94 Toyota Corolla - question

Ray O wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>
> I find it difficult to believe that the idler pulley could be OK one day and
> toast 2 weeks later, although nothing is impossible. The thing that would
> make me wonder is that they first told you that they don't check the idler
> pulley as part of the timing belt replacement and then they tell you that
> they did check.
>
> Just curious, where is the dealership?[/color]

It's in NH. I asked my husband the same question about the idler pulley
and he said that he thinks that she meant initially that they don't
*replace* the idler pulley when they replace the belts when she said
they "don't usually do that", whatever "that" is. He also said
something about maybe it could be a different pulley - something to do
with the fan belts? Though if that's the case, then why was she talking
about the idler pulley and not the other one? I don't know. I'm
confused. I know nothing about cars so this is all very frustrating to
me.

I would love to see what was on the work order again, but my husband
left it in the glove compartment of the car, which we don't have...

N.

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:DV_jf.34$Qf5.23@trndny07...[color=blue]
> Ray O wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>
>> I find it difficult to believe that the idler pulley could be OK one day
>> and toast 2 weeks later, although nothing is impossible. The thing that
>> would make me wonder is that they first told you that they don't check
>> the idler pulley as part of the timing belt replacement and then they
>> tell you that they did check.
>>
>> Just curious, where is the dealership?[/color]
>
> It's in NH. I asked my husband the same question about the idler pulley
> and he said that he thinks that she meant initially that they don't
> *replace* the idler pulley when they replace the belts when she said they
> "don't usually do that", whatever "that" is. He also said something about
> maybe it could be a different pulley - something to do with the fan belts?
> Though if that's the case, then why was she talking about the idler pulley
> and not the other one? I don't know. I'm confused. I know nothing about
> cars so this is all very frustrating to me.
>
> I would love to see what was on the work order again, but my husband left
> it in the glove compartment of the car, which we don't have...
>
> N.[/color]

What town in NH? Except for dealerships that have opened or changed hands
since 1993, I've called on every dealership in NH.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Ray O wrote:

[color=blue]
>
> What town in NH? Except for dealerships that have opened or changed hands
> since 1993, I've called on every dealership in NH.[/color]


Keene - have you called on them?

N.

"Ray O" <rokigawa@tristarassociatesDOT.com> wrote:
snip[color=blue]
>
>I find it difficult to believe that the idler pulley could be OK one day and
>toast 2 weeks later, although nothing is impossible. The thing that would
>make me wonder is that they first told you that they don't check the idler
>pulley as part of the timing belt replacement and then they tell you that
>they did check.
>
>Just curious, where is the dealership?[/color]

Im with Ray and Bruce on this...you're being screwed, mind you,
the Service Manager 'might' make some concessions, (I agree with
Bruce's suggestions).

I think I know how you feel, I'm a quite mild person and hate to
make waves, but this case is pretty brassy I'd say so the SM may
indeed help you out...I'd certainly make a stink with their
management if nothing is done.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:bJ%jf.22$nt5.7@trndny05...[color=blue]
> Ray O wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> What town in NH? Except for dealerships that have opened or changed
>> hands since 1993, I've called on every dealership in NH.[/color]
>
>
> Keene - have you called on them?
>
> N.[/color]

I called on Toyota-Volvo of Keene on Route 12. At the time I called on
them, they were an excellent service dealership. It used to amaze me that
people would come in, toss the keys on the counter, and tell them to do
whatever it needed without asking for quotes beforehand because they knew
they could trust the service department. I never once heard of them ripping
off a customer. If it is the same owner and if the service advisor's name
is Paul, a tall, skinny guy, then they are giving you the straight scoop.

Tell them that Ray O, their first (and probably only) Japanese DSM, says hi!
:-)
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Ray O wrote:[color=blue]
>
> I called on Toyota-Volvo of Keene on Route 12. At the time I called on
> them, they were an excellent service dealership. It used to amaze me that
> people would come in, toss the keys on the counter, and tell them to do
> whatever it needed without asking for quotes beforehand because they knew
> they could trust the service department. I never once heard of them ripping
> off a customer. If it is the same owner and if the service advisor's name
> is Paul, a tall, skinny guy, then they are giving you the straight scoop.
>
> Tell them that Ray O, their first (and probably only) Japanese DSM, says hi!
> :-)[/color]


That's the dealership, but the service manager has changed in the last
year, I believe. Was Paul the northern European (Scandinavian or
something) guy? If so, then he's definitely not there anymore. The new
service manager is named Mike. The owner is the same.

