Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: zirk on 09 February 2017, 12:21:29
-
Just got back from a MOT Garage, took one of the Neighbors Corsa in, shes a retired lady who asked me to take her car in as she always feels uneasy being a female with Garages and the car always seems to fail every year therefore repair bills etc, she always uses the same Garage.
Whilst Im waiting for the Mot to be done, Im reading the previous Mots Paperwork from the Car, the Fails, the Advisories, Work done etc, mainly through boredom.
Mot finished, its failed on excessive play, OS Track Rod End, plus theres a couple of Advisories. Chap starts asking if I want the works done, rough cost etc, I reply 'I need to make a phone call'.
Just before the Phone call, I remembered something about Track Rod fail from a previous Mot, initial thoughts were, its probably the other side. Checked the Paperwork, it was last year, same deal Off Side, slightly confused, double checked Mot paperwork and repair cost Invoice, same Garage, yep OS, then stuck the head underneath and checked both sides, hmmm, they both look original to me, certainly not a year old or around 3000 miles later.
Goes back in the Garage and calls the Guy over, 'can I have a word', hands him the paperwork, 'Do you want to check the Paperwork first, or do you want to look at both the Track Rod Ends and then check the Paperwork?', a confused look on his face, some paperwork reading, goes and looks at the Car, comes back, more paperwork reading more confused looks, then grabs another chap they both go and look at the car, one comes back, goes back out with a wire brush looks again, quiet closely this time, comes back more reading between the two of them, then comes over to me as says, 'Ok, Can you leave this with me', 'What does that mean exactly' I asked, 'Well, as we did the work then there will be some sort of Warranty'?
Outcome was, left the Car with them, hmm, expecting a phone call later, hopefully something along the lines of "all done, works done, MOT done, No Charge perhaps??.
Your thoughts, advice??
-
I believe that some garages can be less than truthful. :)
-
I believe that some garages can be less than truthful. :)
Wont dispute that, but I thought Mot's and Mot Work would be quiet tight these days.
-
If I've read this correctly...
They failed it last year on OS TRE. Then charged her for a part they never fitted. Then tried to fail it again this year?
If I've got that right that's disgusting.
Have you jacked it up to see if there's any play?
My garage wouldn't do anything dodgy. But if we ever have a genuine customer discrepancy or query then we will bring them in and show them what we've found.
-
I would not have left the report with them. That's the proof you have. Maybe ask them to scan it, take a phone picture or whatever. Hope it will all work out. :y
-
If I've read this correctly...
They failed it last year on OS TRE. Then charged her for a part they never fitted. Then tried to fail it again this year?
If I've got that right that's disgusting.
Have you jacked it up to see if there's any play?
My garage wouldn't do anything dodgy. But if we ever have a genuine customer discrepancy or query then we will bring them in and show them what we've found.
Yep, in a nutshell, just to add the bit after 'Then tried to fail it again this year?' ...... and then tried to charge again to fix it this year. >:(
-
If I've read this correctly...
They failed it last year on OS TRE. Then charged her for a part they never fitted. Then tried to fail it again this year?
If I've got that right that's disgusting.
Have you jacked it up to see if there's any play?
My garage wouldn't do anything dodgy. But if we ever have a genuine customer discrepancy or query then we will bring them in and show them what we've found.
I'd trust you, Mr Bear.
But if an establishment by the name of 'STMO Scouse Services' opened it's doors I think I'd give it a miss. :)
-
;D thanks opti. Always count on you for support :y
-
I would not have left the report with them. That's the proof you have. Maybe ask them to scan it, take a phone picture or whatever. Hope it will all work out. :y
As far as I know, any thing thats typed on any MOT paperwork gets filed with DVLA at the same time these days, could be wrong :-\
-
I would take a copper along with you when you collect the car. Fraud pure and simple.
Cunch of bunts >:(
-
The dodgy barsteward!! >:(
Which is the very reason all our cars to a local MOT station that doesn't do repairs. I've used him for years and he'll usually give me the benefit of the doubt as he knows I'll sort any thing that might be iffy.
