- This topic has 13 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Advisory Council over recent months have been engaged in a review of the UKW Members charter. This always had to be the starting point for the A.C. as this is the main thrust of what the A.C. is all about, in so much that its defining roll is to promote and uphold the concept and contents that form the charter.
For the most part the A.C. accepted that the original document was both concise and well written.
However, on close inspection it was felt that there were some anomalies, repetitions and certain rules that may have been open to misinterpretation by both members and public alike.
For this reason the A.C. are submitting a revised draft of the
Charter, for your perusal and acceptance.Below you will find a link to the original document followed by a text draft of an amended version the A.C. would be grateful for your comments before we propose its acceptance.
It is our intention to have it in place before Sibson.I would like to take this oppurtunity to thank the UKW Admin & The A.C.
for their time and efforts.
Link to the originalhttp://www.ukwhitegoods.co.uk/modules.p … tit&lid=42
Below the proposed amended charter
Full amended charter draft ii for approval
Dealing with the general public (Amended draft)
PART 1
1. To be courteous and professional at all times.
2. To be presentable to the public and be clean and tidy
both in appearance and in any work carried out.
3. To be contactable by phone, fax and email.
4. To communicate clearly and simply with the customer on all
issues relating to the repair in hand.
5. Carry a minimum of 2 million pounds public liability insurance.……………………………………………………………………………………………
Part 2 (Amended Draft ii)1. Shall always endeavor to remain pleasant and polite to customers at all times.
2. Should treat customers with courtesy and respect.
3. Should remain as open and transparent as commercially possible with customers
4. Will do as much as possible to accommodate the customer’s wishes and preferences5. A landline contact number must be staffed during office hours or an answering service made available. An answering service should also be made available, out of office hours wherever possible.
6. Messages left by customers must be answered within 1 working day……………………………………………………………………………………………
Part 3 Amended draft
Call handling
1. Contact the customer as soon as possible, when the call has been received via fax/email, generally within 1 working day.
2. If your contact attempt, is met by the customers own answering machine. Then leave a message advising of your call.
3. Offer a call (where geographically possible) within two working days (48 hours) or a timed (AM/PM or other by arrangement) per the customer’s requirements or by mutual agreement.
4. If for any reason the call cannot be made as scheduled the customer is updated at the earliest possible opportunity and an alternative given.
5. If contact by phone or email is not possible, then a postal system should be used after 3 attempted contacts over two working days.
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
Part 4 Amended draft (ii)
Service calls
1. An appliance must be reasonably accessible to the engineer for repair, if it is not and there is any danger to the homeowner or the homeowner’s property the customer is to be advised and a mutual decision taken on how to proceed
2. All Members should adhere to current Health & Safety requirements as stipulated in law.
3. A best attempt is made to rectify the customer’s appliance should be made on the first visit negating the need for a further service call (in conjunction with 4.)
4. Always leave the customer’s appliance is a safe condition with no danger to the customer. If this requires the disconnection of the appliance then the engineer undertakes that responsibility of disconnection and documents this clearly as well as appraising the customer
5. After repairs the appliance is checked for function (specification test) and that it is in a safe condition for the customer to use
6. Wherever possible the appliance will be replaced back into situ as was or the customer fully appraised of the reason/s that this is not possible
7. Any used parts and packaging will be left tidy for inspection and correct disposal by the customer, in line with current legislation
…………………………………………………………………………………………….
Part 5 amended draft (iii)Spare parts
1. All parts & labour on repairs will be guaranteed for a minimum of 6 months from date of purchase
With the exception of one shot safety devices, plastic parts, or where the appliance has been subjected to misuse
2. Any spares required to be ordered, shall be ordered within two working days
of the visit
3. Any information of delays with a spares order notified to the repairer will be relayed
to the customer as soon as possible
4. Customers will not be charged for spares that they did not authorize and specifically
request.
5. Customers will not be charged for missing or damaged spares
Many ThanksSean Delaney (A.C. Member)
Re: Charter Update
Re Part 2: 5. Is the term “answering service” refferring to an “Answer machine” or a staffed contracted out “answering service?”
Re: Charter Update
We thought about that, but an anwer phone is too simplistic as there are now several ways and options for contact telephone messages to be redirected.
The important thing is that there must be a staffed point of contact for the customer to reasonably reach during normal business hours.
Sean
Re: Charter Update
Del wrote:1. All parts & labour on repairs will be guaranteed for a minimum of 6 months from date of purchase
With the exception of one shot safety devices, plastic parts, or where the appliance has been subjected to misuseSorry but you cannot make exclusions of this nature to a ‘work carried out guarantee’. 😕
Whilst I agree one shot devices and plastic parts ( I guess you refer to door handles mainly?) are a high risk item to replace to give any sort of guarantee on in the first place, they nevertheless have to be guaranteed without exception.
