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: Ret. on 14 Jun 2010 13:33 Talking to a friend of mine today. He changed his car two days ago and the salesman had phoned him up today to complain that when he asked my friend if his trade-in had a 'full service history' he had replied yes - when, in fact, the servicing of the car was very patchy. My friend replied: "You didn't ask me if the car had been serviced according the manufacturer's recommendations. You asked me if the car had a full service history - and it does, because there is a clear record of every service that has been done." His argument is that a full service history has no official definition and, IHO, a 'history' of every service carried out is indeed a full service history - even if the car has only been serviced every couple of years! The salesman was annoyed but the deal was done and he is not taking it any further. I'm not convinced that he would have any case to take it further anyway. I have always done my own servicing - mainly because I have plenty of experience of the appalling standards at garages. I stick meticulously to the manufacturer's recommendations. I have blank copies of the official manufacturer's servicing schedules - and tick each of the boxes as I go along. I keep all servicing item receipts, and I stamp the book with my own address stamp and then sign it. So, when a salesman asks me: "Does your car have a full service history?" Do I just answer "Yes" - or do I need to qualify my answer? To date I have always replied; "Yes - although I have done the servicing myself." I don't really see why I should have to do that however - because a FSH is a FSH - even if the services have not been carried out at a garage. My friend has a point. If a car salesman is so concerned about servicing history - then he should make it clear precisly what he is requesting. -- Kev
From: Nick Finnigan on 14 Jun 2010 14:31 Ret. wrote: > > I stick meticulously to the manufacturer's recommendations. I have blank > copies of the official manufacturer's servicing schedules - and tick > each of the boxes as I go along. I keep all servicing item receipts, and > I stamp the book with my own address stamp and then sign it. > > So, when a salesman asks me: "Does your car have a full service > history?" Do I just answer "Yes" - or do I need to qualify my answer? > > To date I have always replied; "Yes - although I have done the servicing > myself." I don't really see why I should have to do that however - > because a FSH is a FSH - even if the services have not been carried out > at a garage. Say "Yes - and I have done the servicing myself". > My friend has a point. If a car salesman is so concerned about servicing > history - then he should make it clear precisly what he is requesting. He should make sure that he can convincingly tell the lucky punter who will be purchasing the bargain vehicle that it has a FSH.
From: Adrian on 14 Jun 2010 16:37 bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>> My friend has a point. >>>> No, your friend is a disingenuous git. >>> And, of course, car salesemen are always paragons of virtue and >>> honesty. >> So it's OK to lie and cheat, so long as you only lie and cheat to >> somebody who might also be a lie and cheat? >> >> "Honour amongst thieves"? > If a seller states that a car has FSH and then you check it personally > and it hasn't, then you simply avoid buying 'anything' from that > seller....simple. But if FSH just means "All the paperwork for the handful of maintenance I've ever bothered giving it" - as, it seems, it does when selling - then surely there's no problem?
From: bod on 14 Jun 2010 16:54 Adrian wrote: > bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > >>>>>> My friend has a point. > >>>>> No, your friend is a disingenuous git. > >>>> And, of course, car salesemen are always paragons of virtue and >>>> honesty. > >>> So it's OK to lie and cheat, so long as you only lie and cheat to >>> somebody who might also be a lie and cheat? >>> >>> "Honour amongst thieves"? > >> If a seller states that a car has FSH and then you check it personally >> and it hasn't, then you simply avoid buying 'anything' from that >> seller....simple. > > But if FSH just means "All the paperwork for the handful of maintenance > I've ever bothered giving it" - as, it seems, it does when selling - then > surely there's no problem? > > But a FSH to me, means a full service at least yearly, besides of course any other repairs/maintenance etc, in addition. If the history falls short of that criteria, then it cannot be classed as full, IMO. Bod
From: Adrian on 14 Jun 2010 17:03
bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> If a seller states that a car has FSH and then you check it >>> personally >>> and it hasn't, then you simply avoid buying 'anything' from that >>> seller....simple. >> But if FSH just means "All the paperwork for the handful of maintenance >> I've ever bothered giving it" - as, it seems, it does when selling - >> then surely there's no problem? > But a FSH to me, means a full service at least yearly "at least yearly"? Bear in mind that modern service schedules are often 20k miles or two years. Can we agree on "to the schedule"? > besides of course any other repairs/maintenance etc, in addition. > > If the history falls short of that criteria, then it cannot be classed > as full, IMO. So you're agreeing with me that Kev's friend is a deliberately disingenous slug? |