-
I would not have left the report with them. That's the proof you have. Maybe ask them to scan it, take a phone picture or whatever. Hope it will all work out. :y
As far as I know, any thing thats typed on any MOT paperwork gets filed with DVLA at the same time these days, could be wrong :-\
It does. All previous passes, fails & advisories are available to view on line ..... quite a useful site for when viewing new to you cars
-
looking at it objectively the guy failed it and he's getting it replaced under warranty for the customer, not a problem. The tester isn't to know if it's had x, y and z done a year ago.
The big problem occurs if it's found out that it's an original gm part and not fitted last year as per their invoice.
I'd be asking for the old part. :y
-
I would let them sort it out then tip off VOSA as to what's going on.
-
I would take a copper along with you when you collect the car. Fraud pure and simple.
Cunch of bunts >:(
I doubt you'd get much interest from plod, but VOSA (or whatever they are this week) might be
-
........ The tester isn't to know if it's had x, y and z done a year ago.
.....
Surely he can when he inputs the car's details before testing :-\
-
I would let them sort it out then tip off VOSA as to what's going on.
I found VOSA most helpful.
They sorted out a rogue MOT station that failed Mrs Opti's RX8 on emissions without performing a second fast idle test.
It failed on the first fast idle test but apparently quite a number of cars do.
-
........ The tester isn't to know if it's had x, y and z done a year ago.
.....
Surely he can when he inputs the car's details before testing :-\
yeah I'm sure you can. In fact joe public can look online (I believe) but if a car comes in for an mot I doubt the tester would look at its previous failings or advisories. They'd simply test what was put in front of them on that day.
-
Disgusting! >:(
I'd be on to them asking for a full refund for previous work and MOT costs, otherwise you would involve VOSA.
-
........ The tester isn't to know if it's had x, y and z done a year ago.
.....
Surely he can when he inputs the car's details before testing :-\
yeah I'm sure you can. In fact joe public can look online (I believe) but if a car comes in for an mot I doubt the tester would look at its previous failings or advisories. They'd simply test what was put in front of them on that day.
The point I'm making is that the testervwill look at the screen for info on that car to perform the test e.g. he always asks if my R Class is in 4 wheel drive (it can't not be) after he's entered chassis number etc I'd have expected previous advisories to be shown then ..... provided the tester looked.
-
........ The tester isn't to know if it's had x, y and z done a year ago.
.....
Surely he can when he inputs the car's details before testing :-\
yeah I'm sure you can. In fact joe public can look online (I believe) but if a car comes in for an mot I doubt the tester would look at its previous failings or advisories. They'd simply test what was put in front of them on that day.
The point I'm making is that the testervwill look at the screen for info on that car to perform the test e.g. he always asks if my R Class is in 4 wheel drive (it can't not be) after he's entered chassis number etc I'd have expected previous advisories to be shown then ..... provided the tester looked.
I'm not sure they are. I'll text our tester to find out :y
-
I would not have left the report with them. That's the proof you have. Maybe ask them to scan it, take a phone picture or whatever. Hope it will all work out. :y
As far as I know, any thing thats typed on any MOT paperwork gets filed with DVLA at the same time these days, could be wrong :-\
Oh yes, it's easy to forget the era we live in today. But then it begs the question why ask you to keep it since he most likely have it on his computer anyway or could access it online.
-
I would take a copper along with you when you collect the car. Fraud pure and simple.
Cunch of bunts >:(
I doubt you'd get much interest from plod, but VOSA (or whatever they are this week) might be
Dunno, as the MOT was done properly both times. The actual garage repair work was where the problem is, would that be covered by VOSA?
-
Without doubt they need reporting , hate dodgy business of any kind unscrupulous bas***ds.
-
https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history (https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history)
There you are ;)
-
Without doubt they need reporting , hate dodgy business of any kind unscrupulous bas***ds.
Its so widespread, I wasn't the slightest bit surprised by Zirks post.
Matters not if its the dodgiest backstreet garage or the swankiest dealer, its rife.
-
I would take a copper along with you when you collect the car. Fraud pure and simple.
Cunch of bunts >:(
I doubt you'd get much interest from plod, but VOSA (or whatever they are this week) might be
Dunno, as the MOT was done properly both times. The actual garage repair work was where the problem is, would that be covered by VOSA?
