I was going to say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 19746476)

That's not comparable. Imagine that a car comes in with a cracked engine mount. Your people weld the bracket and replace the mount. Then when the car is road tested you found that one of the wheel A-frames is also cracked. The owner says the cost of repairing both is more than the car is worth, and decides to scrap it.

Are you entitled to get paid for what you did, which was in fact a legitimate repair?

It is really not like that at all. If the car was in a horrible crash and the mechanic noticed a cracked engine mount, replaced it, and then noticed the car frame was also cracked would be a closer analogy. It happens all of the time and the shops inspect every nook and cranny prior to replacing parts. Yes they miss some things, but they do not replace parts on a car which is totaled.