Co-worker interested in new rims. Any reason why they refused "try them on" his car so he could decide if he liked how it looked?:squint:
If you are saying they refused to mount the rims on his car just so he could see what they looked like....well yeah, then the wheels are no longer new. Anything could happen to them like a scratch or something and who eats that cost. It's a liability issue.
Tell your buddy about Tirerack.com. He can pick his car, select the color, and search thru thier selection of Rims, different sizes, to get an idea of what x wheel looks like on his car. I also agree with what Trey said above.
umm.. you mean if the installer scratches them while installing them? thats pretty weaksauce. I mean think about it, its not like the guy was going to drive off with them or something. These were visual appeal rims, they've got the car jacked up for crying out loud. ...it seems really anti customer-service to me...
Tell him to try www.wheelenvizio.com They have to test fit the wheels anywase there is no reason they would not put them on. As long as they did not mount them.
I have never even considered going to a shop to have wheels fitted onto the car without buying them. I don't see that as anti-customer service IMO, and this is beyond what I would expect any reasonable shop to do. I have had good luck with discount tire in the past. They have great prices, and fast service. On a side note, I go to Gran Turismo East for my alignment needs, and most of my tire needs. I ordered my last set of wheels from tirerack .
dont get me wrong, I love my branch of DT. But it seems contrary to conventional wisdom for them not to extend this courtesey. I was really confused considering the good service i've gotten from them before. So, because the installer might damage them, they wont try them on...seems really weak cop-out to me...
Put yourself in DT's shoes. Most people in your position are honest and just want to try some wheels on. But there will be one guy who wants to try on some used wheels he passed off as new, gets them intsalled by a DT tech, and then blames the tech for some blemish or scratch that was already there. The this customer tries to sue DT for the "lost value" in these wheels. Businesses have to protect themselves from the sue-happy public. Most business policies are related to some incident in the past where a customer has tried to sue or rip off the business.
I would just imagine the time wasted if customers wanted to try out several different wheels on their car before making the purchase... If you want to see what wheels look, use the tirerack website, or find a similar car on forums that has the wheels. I am more geared towards light weight and fitment more than appearance. The 17x9 +45 koseis fit perfect on the STi and are quite light. -- Brian
i would be too, but I referred this co-worker to DT because of my good service history because he was looking for some style rims, and they've got a Georgia special $30 off sets of wheels & tires. I dunno, I've been a manager with CircuitCity and trained 3 people who placed top 10 in the country in the same year, so I guess maybe my customer service ethic is a little different somehow. Its not like you're asking them to install a car stereo to try it out... And it speaks of the quality of service you can expect at that branch if they are so concerned that THEIR OWN TECHS would damage the rim while placing them on the car; you're left to wonder if you'd want to buy from them anyways for fear of damaged goods...
i am an asst. mgr. at Discount Tire.. So what would be the problem with putting the wheel on the car un mounted? Just like at Circut City when installing something you have to pay the tech working on the vehicle.. So mounting multiple wheels just to see how they look would cost.If you really want to see an "in stock"wheel mounted on your car then we will take care of you. Im at the lilburn location, come see me.. Andif thats too far pm me what store and ill call the manager. Im on my cell so sorry if any typos
I agree with Brian, it would be a huge waste of company time to just mount and unmount wheels all day long so a customer can see what they look like on the car. What if 60% of the people don't even buy the wheels from DT? That is counter-productive, not to mention all they money DT loses while paying customers are waiting for a tech to become available. Can you mount a new Alpine in my dash so I can see what it looks like? Don't wire it up or anything, I just want to see what it looks like in the dash. It's the same thing...........
you see, I disagree with this analogy. There was no other business at the time. Thats the first thing I asked the co-worker, knowing that if there was work in the bays, it would be REEEEELY poor service to even entertain such a browsing request whilst work was backing up. Don't misunderstand me, guys. They weren't rude to him or tried to screw him or anything. And I love shopping at my DT in Woodstock(got my kumhos there in about 25 minutes). BUt I haven't mentioned which store he went to because I didn't want to spread a bad opinion inadvertantly without getting some more info. I was just trying to get some more possible insight on the situation. KA, I'll pass your invitation on to him, and thanks for looking in on it.
