WATCH OUT!!!!

[admin]

For some reason MFI have started to send parts out to the customer and then ask us to go and fit….no probs you might say.

Well be careful because in the post MFI are sending an invoice for those parts….which means they are using my account, with them, to buy spares on my behalf without my consent. Not right that and no matter what the gain in customer relationship, its blown away by being underhand with me.

Kevin

[NWAR]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Yup, we’ve been caught out by that as well 👿
Almost slipped by – checked my invoices and instead of the usual order numbers I would have for a genuine order found ‘Haier’ and whatever parts MFI deemed necessary to send the customer at my expense.
This is only happening for the dreaded ADP8342 as far as I’m aware, but it’s worth keeping an eye on.

👿 👿 👿 Haier 👿 👿 👿

Craig

[eastlmark]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

We had a couple of these for the pcb/pressure switch mod. But AFAIK we were never invoiced for the parts so I didnt Bill MFI for them, I will now check that this is the case. God knows why they are doing it that way other than cutting out our(small) spares mark up. Given the carriage charge I am not that bothered.

[admin]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

A communication yesterday with Paul Brooks reveals that this is happening for a modification on the dishwashers and “Norwich” was supposed to inform everyone, clearly they missed me and you two.

However the carriage charge is being applied and we have to stand it, he did offer to refund the carriage, but this is doing business a**e about face and of course if you don’t realize this you will be out of pocket.

To add insult to injury the customer requires a new fascia also, will ask today for a new FSR to cover the repair…seeing as we were sent to do a modification!

Kevin

[Del]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

May I start by saying that for the most part the M.F.I. contract has run as smooth as a silk lined codpiece, however this new method of supplying parts brings with it several concerns.
I can also see some other problems that might arise :-

1) Will some customers try to fit these parts them themselves ?

2) If the appliance is working o.k. at the moment, it’s a devil of a job to get an appointment with some of customers.

3) Who is responsible if some customers in their curiosity damage the parts.

4) May other parts be billed to your account in future, without your knowledge.

5) What happens if more kits have been sent out on your account,
than you have recieved jobs for.

Just a few thoughts !

Del

[NWAR]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Well I don’t know about you but I’ll still be applying the markup. I’m not accepting that our account is to be used to get them parts at cost.

Craig

[kwatt]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

I think that there’s a couple of points that need made here in defence.

The first is that, in a good few years (more than ten I think now) that I’ve worked with MFI they’ve never done a recall on any appliance, so it’s new ground for them. Point is, you learn from it. Most of us have been involved in a recall or two in our time so we know how to to do it and what the pitfalls are, MFI don’t.

From what I can gather MFI wanted to send the spares FOC to the customers but their system will not allow them to do that.

Now, I agree that this perhaps wasn’t handled the best, I too was totally unaware that the spares were being charged to us until I got a call the other night about it, but MFI have always been reasonable with us all so I don’t see any reason this occasion should be any different. But I do feel that the system employed should have been better explained.

Product recalls are always a nightmare and very often open a can of worms with the customers, there’s not much that anyone can do about that really. Such as the customer wanting the basket wheels replaced because there’s a new PCB to go in it, of course claiming that it ‘s related. The problem always is that we’re on the spot and have to deal with the customer in the house or on the phone.

However, what spares have been billed to us and not billed back because we were unaware that we had been charged, will be charged back with a note of what FSRs they relate to at cost with carriage or with the markup applied, that makes no odds to me TBH. What does matter is that over £300 of spares, some that I’ve already paid for (:?) DO get charged back!

It gives Paul something to do anyway. 😉

K.

[alexa]

I’d be running a seperate account not paid for until work done

[NWAR]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not having a go at MFI. I actually quite like them 😆 but I’m not happy that spares I was under the impression were to be FOC have appeared on my account statement 😡
I’ve also got another 4 of the things in this week alone, each one getting as a minimum a pcb so the costs are starting to add up.

KW: Your spares to date will be all be getting billed today 😀

Craig

[eastlmark]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Godamn, it has happenned to me and the job invoices have been paid without comment.
I did get the communication about the re call but it didnt mention anything about us being charged for the parts. Whats more, the parts were sent to the customer in a box with a label on saying that no signature is required which means any parcels that go astray are billed to me.

Thanks Kevin for bringing this to our attention.
UKW…what we do without it?

[NWAR]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

About all you can do is check your invoices carefully – the parts should be easily identifed as they will have 👿 Haier 👿 as the order number.

Craig

[eastlmark]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

eastlmark wrote:

UKW…what we do without it?

or rather: How did we ever get on without it?

[Alex]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Thanks to UKW I’ve caught them out as well.

First reaction was, it wouldn’t happen to me!!

Just browsing the invoices, we have found 6 calls to date with PCB’s and 2 with pressure switches. We were totally unaware and invoiced MFI for the labour only on ALL occasions.

I have asked Gary Reid some Questions:-

1 Why was this not brought to the attention of agents that this procedure would take place?

2 Why didn’t Paul Brooks in claims reject our paperwork as no parts were charged?

3 What happens in situations where the customer has either failed to arrange a service call or refused a visit?

4 What about if a customer fails to receive the part?

5 What about a situation where we call, only to find the part was not needed as the fault was something else entirely?

I have asked M.F.I. to reconcile these parts and raise a credit note against my account. I’ve had to do enough leg work in tracing these and do not relish the thought of raising new invoices on an individual basis.

I am not happy that they have plundered my account, and I’ve made my sentiments very clear indeed. I’m not pleased regards the way it was done, and as a consequence I now have to keep an eye on that account. Something I never had to do with them before.

Alex

[NWAR]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

Alex,

All parts sent are assumed fitted – they get billed.
Whether or not the customer receives the part, or if they refuse a repair, the parts are charged to you. Every 👿 Haier 👿 ordered part should be marked up and claimed for regardless of the outcome of the job.
With regard to finding a different fault with the appliance, see kheath’s post above about requiring a separate FSR: one for the modification they’ve sent you to do and one for the actual fault with the appliance. I think this is a fair point that he makes.

Craig

[Alex]

Re: WATCH OUT!!!!

NWAR wrote:Alex,
All parts sent are assumed fitted – they get billed.
Whether or not the customer receives the part, or if they refuse a repair, the parts are charged to you. Every 👿 Haier 👿 ordered part should be marked up and claimed for regardless of the outcome of the job.
Craig

I haven’t invoked the 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} mark up as that would entail me having to reconcile all invoices in this operation. I cannot guarantee we can track them all, so I’ve left it to MFI to undertake the task. Also the 10{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} is a “handling fee”. As MFI has done the handling and we were not even involved in the transaction, I feel it isn’t my place to implement the surcharge.

This is my way of demonstrating that we had no part in the indentation or indeed the ordering of said parts. I feel our account has been compromised, and what I need is an assurance this will not happen again. I note some conciliatory comments prior to mine has been made on this topic, but as this is my money I’m not taking this lightly, nor am I taking any prisoners.

Alex Reed
Sedgemoor Domestic Appliances Ltd.

[Author]

Posts