Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9485660)

So....say you hire me to build a website for you. I give you a quote that it will take me 8 hours of work to complete the job....but I do it in 5 hours. Should I charge you for 5 hours or 8?

Originally Posted by Exoter175 (Post 9485672)

If you quoted me 8 hours to build a website, and I hired you. I expect you to charge me for 8 hours. That is how contracts work. I have no lawful argument against it even if you told me it only took 5 hours, because I agreed to the contract. I'm not agreeing to the hours, I'm agreeing to the product, of which the price was X@8 hours.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485666)

If your mechanics are so thorough that it takes them an extra hour to do the job, so be it. That's not even what you're claiming. You say that you spend less time on it that the books say yet you charge for more time. You're a thief.

Originally Posted by Old Dog (Post 9485673)

8, but not 10....which Extorter claimed with his additional 25%

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485675)

If you charge by the hour, 5. He would bill for 10 and congratulate himself on being thorough.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9485677)

Well what if I knew that it would only take me 7 hours max.....but I quoted you 8. Is that still wrong?

Originally Posted by Exoter175 (Post 9485174)

Simply put, Labor Hour is what I'm going to charge you PER HOUR to fix your car. IT doesn't stop there though, because I'm probably going to pull up something like Mitchell or Alldata to find out how long it is going to take me to fix it, when you come in and ask for a quote, and I'm probably going to mark up the base labor hour by 10-25% on top of that.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485547)

Good Christ man, are you a ****ing stroke victim? You've flat out stated that you bill for the book time plus 20%...you lying ****ing thief.

Originally Posted by Exoter175 (Post 9485628)

No, that isn't EXACTLY what you just posted, you imbecile.


:thumb:

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485629)

So your contention is that, because the software contains a manual override feature, it's ethical to falsify labor times?

Maybe some jobs take longer than the book lists because of extenuating circumstances. That doesn't mean that you should, as a matter of practice, use this feature in order to bill for hours that were never worked.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9485660)

So....say you hire me to build a website for you. I give you a quote that it will take me 8 hours of work to complete the job....but I do it in 5 hours. Should I charge you for 5 hours or 8?

Originally Posted by Exoter175 (Post 9485685)

Different business, troll.


I would bill for whatever was quoted and signed into contract. No more, no less.



That is up for you to do, in automotive repair, there is no certainty that it'll take under, equal to, or over the book rate.

The book rate is just an "idea" of how long it could take. Some mechanics are very fast, some take twice as long. I only adjust the book hour so that I know the job gets done right, and not cut corners due to speed.

I also don't adjust the book on a per customer basis. It is done when the software is setup, and never touched again after that.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9485693)

So if you book for 8.....but your mechanic is slow and takes 12......the customer doesn't get charged those extra 4 hours.....correct?

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485694)

Wierd...I guess it can be as high as 25%. If they're lucky, you give them a discount and only rip them off by billing them for 10% more time than it actually took.

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats. (Post 9485702)

unless I'm mistaked the book is not binding, only a guide. There is nothing unethical IMHO about padding book times. If history has shown a given shop cannot complete the work in the "book time" then they need to bill whatever the actual time is.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485712)

What a great guy. All you're really doing is checking a book to see how long a job should take (knowing full well that it won't even take you as long as the book estimates), upping the number of hours by 10-25%, billing the customer accordingly, and calling yourself thorough.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 9485717)

I totally agree. That's not what he's doing, though. If the book says 3 hours, he's doing it in 2.5 hours and billing the customer for 3.5 hours.

Originally Posted by Exoter175 (Post 9485714)

You are correct, you aren't paying for my slow mechanic, I am.



That isn't how it works, but you sure are trying hard to make me look like a bad guy here.

This is how it works.

You walk in, hand me the keys, My mechanic and I look at the car, noting what needs to get fixed.

I write up a quote.
I show you the quote.
You either agree or disagree with the quote.
If you agree, you sign the quote, I fix the car, you pay when it is done.
If you disagree, we figure out why you disagree (Probably because my quote has a service on there you don't feel you need to do just yet, like an oil change or something)
I write up a new quote, you agree, you sign, I fix it, you pay when it is done.

That is it. I don't charge you more when it is done, I don't charge you less when it is done. You signed a contract for me to perform a service. The hours are an estimate, the cost is based on my rate and the estimated time to accomplish the job.

That's it.

That is how it works in any lawfully established automotive repair shop, or shall I say, how it is SUPPOSED to work.

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats. (Post 9485726)

So? The book is simply industry averages. There is NOTHING requiring a mechanic to bill "by the book" or even use "the book" at all.

He's telling the customer 3.5 hrs and billing 3.5 hrs.