I have been asked about using the video I posted for educational purposes. Even though nobody really needs my permission since I have posted it in a public forum, I wanted to make sure that everybody knows they are absolutely welcome to use any portion of the story or video for educational purposes. Hopefully the lessons I've learned will be useful to others as well.
Scuba Sciences Regulator Repair Problem
- Thread starter cjust
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
scubatimmay
Registered
I would like to add my thougts on his thread.I am in the automotive repair business.We get accused and blamed for everything on a car.You touched it,your married to it.Do we really know what the customer does after they leave our shop?No we don't.Same here.None of us were there.Who knows the real story.Alot of people seem to want bad luck to happen to Scuba Sciences.How do we not know this is not a set-up?Maybe?Maybe not?Seems like no one out there has ever had bad service anywhere but there.How can that be so?How have they been in business for so long?I want to be fair on this.So how about the rest of you.Alot of jail house lawyers giver advise on here.Everyone is always ready to go for the worst.And putting people's full name's on here is a all time low.Put your own name and address and phone number.That's all.Timmay -------.(602)--- ---- Thanks..................
R
redacted
Guest
scubatimmay:
That makes sense. You do a valve job. 1 week and 200 miles later the guy is back with a blown head gasket. I'll bet the owner loosened those head bolts.
scubatimmay:
Hi Tim,
For one, you are very correct and I think many people have said that "we do not really know what happened". There is a lot of circumstantial speculation, but no concrete facts. There has even been debate about whether or not this could have happened during baggage handling.
As for it being a setup, that seems a little CSI to me. Not saying it is not plausible, but you may be stretching the realities of plausibility.
Now you are hitting the crux of this thread. I am positive we have all had bad service from other shops than the one in question. I think the issue is on how they have handled it. From outright denial to shaking fingers at people. In some cases, it feels like the shop has been their own worst enemy on this thread. My opinion.
How long they have been in business is irrelevant. You could say they have been in business this long simply because they have the best sign in the Metro Phoenix area. Location, location, location. Quite frankly, when I moved to the valley, ten years ago, they were the first shop I visited, simply by the fact that they were right off the highway. Reputation and business longevity had nothing to do with it.
As for the Jailhouse lawyer comment, I have no idea where you were heading with that. Legal liability hasn't been mentioned once. Most likely, since there was no injury, damages would be limited to straight forward financial losses that could be directly linked to the shop's alleged negligence. Since you so adeptly noted in the beginning of your message that it cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was the fault of the LDS in question, it would be a tough go. Furthermore, this would be small claims court dispute and it wouldn't be worth the time for the OP to file. This makes me believe, judging by the OPs original request of full refund, that he is not looking to be malicious.
Tim, I am not beating up on you or your post. None of my posts are intended to beat up on the LDS in question. I think the issue was how the LDS in question handled the original issue and then handled the public relations issue on this board. Doesn't mean they are a bad shop or a good shop. Doesn't mean they were right or wrong. What it means is a dissatisfied customer used the Internet (the most powerful communication medium in the world) to express his opinion. All shop owners, staff, employees and instructors should take note. If you can't resolve a dispute with an angry customer, prepare to defend yourself and position in Cyberspace.
I personally am also using the post to make some changes to my instruction on pre-dive checks to focus on life support connections more thoroughly. I plan on using the video as an example of what could happen should you not do so. I thank the OP for sharing. I also like to think I learn from things the LDS in question has done right and what they have done wrong in this instance. So, I personally would like to thank the LDS in question in helping me redefine how I handle customer service and relations. Specifically handling these issues inside our 21st century world.
Tim, you can look at the glass as half empty or half full. I try to find the positive. If nothing else, the LDS has many strong supporters and friends. They tend to rally when instances like this pop up. Perhaps that is an example of something done right. I have two questions for the LDS, and in my opinion would close the matter completely.
1. Are they considering refunding the OP's money has a way of making a mends with a dissatisfied customer (without admitting liability).
2. Did they learn anything (define anything from a technical, business, instructional, legal or public relations) from this event, whether they think it was their fault or not. If so, what procedural changes are they incorporating? This is more professional curiousity than anything else.
jcf
- Messages
- 1,487
- Reaction score
- 0
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
I don't think it's a matter of nobody has received bad service anywhere before, as has been pointed out on here in previous posts, Mistakes happen so I'm led to believe that these other Phoenix shops resolve their issues in private with the customer to their satisfaction (before it escalates to a public forum) -OR- the customer simply drops the issue (i.e. cuts their losses) and moves on. I would think it's probably a fair bit of both. I know SS has caught alot of flack in the 2 threads in the last few months, but if you step back from all the collateral issues that have come up, gripes and digs and examine the OPs at the heart of both threads are customer service issues that could have been handled privately and quickly and weren't. Had they been handled effectively when the customers first contacted the shop, long before their SB posts, we would have never heard about these issues, we wouldn't be having this conversation.scubatimmay:
Longevity is not really a determining factor of a business' character, validity, ethics, etc., plenty of businesses out there I wouldn't charactized as having great customer service, management, etc. and survive, alot even thrive. I'm not saying SSI falls into either category, I'm just saying longevity is not really a valid argument.scubatimmay:
I suppose your referring to my post here of the President name, I was simply answering a question, it took me all of 10 seconds to look up the answer on the BBB site (Tina has stated they are a member an it's on their website), it's already in public domain/online (at the link provided), I simply cut-n-pasted the info and blanked out the phone number as a courtesy. If it were confidential information not to be used or shared it wouldn't have been there publicly and readily available under the heading of Customer Contact. Actually it's no different than posting the name of the President of Scubapro or Zeagle, etc. on the board IMO; which happens all the time on here. If you got a problem with it you can always contact a MOD or our local guide sjspeck to take a look.scubatimmay:
-Garrett
scubatimmay:
I've had issues with other shops. The difference is I went into the shop, told them the problem, and they put the reg right on the bench and corrected the problem. No questions asked. No finger pointing. No nothing but good customer service. It's already been said, but I'll say it again. The issue is not what happened. The issue is how it has been handled.
Oh, and for information about me, click here.
Dive-aholic:
The way I see it, it's like this. You use a parachute. It fails on you on the way down. You have to go to your reserve. You corner the shop that packed it about it then they say "Well, let us do it again for you...."
WHAT!!?? :11: Um...NO.. You had your chance to work on my life-support equipment. Why would I give them a chance to screw it up again?
Unfair analogy? No. The end outcome is the potentially the same. We still rely upon equipment to keep us alive. If that equipment isn't in top shape, bad things could happen.
Darin
I don't sky dive, but if I did, I think I'd be packing my own chute.
May be a good argument to service our own regs? After all this, gotta admit, the idea sounds pretty good. I work with my hands and with small part all day long. Maybe I can get in on a repair/tech class somewhere....
Darin
Darin
R
redacted
Guest
Darin:
Yes, but the parachute shops are not doing everything they can to prevent you from packing your own parachute. Try to find a shop that will sell you regulator parts.
They will botch your regulator service and then claim they are not responsible because they can't control what happens after the regulator leaves the shop. But they then claim that the liability from selling parts is too great. BS
Similar threads