I personally suggest you reword that clause something like this :-
All work carried out will include a full 6 months guarantee on both the parts that were fitted and labour to fit them in the event of any recall within that period.
By adhering to such a clause, that would not necessarily preclude any individual from negating such items as he or she deems fit to preclude should they feel it necessary provided it be given in writing and agreed to by the customer at the time of the original repair.
For example: A one-shot device is fitted to a dryer in a students shared flat where 4 individuals have access to use and abuse it. Now there is a very strong possibility of that stat blowing again the very next time it is used if someone hasn’t been advised correctly as to its purpose?
Any repairer has the right to not guarantee any work he or she does and for that matter any part they fit in the process, provided of course it is put in writing to and agreed to and signed by the customer first if only to cover such a typical case in point!
If finally the AC has to mediate in such circumstances and finds that the member has no such documentary proof against the 6 month warranty, then the Charter applies to the letter.
Re: Charter Update
I don’t wish to be rude about it Martin, but you really are prepared to offer a guarantee on components which are designed to fail? I am not; and will not – Charter or not. The students are a specific case in point. If they don’t respond to the educational message about abusing their tumble dryer, why should this be my problem? The components have done their job after all.
Your wording is inclusive, not exclusive to each engineer; the wording presented in the proposed draft (which has taken a good few weeks to arrive at) gives engineers the option of guaranteeing these components if they wish. Personally, I won’t.
I really don’t see why any of our members should have to pay for the incompetance of our customers.
Regards,
Chris.Re: Charter Update
Following the debate on the 2 previous postings.
If a one-shot safety device keeps failing in a relatively short time; is it not likely there is still an underlying fault? I agree nuisance tripping is a possibility, but doesnt happen too often; and if due to levels of use or location, this event should have shown itself in the makers warranty period.
Plastic parts, different ball game. If the wording reinforces “component failure”, the cause can then be open for consideration regards being the item itself or external forces. Stripping a tub & drum to remove a foreign body on 2 occasions in a short time, we should not be expected to cover the cost of the tub seal, as the component did not fail.
Part 4 Para 4.
Always leave the customer’s appliance is a safe condition with no danger to the customer. If this requires the disconnection of the appliance then the engineer undertakes that responsibility of disconnection and documents this clearly as well as appraising the customer
Can I clarify this relates to where a machine is in a dangerous state which necessitates disconnection from the supply? and some form of failure notice being issued.
Alex
Re: Charter Update
Penguin45 wrote:I don’t wish to be rude about it Martin, but you really are prepared to offer a guarantee on components which are designed to fail? I am not; and will not – Charter or not.
Chris,
Have you read my posting correctly? I’m not sure you have 😕
My understanding of any “Charter” is a framework of basic rules an individual agrees to comply with, period. By all means add certain exclusions to your 6 months warranty clause if you wish (I could think of hundreds that qualify) but I did go on to explain how such a clause can contain exclusions made by each individual should they wish without contravening the basic rules of the Members Charter.
Martin wrote:Any repairer has the right to not guarantee any work he or she does and for that matter any part they fit in the process, provided of course it is put in writing to and agreed to and signed by the customer first
I respectfully suggest therefore that a comprehensive 6 month inclusive warranty be agreed by each member. 💡
Re: Charter Update
What you have to bear in mind with the charter is that it is designed to appeal to everyone, not any one faction within the trade or viewpoint. And, as the old adage goes, you can’t please all the people all the time.
The wording there Martin, as our flightless friend points out, is to allow a choice, not an edict.
There are spares that, whilst I fully accept the warranty on where the failure is “within reason” I may not do so if little Johnny decides to play Tarzan on the door ans it does happen. Same thing where there has been obvious customer misuse, Alex points out one such instance. Therefore I want a get-out of jail card.
I accept that in law there is certain obligations to uphold but this is not a legal document, it is designed to work within that existing framework and anyway, even the law gives the “within reason” caveat as well which opens a whole new field of grey areas. Just like that legislation each repairer (IMO) has to apply a little common sense and reason to each instance and judge each on its own merits, (again IMO) trying to force a designated path would be a mistake.
You also have to remember, whilst on this subject, that manufacturers also state that they will not cover some items quite clearly in their warranties. Customers never read them, but that’s not the point, the point is that they don’t even see the T&C until they have bought the appliance, got it home and unpacked it!
K.
Re: Charter Update
Martin in a way you contradict yourself, by first of all saying that there cannot be any exclusions. You then go on to say that there can be exclusions provided they have been pointed out to the customer before hand.