Yea, but surely the car would have had to be retested to make sure the work was done?
-
I would take a copper along with you when you collect the car. Fraud pure and simple.
Cunch of bunts >:(
I doubt you'd get much interest from plod, but VOSA (or whatever they are this week) might be
Dunno, as the MOT was done properly both times. The actual garage repair work was where the problem is, would that be covered by VOSA?
Yea, but surely the car would have had to be retested to make sure the work was done?
Good point, well presented :y
-
Somewhere between VOSA and Trading Standards then IMHO.
Trading standards for billing for work that wasn't done/parts not fitted and VOSA for falsifying an MOT. Either the initial test or the retest must have been knowingly falsified.
-
Ok, first of all. IF this garage has charged Zirks friend / relation for a track rod end they never fitted that is outrageous. To then fail the same part again a year later and try and charge AGAIN they need stringing up.
However, there are a lot of assumptions here.
It's been for a test. It failed on the OS TRE. Zirks then realised (and the tester probably should have too, but that's not the issue) the same item was replaced last year. The garage are now Presumably doing the part for free under warranty. There's nothing wrong with this. New parts do fail. I see it everyday.
The problem is IF they never fitted the replacement part and / or are lying about its failure then and now.
There's no way of proving this without either having the old part in your hand and / or jacking the car up and seeing if it has play yourself.
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
Obviously that's assuming they do replace the part under warranty which I'm sure Zirk will be able to see when he takes the car away.
-
Ok, first of all. IF this garage has charged Zirks friend / relation for a track rod end they never fitted that is outrageous. To then fail the same part again a year later and try and charge AGAIN they need stringing up.
However, there are a lot of assumptions here.
It's been for a test. It failed on the OS TRE. Zirks then realised (and the tester probably should have too, but that's not the issue) the same item was replaced last year. The garage are now Presumably doing the part for free under warranty. There's nothing wrong with this. New parts do fail. I see it everyday.
The problem is IF they never fitted the replacement part and / or are lying about its failure then and now.
There's no way of proving this without either having the old part in your hand and / or jacking the car up and seeing if it has play yourself.
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
Obviously that's assuming they do replace the part under warranty which I'm sure Zirk will be able to see when he takes the car away.
Pretty much agree with all what youve said there Webby, appart from, my belief would be, VOSA may be interested in the Re Testing bit from last year?? :-\
-
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
In the OP it's made clear that the two TRE's are the same, and that neither has been replaced within the last 12 months. So that is what you say. If there is an issue with the Mot station, it is hugely unlikely that the OP's friend is the only victim.
If there are 50 others out there who have their suspicions, and they report them VOSA may look closer. If no one says anything then nothing gets done guaranteed.
It's not about building a water-tight prosecution case from one incident ::)
-
Ok, first of all. IF this garage has charged Zirks friend / relation for a track rod end they never fitted that is outrageous. To then fail the same part again a year later and try and charge AGAIN they need stringing up.
However, there are a lot of assumptions here.
It's been for a test. It failed on the OS TRE. Zirks then realised (and the tester probably should have too, but that's not the issue) the same item was replaced last year. The garage are now Presumably doing the part for free under warranty. There's nothing wrong with this. New parts do fail. I see it everyday.
The problem is IF they never fitted the replacement part and / or are lying about its failure then and now.
There's no way of proving this without either having the old part in your hand and / or jacking the car up and seeing if it has play yourself.
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
Obviously that's assuming they do replace the part under warranty which I'm sure Zirk will be able to see when he takes the car away.
Pretty much agree with all what youve said there Webby, appart from, my belief would be, VOSA may be interested in the Re Testing bit from last year?? :-\
Don't get me wrong I hate dodgy fekkers if they have done something like that. But by the same token I wouldn't want to see a garage who've fitted a dodgy part get labelled as such.
As for the retest.... difficult to say cos if they've not fitted a part they said they had then it's a fake repair AND a dodgy test. Was there any play to begin with? Who knows.
As I said imo until you have that part it's difficult to prove anything.
