Burke's Lawnmower Repair

Review: The company's website offers free estimates for basic diagnostic repairs. My lawn mower has a broken safety cable for the handle. No work in the or near the engine is required. I can not see how any more basic of a repair this could be.An estimate for replacement of the safety wire was provided for $120 for labor and $60 for parts which I declined. Upon picking up the lawn mower from them, they informed that a $35 estimation fee is due. I responded that the website offers free estimates. The clerk responded "that they ended this in October", which would be contrary to the website. I continued to ask if they intended to honor the website for free estimates, and the response was repeated, "that ended in October". This still would be contrary to a policy that is described on their website (as of 11/16).The reason I chose to entertain their services is because of the website offer of free estimates, which appears to be a deceptive practice to lure the customer in only to force them to pay an estimation fee, which is arbitrarily set by the company. For example, if repairs are estimated at $500, is the estimation fee higher or a percentage of the repair cost? Does the manager make up the cost on the spot at the time of a decline?Lastly, the Web site offers an asterisk next to the offer of a free estimate, but no description of the asterisk, conditions, or terms is provided by the Web site or the clerk(s) at the shop at the time of pick up. Anything that could be offered by staff is that "that ended in October". So if this transaction occurred in any random December, is staff trained to say, "that ended in November"?It is my opinion that this business be investigated for deceptive advertising and/or practices.Desired Settlement: Refund of $35 estimation fee.

Business

Response:

December 09, 2013

Dear [redacted],

Burke’s Lawnmower Repair, offers free estimates for basic diagnostic evaluation of small engines per our website: www.burkeslawnmower.com [redacted] brought in his machine due to a “safety” brake cable that was broken on his lawnmower which prevents loss of limb[s] or possible death -[redacted]

The replacement of the cable is neither as simple nor basic as [redacted] states in his memo. Proper evaluation of the cable breakage requires inspection/check to the engine (brake cable attachment, flywheel, armature clearance, etc) plus grounding wires including the “basic” evaluation. If replacement of the cable is so '‘basic" one would not bring in their machine for replacement. However, for safety reasoning the best course of action for this type of work is a small engine repair shop with the proper certifications, like mine. [redacted]’s machine also required a tune-up to ensure proper operation of the device. Once more, the basic diagnosis is for compression, ignition, and fuel operation for a machine that does not start but are completely intact with no visible safety issues (such as [redacted]’s). All of out claim checks are stamped with “NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEFT, FIRE OR GRASS BAGS, S35 ESTIMATE TO REPAIR FEE CALL FOR DETAILS” on the back (attach 1). The website also states call for details.

Our policy did change in October, but it had no bearing on [redacted]’s piece of equipment or our website and claim checks since they have never changed. The mentioned staff member has been positively counseled, however, he is a young college student trying to make ends meet and had difficulty communicating effectively with [redacted] who was badgering him, overbearing, and talking down to him. We strive to ensure effective communication of our policy to all customers and ask them to review the claim stub before they leave. We do not make up any charges on the spot since I run a very tight organization, which is based on my military career and training. Unfortunately, we have customers who try to game the system. [redacted] stated in his memo, “broken safety cable .. what he doesn’t understand the cable is there to protect him or any user. I will not address his monetary example, since we have serviced thousands of customers in the past eight years with only two complaints to the Revdex.com. Both have been in regards to the diagnostic fee, all other have complied and have not tried to abuse our policy by looking for loopholes.

If you have any additional questions or need further clarification please call me ###-###-#### or email me at [redacted].

Regards

Consumer

Response:

December 20. 2013

To Whom It May Concern,

In accordance with the instructions provided in the December 13 electronic mail correspondence, please accept this response herein as directed within 10 days. I would like to take this opportunity to address several statements made by the private business in its response dated December 13 to the Revdex.com.

First, the word "basic’' as used on the Web site of the private business is inherently ambiguous. By providing no definition or additional details, it automatically creates a matter of inconvenience to the consumer. As a result, where the consumer would accept what seems to be an innocuous offer, consumers are ultimately misled. Further, the private business through this mechanism thus sets its own evaluation and inspection process where it can determine that somehow the flywheel is related to the safety cable thereby nullifying the offer and concluding that the diagnosis is not "basic’'. By these principles, and not being the subject matter expert, it seems that maybe except for the plastic wheels, the private business has determined that everything in the system is directly related and attached to the engine, and that replacement of the safety brake cable is intrinsic to fuel operation. By this business practice, no repair(s) could ever be considered basic by the private business and what is essentially taking place is that the business sets its own repairs outside the scope of the consumer's request. When the scope is artificially inflated thereby introducing the probability that the consumer will decline the repairs, the S35 fee is administered—but in conflict with an undefined advertisement on the business's Web site.

Through aforementioned mediums, there is a direct conflict of business policy where its Web site offers a service for free, but yet the claim check nullifies this free offer automatically when the consumer is physically on the premises and agrees to provide their property for inspection. Rhetorically, is there an alternative claim check design to be provided that states the diagnostic inspection is ever free in accordance with the Web site?

It should not be the consumer's responsibility that staff is quantified as personnel who has difficulty communicating business policies or is classified by an education level based on a false accusation of the consumer's behavior. In no way did I engage in any of the actions listed. No staff member asked me to review or agree to anything—including the claim check—before I left the premises. The staff member and I may have said 5 total sentences to each other because I immediately sensed what was being put into effect to the consumer through this transaction. My exemplary credit score would be evidence enough to prove that I have never consciously perpetrated any loophole. In essence, the private business's course of action is to not honor the offer the on the Web site, blame the consumer, and continue to not rectify the documented conflict in internal policies.