Anyway - another update. They've agreed to cut the labour cost in half,
but everything else is full price, including the nearly $200 towing
bill. If they're cutting the labour in half, are they trying to work
things out with us even though they are not to be held responsible for
what happened to appease us or do you think that's an admission of
guilt, for lack of a better word? I've been going to them for over 8
years and I've always trusted their judgement - mostly because my car
hasn't needed much work at all until now with the belt issues.

N.

spamalicious wrote:
[color=blue]
> Anyway - another update. They've agreed to cut the labour cost in half,
> but everything else is full price, including the nearly $200 towing
> bill. If they're cutting the labour in half, are they trying to work
> things out with us even though they are not to be held responsible for
> what happened to appease us or do you think that's an admission of
> guilt, for lack of a better word? I've been going to them for over 8
> years and I've always trusted their judgement - mostly because my car
> hasn't needed much work at all until now with the belt issues.
>[/color]

ps. They said the car will be ready by tomorrow, but I think I'm going
to wait until Monday to call the regional Toyota corp. office just to be
on the safe side.

Thanks again!

N.

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:xi5kf.136$Yh2.67@trndny01...[color=blue]
> Ray O wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> I called on Toyota-Volvo of Keene on Route 12. At the time I called on
>> them, they were an excellent service dealership. It used to amaze me
>> that people would come in, toss the keys on the counter, and tell them to
>> do whatever it needed without asking for quotes beforehand because they
>> knew they could trust the service department. I never once heard of them
>> ripping off a customer. If it is the same owner and if the service
>> advisor's name is Paul, a tall, skinny guy, then they are giving you the
>> straight scoop.
>>
>> Tell them that Ray O, their first (and probably only) Japanese DSM, says
>> hi! :-)[/color]
>
>
> That's the dealership, but the service manager has changed in the last
> year, I believe. Was Paul the northern European (Scandinavian or
> something) guy? If so, then he's definitely not there anymore. The new
> service manager is named Mike. The owner is the same.[/color]

Paul was not a Scandinavian-looking guy. The owner that I dealt with's
last name is Fenton.
[color=blue]
>
> Anyway - another update. They've agreed to cut the labour cost in half,
> but everything else is full price, including the nearly $200 towing bill.
> If they're cutting the labour in half, are they trying to work things out
> with us even though they are not to be held responsible for what happened
> to appease us or do you think that's an admission of guilt, for lack of a
> better word? I've been going to them for over 8 years and I've always
> trusted their judgement - mostly because my car hasn't needed much work at
> all until now with the belt issues.
>
> N.[/color]

If it is the same owner, then I believe they are cutting the labor to keep
you as a customer and not as an admission of guilt. The guys I called on
were very honest and competent and I never had any problems with them, and
if it still the same guys, I know they wouldn't try to squirm out of
something they were responsible for, even though the circumstances looked
suspicious.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:nl5kf.137$Yh2.72@trndny01...[color=blue]
> spamalicious wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Anyway - another update. They've agreed to cut the labour cost in half,
>> but everything else is full price, including the nearly $200 towing bill.
>> If they're cutting the labour in half, are they trying to work things out
>> with us even though they are not to be held responsible for what happened
>> to appease us or do you think that's an admission of guilt, for lack of a
>> better word? I've been going to them for over 8 years and I've always
>> trusted their judgement - mostly because my car hasn't needed much work
>> at all until now with the belt issues.
>>[/color]
>
> ps. They said the car will be ready by tomorrow, but I think I'm going to
> wait until Monday to call the regional Toyota corp. office just to be on
> the safe side.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> N.[/color]

I forgot to mention that this transaction is between you and the dealership
so the regional office is not likely to get involved other than maybe as a
mediator . It doesn't really involve Toyota because you are not asking for
something to be covered under warranty.

Good luck!
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

Ray O wrote:

[color=blue]
> I forgot to mention that this transaction is between you and the dealership
> so the regional office is not likely to get involved other than maybe as a
> mediator . It doesn't really involve Toyota because you are not asking for
> something to be covered under warranty.
>
> Good luck![/color]

Darn - so then I don't have a leg to stand on? They did everything by
the book? We have to cough up the $500 for everything? That really
bites. :(

Thanks everyone for your help - you're a helpful bunch of guys!

N.