But isnt that what we are doing by pointing it out in the charter.We all have different nieches in the market and Chris in particular has a very high proportion of rented accomodation in his area.
We all know that people rarely look after appliances properly even when they own them let alone when they belong to somone else.By wording the charter this way for a very small set of components. It then lets the member take a ballanced view of wether this is due to misuse or as Alex say’s to investigate if there is still an inherent fault on the appliance, or down to missuse with the pressure off.
Believe it or not over the last few months the A.C. has had battle royal
over several rules within the charter, and as you have no doubt guessed this was one of them.We have I feel, to look at the charter in the round. For the most forward thinking members they will not be a problem but for a great many others we will be raising the bar on the terms and conditions they now offer.
With regard to Alex’s other question about disconnection of dangerous appliances the rule does actually state that this has to be clearly documented and the customer informed.
Sean
Re: Charter Update
kwatt wrote:The wording there Martin, as our flightless friend points out, is to allow a choice, not an edict.
OK fair enough at least I put my point as concisely as I could on this issue and I don’t wish to dwell on it any further. 🙂
To move on if I may, I propose an additional clause be added under ‘Service Calls’ to the effect :-
8. If it is deemed necessary to remove an appliance or part of that appliance from the customers premises for workshop repair or replacement. It must first be authorised by the customer, signed for and a receipt given.
The preceeding clause (7.) could be reworded (slightly) thus : Any used parts and packaging remain the property of the customer and should be left….etc etc…
Re: Charter Update
Del wrote:Martin in a way you contradict yourself,
Indeed I do Sean and my point lies within that very contradition so as not to compromise the Charter with minor exclusions such as door handles!
I said my peace, enough already… :wave:
Re: Charter Update
Martin wrote:
To move on if I may, I propose an additional clause be added under ‘Service Calls’ to the effect :-
8. If it is deemed necessary to remove an appliance or part of that appliance from the customers premises for workshop repair or replacement. It must first be authorised by the customer, signed for and a receipt given.
The preceeding clause (7.) could be reworded (slightly) thus : Any used parts and packaging remain the property of the customer and should be left….etc etc…
On the face of it this would appear be reasonable inclusion but it opens up a whole new can of worms.
I think that in future we will see far less removal of appliances from peoples homes for several reasons.
1) if the appliance (on futher investigation back at the workshop) is deemed by the customer to be BER you then have the problem of trying to get it back to the customer. Who very often then wants you to dispose of it. When the WEEE directive comes in next year this will be a real headache.
2) You then require a waste carriers licence.
3) Most whitegoods wiegh over 25 Kg so unless you have two guys in attendece you will be in contravention of HSE rules, unless you can get assistance from the customer. If the customer then injurs themselves whilst helping you, then who is responsible ?
4) There is the issue of damage caused to the appliance whilst in transit.
we’ve all had customers trying it on with pre existing damage.5) What do you do about the customers written authorisation or documentation when you have been left a key for access or have been let in by a nieghbour.
These are only a few points off the top of my head. The problem is, that as an individual you are on the sceene and can make a judgement call.
But when you are writting a set of rules for others to abide by it isn’t that simple you have to run through every conceiveable senario because others have to abide by rules that you have set down on their behalf.
My own take on this proposed clause, is to leave well alone and allow members to take their own decision on wether or not to uplift appliances along with their own individual policy when doing so.
With regards the proposed changes to clause 7 I actually agree with you but it was worded very carefully to be open to interpretation on behalf of the member.
Sean
Re: Charter Update
Del wrote:My own take on this proposed clause, is to leave well alone and allow members to take their own decision on wether or not to uplift appliances along with their own individual policy when doing so.
It is very ‘open ended’ then not to include such a provision. I am aware of many firms that take appliances away for repair and remove parts from them for the same purpose (Thoughts of PAT-UK strike me here 🙄 )
Del wrote:I actually agree with you but it was worded very carefully to be open to interpretation on behalf of the member.
It’s a Members Charter but I thought it was in place to protect the interests of the customer?
Del wrote:But when you are writting a set of rules for others to abide by it isn’t that simple you have to run through every conceiveable senario because others have to abide by rules that you have set down on their behalf.
Now I’m getting confused 😕
Re: Charter Update
I think some things have to be a little open ended as we can’t cover every eventuality and I truly believe that sometimes things are best left up to to the guy on site. Remember that all of our members are already running their own businesses and have their own terms and conditions in place.
We have simply laid down a basic framework for ukw members who wish to recieve jobs from Repairs@ to follow.
If individual members wish to give additional benifits to their customers they are absolutley entitled to do so. it is their business after all.I’m sorry your confused perhaps that’s an unhappy state that the rest of us will reach in the fullness of time 😆
Sean
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.