1 am not a subject matter expert with small engine repair nor am I a professional in consumer-business relations, but it appears that 3 specific complaints in 8 years regarding the applicability of the free diagnostic investigation policy is evidence of a pattern of a deceptive business practice that perpetuates. Although by numerical standards, 3 complaints in 8 years are not chronic, but it can speak to the unknown number of consumers who have not come forward.

Lastly, after denying the offer to repair my property, 1 pursued several options where the ultimate outcome came from a 3:27-second [redacted] video that shows that repairing a safety brake cable is in fact simple and straightforward. By no means does this video suggest that a technician should investigate the flywheel or the fuel system. For your use. the title of the video is "How To (sic) Replace a Lawnmower Brake Cable" posted by [redacted] user [redacted].

Further, attached is a receipt for a replacement safety brake cable for $16.05 from Internet retailer [redacted]. This is a significant difference from the business's provided estimate of $60 for parts and $120 for labor to repair the safety brake cable. This is evidence that the business practice is to generate its own repairs outside the scope of the consumer's request. It is interesting that the business would not entertain repairing the safety brake cable at $16 for parts and approximately $20 for one half-hour of labor—since it took me less than 3 minutes to repair the cable myself using the [redacted] video. In theory, the total cost of the repair could have been approximately $35 dollars. Instead, it is possible that the business determined to not perform the repairs, inflate the scope and cost, thereby triggering the $35 fee. This results in the business receiving funds without having to perform any repairs. All of these possible policies and/or actions leave the consumer without protection.

In conclusion, if the $35 fee will not be refunded in accordance with the advertised business policy on the Web site owned by the business, I would like at a minimum that this complaint be made public by the Revdex.com so that future consumers can be protected. I thank you for the opportunity to participate in this process and continue to value the function of the Revdex.com regardless of the outcome.

Sincerely yours.

Business

Response:

February 10, 2014

Dear Revdex.com c/o **. [redacted],

I consider that BLR has fully answered [redacted]’s previous Revdex.com complaint (see attachment). However, he has refuted our reply and trying to influence into an approving response of his liking. His most current memo is very above-board, and I do show appreciation for his persistent nature, but I do object when one’s goal is solely a paroxysm.

I will respond to the dissident of his comments, but, I will first make an illustration that [redacted] is an instrument for information and not the ultimate solution. As a career military officer, I would not rely on [redacted] to fly a plane without hands-on experience at the yoke with a live instructor:

OR

How to perform CPR successfully, even though, endorsed by AHA without hands-on training with a live instructor: [redacted]

As a homeowner something as “BASIC” as changing Oil in a lawnmower, sharpening/replacing the Blade, Air Filter, Fuel Stabilization without consulting the experts and/or manufactures such as [redacted] & [redacted], [redacted], [redacted], or there designated representative(s) ... vice a retailer such: [redacted]

Though, [redacted] is a vast resource to today’s internet Do It Yourself (DIY), conversely, it is not always correct since there is not a comprehensive assessment to ensure safety and/or proficiency. By Kevin’s own admission he is not a Subject Matter Expert (SME) with regards to small engines - which I agree. There are inherent problems with the three examples listed above. I will only address one -

lawnmower video. There are copious flaws with the video, but the most vital, when the gentleman states “Secure the nut [blade bolt]”. What does that mean? What Tool? How tight? He doesn’t demonstrate the use of a Torque Wrench nor states the foot-pounds to tighten the bolt. Tighten the bolt too tight might result in a breakage and your most likely left with a lawnmower that will become a internet ad; Too Loose, then one might become an amputee or forbid a casualty to life [or property]. I am not here to debate the legal implication of [redacted], but I will make the Revdex.com and [redacted] aware that I am a SME on all three examples of above because I have had training by SME’s that taught me on the correct operational procedure by understanding material, classroom training/instruction, on-hand supervision/familiarity and to finish off with a proficiency exam. We will address the safety cable shortly.

Again, Burke’s Lawnmower Repair, offers free estimates for basic diagnostic evaluation of small engines per our website: www.burkeslawnmower.com which is asterisked and states, “call for details”. The majority of our business is generated from free evaluations contrary to Kevin’s declare. By the way I am aware of one other submission to the Revdex.com, vice the additional one that he states.

[redacted] brought in his machine due to a “safety” brake cable that was broken on his lawnmower which prevents loss of limb[s] or possible death -[redacted] I will not allow [redacted], or any other non sanctioned/endorsed medium to dictate our business practices. Safety is our foremost concern before profits. We evaluate all small engines as an entity, including its frame/infrastructure. We evaluate each machine for the basics first, however, when an out-of-order part of a set is visible then the “basic” is no longer basic. Again, the majority of our customers are “NOT” charged a Diagnostic Fee (which is stamped on all our claim checks) therefore not “artificially inflated” and most of our customer “APPROVE” repairs and/or services before any fee is assessed.

Lastly, I hire the best staff by screening and testing, point blank. All are great mechanics, and most importantly 1 am teaching my young employees to become successful citizens once they progress to their next chapter with values, ethics, and respect. So, there assessment of a defensive customer is my baseline for further dialogue and elucidation. As for the “Safety Brake Cable” stated by [redacted] in his second to last paragraph; the operative word is “Safety” and we will leave it at that and wish that his repair remains successful. As for his purchase of the cable on [redacted]; we only utilize OEM parts [or approved equivalent] from a reputable supplier which might cost a little more.

Revdex.com, thank you for the opportunity to respond again, though, I will not respond to his labor price arithmetic which strictly opinionative with no market research, aside from a video. Our estimates are all-inclusive to ensure safety and return a not working piece of equipment back to a properly functioning mechanism without shortcuts.

If you could please provide me a copy of the third complaint that has been mentioned, I would be most grateful.

If you have any additional questions or need further clarification please visit our website www.burkeslawnmower , call me at ###-###-#### or email me at [redacted].