Tire replacement

Discussion in 'Motorbike Technical Discussion' started by Larry Blanchard, Apr 6, 2012.

  1. This group's been pretty much non-existent over the winter. Maybe
    this'll get some discussion going.

    I recently bought a new tire that proved to be defective (extensive
    sidewall cracks in about 2 months). The manufacturer, Dunlop, sent a new
    tire at no cost, but would not pay for re-installation. At 75 I wasn't
    about to do it myself.

    So I called Dunlop and was told that the reasons for the non-
    reimbursement policy were:

    1. Some people install them themselves.

    2. Some shops overcharge to install them.

    I pointed out that even the DIY'er incurred the cost of lost time and
    that a simple fixed amount, say $20, would solve the overcharging and
    mollify the DIY'er. The response was along the lines of "That's above my
    pay grade but I'll pass it along."

    Seems a bit unfair that either the end user or the vendor should have to
    pay for something that was Dunlop's mistake. Are all motorcycle tire
    manufacturers like this?

    Luckily my vendor is a good guy. I took the wheel off, which is easy on
    my old SR500, and they did the replacement for free. So I'm out a
    minimal amount of labor - they're out a bit more. But it still doesn't
    seem fair.
    Larry Blanchard, Apr 6, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  2. Larry Blanchard

    Mark Olson Guest

    I'd guess that somewhere between 75 and 95 percent of all street
    bike tires are not installed by the owner, so if they buy the
    tire from a shop, the shop eats the labor and the customer isn't
    out any cash, other than the inconvenience. I do all my own
    mounting and balancing and I'd
    probably be happy to get the tire replaced without quibbling and
    I wouldn't ask for any compensation. If they gave me a hard time
    about replacing an obviously defective tire, or it happened too
    many times, then I'd be looking to a different manufacturer and
    not looking back.
    Mark Olson, Apr 6, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  3. And my point is that I don't think the shop should have to eat the labor
    any more than I should.
    Larry Blanchard, Apr 7, 2012
  4. Larry Blanchard

    Mark Olson Guest

    As it happens, I agree with you 100%. Obviously Dunlop has a different
    view, yet shops are still buying their tires and putting them on customers'

    I suppose the point I was trying to make was that this sort of problem is
    pretty rare and doesn't rise to the sort of situation where it is costing
    Dunlop a lot of business. I would be interested in finding out if other
    tire makers do reimburse for labor charges or not, I suspect not but I
    don't know.
    Mark Olson, Apr 7, 2012
  5. Larry Blanchard

    Ian Field Guest

    I'm obviously missing something here - why wouldn't you just return the
    defective product to the dealer who supplied and fitted it and let them get
    on with it?

    When the jobs done they give you a call to come collect it and you probably
    wouldn't have give a second thought to who pays labour costs.

    Was that brand of tyre your idea or theirs? - Probably wouldn't be theirs if
    that choice was in the habit of eroding their profits.
    Ian Field, Apr 13, 2012
  6. I know I'm an old fart, but have the rules of ethics changed that much in
    my lifetime? The dealer didn't manufacture the defective product - why
    should replacing it cost him money? I didn't manufacture the tire either
    so I shouldn't have to pay either.

    What it boils down to is that the manufacturer is passing along the costs
    of replacing a defective product when the manufacturer should be
    responsible for those costs. That's unethical in my book.
    Larry Blanchard, Apr 14, 2012
  7. Larry Blanchard

    Mark Olson Guest

    No, the dealer shouldn't have to bear the cost, but he is also free to
    start a discussion with Dunlop re: getting a refund, after he has taken
    care of you, his customer. It's one of the reasons why retailers charge
    a reasonable markup on the goods they sell, after all.

    If you bought a radio from a Target store, and it failed, would you get
    in touch with Panasonic in Japan or would you take it back to Target?
    Same thing, really, just a different product.
    Mark Olson, Apr 14, 2012
  8. Larry Blanchard

    Ian Field Guest

    Pretty much its a case of any reputable dealer will regard it as "the cost
    of doing business", and hope its a rare occurrence.

    The dealer has also gone beyond the call of duty to treat you fairly, so you
    will probably feel obligated to reward them with future custom in due

    I don't know where you are, or how consumer protection regs there compare to
    the one's here, but its a common thing that manufacturers readily replace
    defective parts without quibble - but let the cost of labour to fit it fall
    on the retailer that sold the item.

    This was certainly the case with warranty replacement CRTs in TVs - usually
    a right PITA job too.
    Ian Field, Apr 14, 2012
  9. Larry Blanchard


    May 7, 2012
    Likes Received:
    lol. here in thailand, every recept has writen on it " NO REFUND UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE"
    munz, May 7, 2012
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.