Samick warranty work

[gutlo]

----------
> From: Joseph Alkana <jfa19@IDT.NET>
> To: Pianotech@ptg.org
> Subject: Samick warranty work
> Date: Sunday, October 31, 1999 6:19 PM
> 
> List,
> I've stewed about a situation for awhile, now I'd like some help in
> making a decision, if any of you are willing to post an opinion.
> 
> A Samick grand I take care of for a private client has bad knuckles. In
> the past couple of years I have replaced several sets of knuckles all
> under warranty and all authorized and paid for by Samick. No real
> problem, unless you consider the paltry sum paid to me for the amount of
> work done, but in some ways that's another story.
> 
> This time I was told that if the bill exceeds $160.00, Samick would pick
> up the piano from a local dealer who sells Samicks (not the original
> dealer, by the way) at their convenience, transport the piano to their
> warehouse facility in California and do the replacement and regulation
> necessary there. All, I was told by a Rich Austin, at the total cost to
> Samick of $80.00 transport cost each way. Needless to say the customer
> would have to foot the bill for transport to the dealer's facilities
> which in this case would be about $175.00 each way. (Gee, I wonder if
> the piano might go out of tune somewhere along the way?)
> 
> So far I have not relayed this information to my customer.
> 
> I have mixed feelings about the situation and I'm sure all of you good
> people can see many of the ramifications involved. Not the least of
> which I feel is the potential loss of credibility as a qualified
> technician to do what I consider very minor work. However, the Samick
> warranty does specify that at its option any warranty work may be done
> at a facility of their choice, which may indeed be a Samick facility.
> 
> Yesterday I learned that a fellow tech here in this area (Seattle) had
> exactly this same situation occur. The customer is furious with Samick
> and had the local technician do the work at the customer's expense. The
> technician was as generous as he could be, but I am sure the total bill
> was more than Samick ever would agree to, which as stated above is only,
> and forever, going to be $160.00 maximum.
> 
> Comments please.
> 
> Joseph Alkana RPT

Joseph,

You seem to come out looking good no matter what choice the customer makes.
 It's a legal situation between the customer and Samick.  The customer
could have you do the work , pay you for the  regulation and knuckle
installation, then sue Samick in small claims court.. Let the judge divine
the inherent unfairness of Samick"s $160 maximum.

Perhaps just the threat of this would make Samick reconsider, especially if
you give them a reasonable rate on your regulation.

Arthur Grudko