-
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
In the OP it's made clear that the two TRE's are the same, and that neither has been replaced within the last 12 months. So that is what you say. If there is an issue with the Mot station, it is hugely unlikely that the OP's friend is the only victim.
If there are 50 others out there who have their suspicions, and they report them VOSA may look closer. If no one says anything then nothing gets done guaranteed.
It's not about building a water-tight prosecution case from one incident ::)
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 12 months? ;D
-
If it were summat subjective like a discoloured indicator bulb the fair enough... A failed tre would have likely been apparent when driving... And even really shite parts do better than 3K miles... Especially when they've clearly not been changed.
-
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
In the OP it's made clear that the two TRE's are the same, and that neither has been replaced within the last 12 months. So that is what you say. If there is an issue with the Mot station, it is hugely unlikely that the OP's friend is the only victim.
If there are 50 others out there who have their suspicions, and they report them VOSA may look closer. If no one says anything then nothing gets done guaranteed.
It's not about building a water-tight prosecution case from one incident ::)
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 3,000 miles? ;D
Fixed and next to fark all.
-
If it were summat subjective like a discoloured indicator bulb the fair enough... A failed tre would have likely been apparent when driving... And even really shite parts do better than 3K miles... Especially when they've clearly not been changed.
Exactly. Which is why I'd want the old part.
-
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
In the OP it's made clear that the two TRE's are the same, and that neither has been replaced within the last 12 months. So that is what you say. If there is an issue with the Mot station, it is hugely unlikely that the OP's friend is the only victim.
If there are 50 others out there who have their suspicions, and they report them VOSA may look closer. If no one says anything then nothing gets done guaranteed.
It's not about building a water-tight prosecution case from one incident ::)
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 3,000 miles? ;D
Fixed and next to fark all.
'dangle berries'! (No offence ;D)
Those ATP parts that you kindly gave me a link to a few years ago (the set of drop links, tre's and wishbones) I fitted. I had the car up in the air a few weeks later and was amazed how badly they'd rusted. They are still on their today and have passed all the mot's. but they look like shite!
-
Ok, first of all. IF this garage has charged Zirks friend / relation for a track rod end they never fitted that is outrageous. To then fail the same part again a year later and try and charge AGAIN they need stringing up.
However, there are a lot of assumptions here.
It's been for a test. It failed on the OS TRE. Zirks then realised (and the tester probably should have too, but that's not the issue) the same item was replaced last year. The garage are now Presumably doing the part for free under warranty. There's nothing wrong with this. New parts do fail. I see it everyday.
The problem is IF they never fitted the replacement part and / or are lying about its failure then and now.
There's no way of proving this without either having the old part in your hand and / or jacking the car up and seeing if it has play yourself.
So without this info what are you going to say to VOSA? That the garage replaced a part under warranty for me so they're clearly dodgy?
Obviously that's assuming they do replace the part under warranty which I'm sure Zirk will be able to see when he takes the car away.
Pretty much agree with all what youve said there Webby, appart from, my belief would be, VOSA may be interested in the Re Testing bit from last year?? :-\
Don't get me wrong I hate dodgy fekkers if they have done something like that. But by the same token I wouldn't want to see a garage who've fitted a dodgy part get labelled as such.
As for the retest.... difficult to say cos if they've not fitted a part they said they had then it's a fake repair AND a dodgy test. Was there any play to begin with? Who knows.
As I said imo until you have that part it's difficult to prove anything.
Well, the only other thing that I can think of, is if it was fiited then a second hand part was fitted or one that may have been laying around (why? there not mega money new), in that senerio I could be fooled for thinking that both parts looked original condition, failing that I would need to see the Invoice for last years works again as I cannot recall the exact cost, wording etc, the Invoice is currently with the Garage.
-
And just to clarify zirk I'm not doubting what you saw. Merely that I feel it'd be difficult to tell on the ground.
I'm just trying to stop an oof mass killing when one MAY NOT be justified. Though as said before if they are dodgy I'll personally come round and help you kick 'em :y
-
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 12 months? ;D
Well, I can see all the parts I've replaced on my car in the last yr as distinct from the older (probably original) items. But thats totally missing the point. As I said it's not about proof, it's about reporting your suspicions. For Trading Standards/VOSA it's very very easy for them to prove in total.