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Y_5kf.63$605.61@trndny09...[color=blue]
> Ray O wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>> I forgot to mention that this transaction is between you and the
>> dealership so the regional office is not likely to get involved other
>> than maybe as a mediator . It doesn't really involve Toyota because you
>> are not asking for something to be covered under warranty.
>>
>> Good luck![/color]
>
> Darn - so then I don't have a leg to stand on? They did everything by the
> book? We have to cough up the $500 for everything? That really bites.
> :(
>
> Thanks everyone for your help - you're a helpful bunch of guys!
>
> N.[/color]

Politely make your case with the service manager and explain why you think
they should see if they can help you out a little more. They are pretty
reasonable folks. Shouting and screaming and threats probably won't get you
anywhere.

--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply

spamalicious wrote:[color=blue]
> Ray O wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Politely make your case with the service manager and explain why you
>> think they should see if they can help you out a little more. They
>> are pretty reasonable folks. Shouting and screaming and threats
>> probably won't get you anywhere.
>>[/color]
>
> That's for sure. I've asked my husband to make the case that the
> tensioner shouldn't have seized so soon after being inspected if it had
> been inspected thoroughly. I hope that's a reasonable argument. The
> total will only come to just under $400 because of the towing - they had
> thought it was $100 more than it really was.
>
> Thank you once more.
>
> N.[/color]


ps. My husband went to pick up the car today - apparently he was
mistaken once again - it really was the idler pulley for the timing belt
that seized. They said that it was checked 2 weeks ago when the belts
were first replaced and it was okay then, however no note of this was
made on the work order/invoice when we checked it after claiming our
car. I've seen them write down before what they've done, but this time
there was nothing, only a summary of the charges.

The pulley was inspected, but 1.5 weeks later it craps out? She said
that if the car had for ex. only 60K on it and this issue happened, then
they would have been able to cover more of a cost on the labour.
However because of the age of the car and "everything's rusty under
there" (as she said) then they aren't willing to accept more fault or
guarantee how much longer the parts there now are going to last.

However, this then begs the question - because the car is old, was the
idler pulley/tensioner only checked very cursorily or why was it not
even replaced altogether given its age? If they had given us the
option to replace it initially and we refused, then I can understand
them not wanting to foot the cost of the parts and repairs. However, we
were never given the option. My 2 daughters and I waited in the waiting
room for 3+ hours the first time and not one service person came in to
update me on how things were going.

The service person said to call and talk to Mike, the service manager on
Monday, which I will do. Hopefully I'll be able to maintain my
composure when talking to him, lol.

Hopefully that will be the end, one way or another, of this saga of
mine. :)

N.

"spamalicious" <spamalicious@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:p1pkf.1783$Yh2.356@trndny01...[color=blue]
> spamalicious wrote:[color=green]
>> Ray O wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Politely make your case with the service manager and explain why you
>>> think they should see if they can help you out a little more. They are
>>> pretty reasonable folks. Shouting and screaming and threats probably
>>> won't get you anywhere.
>>>[/color]
>>
>> That's for sure. I've asked my husband to make the case that the
>> tensioner shouldn't have seized so soon after being inspected if it had
>> been inspected thoroughly. I hope that's a reasonable argument. The
>> total will only come to just under $400 because of the towing - they had
>> thought it was $100 more than it really was.
>>
>> Thank you once more.
>>
>> N.[/color]
>
>
> ps. My husband went to pick up the car today - apparently he was mistaken
> once again - it really was the idler pulley for the timing belt that
> seized. They said that it was checked 2 weeks ago when the belts were
> first replaced and it was okay then, however no note of this was made on
> the work order/invoice when we checked it after claiming our car. I've
> seen them write down before what they've done, but this time there was
> nothing, only a summary of the charges.
>
> The pulley was inspected, but 1.5 weeks later it craps out? She said that
> if the car had for ex. only 60K on it and this issue happened, then they
> would have been able to cover more of a cost on the labour. However
> because of the age of the car and "everything's rusty under there" (as she
> said) then they aren't willing to accept more fault or guarantee how much
> longer the parts there now are going to last.
>
> However, this then begs the question - because the car is old, was the
> idler pulley/tensioner only checked very cursorily or why was it not even
> replaced altogether given its age? If they had given us the option to
> replace it initially and we refused, then I can understand them not
> wanting to foot the cost of the parts and repairs. However, we were never
> given the option. My 2 daughters and I waited in the waiting room for 3+
> hours the first time and not one service person came in to update me on
> how things were going.
>
> The service person said to call and talk to Mike, the service manager on
> Monday, which I will do. Hopefully I'll be able to maintain my composure
> when talking to him, lol.
>
> Hopefully that will be the end, one way or another, of this saga of mine.
> :)
>
> N.[/color]

Good luck, let us know how you make out!
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply