So what is a 'Full Service History'?
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Screenwash may save your life
Next: Is there some way of findng the best route from a to e together with the distance?
From: Adrian on 15 Jun 2010 09:29 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> But, again, we've moved away from the original topic. In that instance, >> IIRC, there was no suggestion that work had been carried out but had no >> supporting paperwork. Quite the opposite - the little paperwork there >> was an accurate representation of the meagre maintenance the vehicle >> had had. > Precisely - and a *full* service history is as you say, "an accurate > representation of the meagre maintenance", or could be an accurate > representation of an excellent maintenace record. No, that's not what I say at all. > Basically because we have a *full* service history I say we don't. > we can tell that the car *has or hasn't* been serviced within the > manufacturers recommended guidelines. Without the FSH, we wouldn't have > this information. Again, I say that the very differentiator between a Full Service History and just a service history is that there paperwork to cover the full recommendation to that point. > Having a Full Service History doesn't mean the car has been fully > serviced according to guidelines So - and I've asked this before without an answer - what WOULD you term documentation that demonstrates compliance with the recommendations?
From: GT on 15 Jun 2010 09:47 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:87pdhfFoq0U6(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >>> But, again, we've moved away from the original topic. In that instance, >>> IIRC, there was no suggestion that work had been carried out but had no >>> supporting paperwork. Quite the opposite - the little paperwork there >>> was an accurate representation of the meagre maintenance the vehicle >>> had had. > >> Precisely - and a *full* service history is as you say, "an accurate >> representation of the meagre maintenance", or could be an accurate >> representation of an excellent maintenace record. > > No, that's not what I say at all. > >> Basically because we have a *full* service history > > I say we don't. Well then you are wrong then as we have documentation for every service carried out on the vehicle so the service history is a full one, not a partial service history, but a full complete record. There would have to be something missing for the history not to be full. >> we can tell that the car *has or hasn't* been serviced within the >> manufacturers recommended guidelines. Without the FSH, we wouldn't have >> this information. > > Again, I say that the very differentiator between a Full Service History > and just a service history is that there paperwork to cover the full > recommendation to that point. And again, you are adding meaning to a simple phrase that does not include the meaning that you are adding. A service history is a record of work done to a car if that record is full, then its a full history, if the record is incomplete then its a partial history. The term 'full service history' doesn't carry any information to do with recommendations and intervals! >> Having a Full Service History doesn't mean the car has been fully >> serviced according to guidelines > > So - and I've asked this before without an answer - what WOULD you term > documentation that demonstrates compliance with the recommendations? You have had an answer, perhaps not directly after the question in a reply, but it has been answered. But to summarise and repeat: I don't know of a commonly used term to describe a vehicle that has been serviced within a manufacteres guildlines - if I wanted to know that information, I would gleen it from a full service history and decide for myself whether the car has been serviced to my liking or not. If enquiring about the standard or frequency of the service history, one could ask.. "has the car always been serviced within the manufacturers guidlines?". The answer should then be "yes" or "no", but personally I wouldn't ask that question. I would ask to see the service history for the vehicle so that I could establish (or prove) that for myself. Whilst examining the set of service records, I would ask, "is this a full service history, or is anything missing?". The answer would tell me whether I was reading the *full history* of the vehicle or a partial history of the vehicle, the answer carries no implication as to service intervals or manufacturers guidelines, it simply tells me if the set of records represent the full history (FSH) for the vehicle or whether the records do not document the full history (not FSH).
From: Adrian on 15 Jun 2010 09:51 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> Basically because we have a *full* service history >> I say we don't. > Well then you are wrong then as we have documentation for every service > carried out on the vehicle so the service history is a full one, not a > partial service history, but a full complete record. There would have to > be something missing for the history not to be full. There is. The services the car didn't get. It is a history to show that the car has been partially serviced, not a history to show the car has been fully serviced. >>> Having a Full Service History doesn't mean the car has been fully >>> serviced according to guidelines >> So - and I've asked this before without an answer - what WOULD you term >> documentation that demonstrates compliance with the recommendations? > You have had an answer, perhaps not directly after the question in a > reply, but it has been answered. But to summarise and repeat: > > I don't know of a commonly used term to describe a vehicle that has been > serviced within a manufacteres guildlines - if I wanted to know that > information, I would gleen it from a full service history and decide for > myself whether the car has been serviced to my liking or not. If you were selling that car, what would you put in the ad? How would you differentiate your ad, for a car which has been serviced to the manufacturer's recommendations, from one which has not?
From: GT on 15 Jun 2010 10:16 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:87per4Foq0U7(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >>>> Basically because we have a *full* service history > >>> I say we don't. > >> Well then you are wrong then as we have documentation for every service >> carried out on the vehicle so the service history is a full one, not a >> partial service history, but a full complete record. There would have to >> be something missing for the history not to be full. > > There is. The services the car didn't get. We are going round in circles and we both intelligent enough to realise it, but stubborn enough to keep running. I think the word 'full' refers to the fact that the documentation is a full history. You think the word full implies that the documentation should show that the car has been serviced according to guidelines. My interpretation follows the standard definition of a 'full history' of something, your intepretation follows the "salesman's interpretation" that the servicing for the vehicle is fully complient with guidelines. We are both right and we are both wrong. That a fair summary? Oh, and my advert would read... "2002 Alfa Romeo 2.0JTS. One careful owner. FSH. Slight scuff marks from running over Doug's bike. All reasonable offers considered."
From: Adrian on 15 Jun 2010 10:21
"GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> Well then you are wrong then as we have documentation for every >>> service carried out on the vehicle so the service history is a full >>> one, not a partial service history, but a full complete record. There >>> would have to be something missing for the history not to be full. >> There is. The services the car didn't get. > We are going round in circles and we both intelligent enough to realise > it, but stubborn enough to keep running. I think the word 'full' refers > to the fact that the documentation is a full history. You think the word > full implies that the documentation should show that the car has been > serviced according to guidelines. My interpretation follows the standard > definition of a 'full history' of something, your intepretation follows > the "salesman's interpretation" that the servicing for the vehicle is > fully complient with guidelines. We are both right and we are both > wrong. > > That a fair summary? No. I would have said that, in the specific context of a record of the maintenance a used car has had, my interpretation followed the standard definition in use by damn near everybody for decades. > Oh, and my advert would read... > > "2002 Alfa Romeo 2.0JTS. One careful owner. FSH. Which doesn't distinguish your car which has had every recommended service from one that might only have seen the inside of a workshop once from new. You might also like to say what model of Alfa it is... |