Lets say the garage invoiced 200 customers for TREs last yr. then they have to be able to provide a Unipart/ECP/other motor factor account statement for those same 200 TREs. If not, then how did they fit them. Businesses are required by HMRC/companies house to keep records so they're in the shit if they can't prove it anyway.
My point still stands that if no-one reports their experiences, these things never get started.
-
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 12 months? ;D
Well, I can see all the parts I've replaced on my car in the last yr as distinct from the older (probably original) items. But thats totally missing the point. As I said it's not about proof, it's about reporting your suspicions. For Trading Standards/VOSA it's very very easy for them to prove in total.
Lets say the garage invoiced 200 customers for TREs last yr. then they have to be able to provide a Unipart/ECP/other motor factor account statement for those same 200 TREs. If not, then how did they fit them. Businesses are required by HMRC/companies house to keep records so they're in the shit if they can't prove it anyway.
My point still stands that if no-one reports their experiences, these things never get started.
Fair comments :y
-
If I've read this correctly...
They failed it last year on OS TRE. Then charged her for a part they never fitted. Then tried to fail it again this year?
If I've got that right that's disgusting.
Have you jacked it up to see if there's any play?
My garage wouldn't do anything dodgy. But if we ever have a genuine customer discrepancy or query then we will bring them in and show them what we've found.
I'd trust you, Mr Bear.
But if an establishment by the name of 'STMO Scouse Services' opened it's doors I think I'd give it a miss. :)
Such an establishment exists, but it's nowt to do with cars :-*
-
Car wont be ready for collection till tomorrow, so will have to postpone judgement till then. :-\
-
Following this with interest. Any news?
-
It is all to common in the industry as a whole
As a point, the MOT tester does not get instant visibility of advisories or previous failures when they enter the cars details so as to ensure that its an independent one off check which is not swayed by the vehicles 'previous' :y
In theory it removes the potential for somebody to think 'it was an advisory last year and they did jack all about it' type of thing.
-
As an example, here is the MOT history for one of the Land Rovers that I look after.
Pretty much every advisory has not been done........yet some disappear never to be seen again....
(http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b394/Marks_DTM_Calib/Lrover_MOT_zpsvkzkinfd.jpg)
-
........
Pretty much every advisory has not been done........yet some disappear never to be seen again....
....
I can relate to that as my vehicle mot history shows 'Delaminating front suspension lower bush but not resulting in excessive play' for two consecutive years but then vanished for the following two mot's. Same mot station for all of my mot's as well. I did them myself voluntarily in the end. :y
-
I think in some cases it may also be whats "flavour of the week" at a particular MOT station/tester, for example, the folks' range rover got "towbar lightly corroded" one year ::). Along with literally every other car that went through there with a tow bar on. Then never to be seen again. Turned out it was a guy worked at the MOT centre for 6 months or so and he was the only one who was bothered with it. ;D
-
Following this with interest. Any news?
Yea, car wasn't ready till Saturday in the end, picked it up in the morning, both sides Track Rods done, no charge for the work and Mot was charged with a 50% discounted (as a gesture), Guy also offered 30% Off her next Service when she brings it in.
The Guy couldn't really explain what happened, mentioned they do sometimes use Freelance people to cover holidays, short staff periods etc and said sometimes stuff happens and that they will be putting additional practices in place in future.
Read into it which ever way you think fit, but the Guy did seem genuine to me, theve been trading there for donkeys years, so in the end I accepted what had happened, the work done, the discounts and the apology. End of the day now its up to the Lady that owns the car if she wants to take it any further, but I doubt she will.
-
In my experience real scumbags don't back down. They just get defensive/aggresive, so perhaps it was a genuine friday afternoon moment in this case.
Incidentally, if you want a guaranteed MOT failure try Coton Van Hire in Tamworth, B77. They WILL find something everytime. Tossers. ::)
-
......