OK, you work at Circuit City, right? Do you guys install and sound systems in people's homes or vehicles just to so they can see how they look/sound? Probably not. Even IF the cost weren't prohibitive, CC still wouldn't do it. Why? Because anytime you (a business) work with/on/in someone's PERSONAL PROPERTY, you become potentially liable for anything that goes wrong. A customer could very easily ask a tech at CC or DT to install something just to see how it looked, sounds simple. Then the customer complains about some damage to his car: a scratch on the paint or some trim piece inside the car is bent or something. Unless CC or DT did a complete check of the entire vehicle with pictures for proof, the customer could then blame CC or DT for the damage even if it was there before the "just to see how it looks" install. So, REGARDLESS of the man-hours and cost involved in giving away free services, this would be a bad idea for any company. But don't blame the company, blame the public who wants to place responsibilty on someone else and profit from it through legal action.
*re-reads* Okay, I think there was a key misunderstanding in that my co-worker was shopping for rims that DT was actually selling, he wasn't bringing him some rims and expecting them to mount them for nothing. I wonder if i didn't make that clear.
I went by DT today and bought some tires at the one in Lilburn. Great service by Kevin (KA04WRX) and the other guys. I would highly recommend you guys going up there if you need any tires. They have a great special right now for forum members: http://www.wrxatlanta.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15982 :bigthumb:
+1 for DT, free wheel balance and rotation for tires you purchase there. "Okay, I think there was a key misunderstanding in that my co-worker was shopping for rims that DT was actually selling, he wasn't bringing him some rims and expecting them to mount them for nothing. I wonder if i didn't make that clear." Its clear, just consider the Circuit City analgoy: would CC install a headunit (in stock at CC) in your car for free to see how it looks/sounds....Nope.
okay then, if that was clear, I'll continue... ;p (yeah that is a killer deal...makes me wish I needed tires... no, wait, that would be bad...) This is not an equitable characterisation either. In one sentence you're talking about defending the decision not to based on cost, and then in the next sentence saying cost is irrellevant. It's either about liability or its not, and in this case I simply disbelieve it to be valid for it to be about liability. The main liability issue people in this thread were bringing up is "what if the new rims got damaged?" To that, my response is, that would be on the tech and the company's shoulders, wether you were browsing or already bought them is simply irrelevant to that. So if this is a real reason put forth, then I say that is indicative of a deeper concern that the tech is not actually capable of reliably installing the rims without damaging them. The other liabilty is "what if they damaged my cart putting them on?" The answer would be the exact same. If you were buying or browsing doesn't matter. If you're installing a wheel, you're installing a wheel. One would understand that having liability insurance is an extension of being afraid that your workers would mess up. It is immaterial to general liability insurance if you were test-fitting, or actually installing as the actions to do both are the same. Also, there's nothing stopping the customer from alleging damage was done by a tech of some kind even if no work was done. The other issue about workload I already addressed by saying they didn't have a workload at the time. And for installing a head unit to be a fair direct comparison to a wheel install as far as cost; the wheel install would have to involve special valve stems for every kind of wheel and car that would be incompatible with eachother, a new custom rotor to be used by default along with special adapters or spacers, the entire fender and quarterpanels would have to come off half the time and a 1/4 of the time get body modified in some way to work with... I think a more fair comparison would probably be a manager refusing to open the package of an MP3 player with an athletic armband to try it on. And the customer wouldn't even want to turn it on. Don't misunderstand: I totally agree a business is perfectly within its rights to say 'no' to such a thing. I just found it troubling and tacky that something so comparatively simple when requested would be refused. Should I find myself in a position that I had no business at the moment, and someone who could give/get me more business wanted to sample something that would cost me no additional loss to do, I would definetly be remiss as a buiness manager if I didn't at least consider it. Its not like he could drive off with them on. ... I guess all you guys think I'm crazy for thinking this way, but it really did trouble me, especially cause I had such good service from two branches of DT already.
Woah, way overthinking! But look at it this way: the fact that you DON'T understand means that you are an honest, decent human being. Companies come up with policies to protect themselves from criminals and plain old douchebags. Unfortunately, honest folk like us suffer because there are jerks out there who will lie cheat or steal whatever they can.
Your point is completely valid, but you really have to take into account one more factor: People who are already paying for a service are worth the risk in liability, people who just want stuff for free aren't. Basically if a company performs more free services, they are openeing themselves up to more liability without (in the businesses opinion) making more profit
yeah thats a case-by-case thing for a manager to judge, i agree. It was just based on the info i got from co-worker, i was all like WTF? But if you all think I'm.... quackers, I'll just drop it I guess, and be whiny on my own time.