| The commentary box |
December 2006 |
|||
Welcome to a rather belated opening of this
months Commentary Box.Unfortunately Mr Mo Rafique, my invited guest this month and Managing Director of Trauma Claims Consultancy (T C C ), has been unavoidably detained. He sends his apologies and says that he will be joining us, next month, for what I am sure will be a fascinating insight into the medical side of automotive accident claims management. In addition Mo will have some important comments to make, relative to the impending legislation involving Non Fault Accident claims processing. Mention will be made of the new Compensation Act, and the need for all companies concerned to be correctly registered. As the entire Non Fault process invariably starts in the bodyshop, Mo's comments will be highly relevant to the readers of this column. For further information, on the Compensation Act, please take a look at the Monthly Updates section on this website. So, and without Mo, I am stepping forward as a poor substitute and will highlight a few issues that have come to my attention lately. ROAD PRICING: At first glance, perhaps not an issue to grab the headlines in our Industry. Yet, upon closer inspection, it's bound to affect us directly, and indirectly. Having watched the mass production of motor vehicles outstrip the building of roads, should anyone really be surprised that virtual gridlock threatens? Back in the sixties Doctor Beeching set about dismantling our railway system, and what a "double whammy" that turned out to be. Not only did it force more freight onto the roads, it guaranteed that millions of commuters, robbed of their local train services, took to the same roads and at the same time. So, how might this new legislation affect bodyshops? For example, will productive workers, paying road charges to get to work at peak times, settle for earning less, or will they demand a wage rise? Given the latter, how many bodyshops could face, and survive, such demands given the present level of labour rates? Next, one could ask; would bodyshops be responsible for road charges incurred by courtesy cars? Would this be another cost on the bodyshop, or might work providers come to the rescue? Already chasing up speeding fines, parking tickets and congestion charges has proved to be a nightmare for many bodyshops. Then, what about any charges incurred while providing free collecting and delivery services to customers? I could go on, but I guess you've got my drift. No, road charging will never be a fair answer to congestion. I think every one of us should protest now, and before this shoddy tax is allowed to slither unopposed onto the Statute book. " A DOUBTFUL THRONE IS ICE ON SUMMER SEAS" So wrote Alfred Lord Tennyson many years ago. And now, as yet another work provider "takes the axe" to their repairer network the old saying still stays good, as many bodyshops must be left wondering what is safe, and what is not safe, where work provision is concerned. When will our "Dear John" letter arrive is perhaps a sobering thought in the minds of many owners? Perhaps there are no answers, but the old Greeks had the right idea. Never for one moment did they consider using one pillar to keep the roof on the Parthenon. They used plenty, recognising that there is strength in numbers. Similarly bodyshops would be well advised to use the same principle. In my view, no work provider should be given more that 20% to 25% of a bodyshops capacity. Then, without any apology, back to my old "hobby horse," bodyshops should draw up their own Terms of Business to use in negotiations with the next work provider who comes knocking. GROWING: With many bodyshops preparing next years budget, increasing the bottom line will be in plenty of minds. Growing any business is confined to three activities; namely get more customers, put up prices or sell more to the customers you already have. To bodyshops, options one and two may be limited but what about number three? It's called related selling and members of the Bodyshop Fellowship are already being introduced to a prime example of this; one that can produce a three-figure profit gain for very little effort every time it's used. I'll not insult anybody by saying "maximise the estimate". If this is not being done, then it should be. But, is it time to check that all identified, non-accident, work is being quoted for? Take a look at the cars in the bodyshop, and then read the job cards. The results can be quite revealing, perhaps asking if the estimator is motivated to look, and quote, for extra work? As an old boss of mine used to say, "if you get the same rate of pay for marching, as you do for fighting, you don't do a lot of fighting."Of course bodyshops are busy, but never lose sight of the fact that related selling, to the customers you already have, can add significantly to the bottom line. QUALITY CONTROL: Like justice, quality control must be seen to be done and, sadly, I see quite a few bodyshops where the recording of work operations is short circuited, or ignored altogether. With the Law strengthening it's grip on corporate responsibility, bodyshops have an obligation to record the actions they take to regulate quality, throughout the whole repair process. Don't get me wrong, I have no argument (in general) with the quality of repairs being carried out. Yet, many bodyshops would be hard pressed to produce tangible proof, of their repair process, if called upon to do so in a courtroom. A blank document, accompanied by a limp "I told them to fill it in your honour" would never do. So, when completing repairs, a fully signed off quality control document must be an essential part of the process, forming a complete record of the work carried out. (Perhaps a thought for a New Years resolution; check that ours being carried out properly!)
|
||||