Incidentally, if you want a guaranteed MOT failure try Coton Van Hire in Tamworth, B77. They WILL find something everytime. Tossers. ::)
I'll look them up when I next go to my sister in law's
-
Sounds like you had a fair result & give them the benefit of the doubt, some strange things on advisories now like shields covering engine parts etc.Like someone said earlier a lot depends on who is doing the test.
-
That sounds like a fair outcome.especially if a genuine mistake.
-
Did they actually change the trackrods then?
-
He di
Following this with interest. Any news?
Yea, car wasn't ready till Saturday in the end, picked it up in the morning, both sides Track Rods done, no charge for the work and Mot was charged with a 50% discounted (as a gesture), Guy also offered 30% Off her next Service when she brings it in.
The Guy couldn't really explain what happened, mentioned they do sometimes use Freelance people to cover holidays, short staff periods etc and said sometimes stuff happens and that they will be putting additional practices in place in future.
Read into it which ever way you think fit, but the Guy did seem genuine to me, theve been trading there for donkeys years, so in the end I accepted what had happened, the work done, the discounts and the apology. End of the day now its up to the Lady that owns the car if she wants to take it any further, but I doubt she will.
There ya go :y
-
Yes but have they actually changed them or are they simply saying that they did?
::)
-
If both sides havn,t been done then he and his neighbour have been. :D
-
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 12 months? ;D
Well, I can see all the parts I've replaced on my car in the last yr as distinct from the older (probably original) items. But thats totally missing the point. As I said it's not about proof, it's about reporting your suspicions. For Trading Standards/VOSA it's very very easy for them to prove in total.
Lets say the garage invoiced 200 customers for TREs last yr. then they have to be able to provide a Unipart/ECP/other motor factor account statement for those same 200 TREs. If not, then how did they fit them. Businesses are required by HMRC/companies house to keep records so they're in the shit if they can't prove it anyway.
My point still stands that if no-one reports their experiences, these things never get started.
so the garage must be using some kind of ERP system ??? or is that too complex for a small business
But something must be inplace to enable independant auditing of the books.
How are the jobs handed out in a garage workshop environment. Is it all controlled via operator login.
-
Yes but have they actually changed them or are they simply saying that they did?
::)
I did check, both done, they look brand new........
...... so new in fact the black Hammerite paint is still a bit tacky, ;D
-
Lmao so it's easy to have a quick look under the car and judge the manufacture year of a track rod end or indeed whether it has excessive play? How much road grime should a track rod end have after 12 months? ;D
Well, I can see all the parts I've replaced on my car in the last yr as distinct from the older (probably original) items. But thats totally missing the point. As I said it's not about proof, it's about reporting your suspicions. For Trading Standards/VOSA it's very very easy for them to prove in total.
Lets say the garage invoiced 200 customers for TREs last yr. then they have to be able to provide a Unipart/ECP/other motor factor account statement for those same 200 TREs. If not, then how did they fit them. Businesses are required by HMRC/companies house to keep records so they're in the shit if they can't prove it anyway.
My point still stands that if no-one reports their experiences, these things never get started.
so the garage must be using some kind of ERP system ??? or is that too complex for a small business
But something must be inplace to enable independant auditing of the books.
How are the jobs handed out in a garage workshop environment. Is it all controlled via operator login.
I walk in in the morning, say "I fancy that job" and pull it in ;D in Bigger garages I know that the days jobs are put on to job cards and you get given your days work depending on your skill (i.e. Apprentice will be given all the tyres, the best mechanic the hardest jobs etc).
As for getting an invoice we send ours off accountant with a completed invoice showing who did the job. Whenever we need a copy (for warranty claims usually) we get him to e mail a copy. Not sure how bigger garages store this info :-\
-
I would guess it varies wildly. I know kwik sh!t hold them online as I've got them to pull a duplicate for me based on invoice (that was tyres but I'd guess the rest of the business works the same). My local garage however, stores them by stuffing them In about a million box files in a back room. ;D
If it were me running a small garage I'd keep duplicate receipts for proving my income, and then just get monthly/annual statements from my motorfactors to prove expenses. That along with monthly bills for utilities, rates, warranty subscription, payroll ought to be enough for a small outfit. Is basically what we keep for SWMBO's business.
Although she (sadly) doesn't own a garage! ;D