IS THE AUTO CLUB COURTING DIVORCE?  A rocky marriage of convenience for the last several years, the relationship between CAA and its AARS (Approved Auto Repair Services) Affiliates appears headed for total collapse. At least that's the way AARO member Dan Cecchin, the operator of Select Auto Service in St. Catharines sees it.

Cecchin recently heard a strong rumour - since confirmed - that CAA's Niagara Division would soon open its own repair and emissions testing facility, and right in his backyard. He's hopping mad. And he's not even an AARS affiliate. How angry must they be?

"I, for one, think this will hamper the income of many small businesses... if push comes to shove I will contact a federal MP, as well as my local MPP to strongly oppose this (CAA) decision," asserted the scorned garage operator.

In a News Brief we posted almost two years ago, AARO reported that AAA - the Canadian association's U.S. kinfolk - had gotten into the retail automotive service and repair business in Sacramento, California. (Ref. "Competing With the Auto Club", a Mar. 2/01 entry in the News Archives.) In that article we postulated that "ideas hatched stateside are often cloned, and later re-introduced in Canada". In light of the news coming out of the Niagara region, it seems we get an "A" for "Accuracy" for that particular prognostication.

AARO VP Dave Peck, himelf an AARS Affiliate, called CAA's Mike Jackson to check out the rumour from our St. Catharines-based member: "I was told 'yes', their Niagara division is in fact opening a retail auto repair facility down there," lamented Peck.

"We didn't have much time when we spoke, but since then I've been trying to wrap my thoughts around the situation. I've asked myself, 'how would this affect my business if CAA was opening an auto repair facility right here in Thornhill?' I'm not sure I'd be any less annoyed and concerned about it than our AARO member in St. Catharines is," said Peck.

AARO Membership Services Administrator Luanne Ingram says this latest CAA activity is just the most recent - albeit the most serious - of a string of beefs their affiliates have with them. The rumour out of St. Catharines prompted her to read through the News Archives on the AARO Web site. She wanted to find precisely how many grievances there'd actually been, and discovered there are issues dating back to the fall of 1999.

"First it was batteries sold at roadside, and card-swipe loyalty programs with Sunoco and Speedy Auto Centres; in the Spring of 2000 they began lobbying the government, trying to get them to water down the Drive Clean program; in 2001 we heard they were experimenting with a Saskatchewan-based copy-cat of that retail auto repair facility in California; last year it was some tactless promotion that really upset service station operators; and here we are... 2003 is barely underway and we learn they'll soon be competing with their own affiliates for auto repair work in St. Catharines. They ought to write a book. I have a title for them: they could call it, 'How NOT to Treat One's Associates'," quipped Ingram.

As for Dave Peck, he plans to place another call to Mike Jackson.

"I want to have a no-nonsense chat with him to find out exactly what his position is on all of this. On the surface, from an AARS Affilate's perspective, what they're doing seems indefensible. Nonetheless, I believe one deserves an opportunity to explain his actions before he's marched to the gallows. I'll inform our staff members and the AARO board of directors about what he has to say as soon as we've spoken again," Peck promised.

Editor's Note:  Stay tuned!

Posted Jan. 29/03

 

SWAT TEAMS NOW CONVERGING ON GARAGES:  Don't be shocked if a couple of uniformed men pay you an unannounced visit. Word has reached us that the Ontario Ministry of Environment's SWAT (Soil, Water, Air) Teams are descending on auto repair garages.

Last Spring their attention was focused on auto body shops, (See our May 23/02 News Brief Posting in Archives,) but thanks to Instructors Glenn McNally and Ross Merrow, we've learned that the so-called SWAT teams have begun to make surprise visits in the repair sector. A garage owner in Blackstock, a town in the Port Perry area, recounted to McNally the circumstances of his environmental compliance audit, and Merrow actually witnessed one at a garage in Keswick, Ontario.

Ross Merrow was on one of his diagnostic calls when the two MOE inspectors arrived. "One had MOE patches on, and the other was wearing blue coveralls with "SWAT" in huge, yellow block letters on the back," he exclaimed. The garage owner subsequently informed Merrow that the investigators remained on his premises all day, and returned the next day - again unannounced - to follow up on some issues.

According to the Keswick garageman, following is a listing of the records and documentation the SWAT team checked out:

The Blackstock garage operator's accounting to Glenn McNally of his experience with the SWAT team indicated that both audits had been carried out in a similar manner.

AARO Training Coordinator Frances Ricci said she was shocked when the Instructors told her about the MOE audits. "These environmental compliance investigations are serious business, but one has to wonder if the 'theatrics' are necessary. Most people relate the term 'SWAT' to drug busts and the like. What on earth will their customers think when these guys arrive at our members' shops?" she asks.

The association's executive director Bill Burkimsher believes AARO members are complying with most of the province's environmental regulations, but he has concerns about one that was passed last year.

"The large number of technicians we've put through our ODP certification and recertification classes tells us they're compliant in that regard. And I know the vast majority of our members would be using a licensed carrier to pick up their waste oil and batteries. But used refrigerants... now that's another matter," he cautioned.

Ontario passed a regulation last year requiring that cylinders of used coolants can only go to a hazardous waste recycler that's fully authorized to accept them. But according to Burkimsher, someone was "asleep at the switch" when they did that.

"There were Ontario-based waste handlers doing business in the residential/commercial A/C sector. They were ready to step to the plate. But incredible though it may sound, the only facility licensed to recycle refrigerants for the mobile sector was one located way out in Alberta," exclaimed Burkimsher. "The government must have known that, so why they went ahead and passed the regulation anyway is anybody's guess," he added.

Burkimsher says that with the assistance of Glenn McNally, AARO took steps to ensure its members could comply with the new regulation. An exclusive refrigerant recovery service for R12 and similar mobile A/C coolants was arranged with Fielding Chemical Technologies Inc., Canada's largest refrigerant recycler. The program was announced on the AARO Web site last September, and an information package concerning it was mailed to the entire membership in December.

"Lots of our members have signed on, but lots have not. I can't imagine they're sending their used refrigerants all the way to Alberta, so maybe some have decided to get out of A/C service altogether. Or perhaps it's just that A/C is out of their sight and mind due to the frigid weather we've been having, and that's not good because there's nothing seasonal about the SWAT visits," observed Burkimsher.

Members anxious to get registered for the refrigerant recovery service should call the AARO office (1-800-268-5400) right away, suggests Assistant Membership Services Administrator Bonnie Black.

"I'll fast-track things on a first come-first served basis, and get them onside with Ontario Environment Regulation 189/94 a.s.a.p.," she promises. "That way, if a SWAT team comes calling they'll have the AARO/Fielding certificate on their wall to prove they're compliant," said Black.

"CLICK HERE" for full details on the Refrigerant Recovery Service program.

"CLICK HERE" to view a specimen of the AARO/Fielding Compliance Certificate.

Posted Jan. 27/03

 

Concern Growing re Newspaper's Appeal for Drive Clean Test Data

MANY FACILITY OPERATORS ARE EXPECTED TO PROTEST the release of "specific garage identifiers" (SGI) that could be used to link emissions test results with the individual Drive Clean Facilities that produced them. In a dogged effort to acquire the data, an unidentified newspaper has launched an Appeal under Ontario's Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

According to AARO executive director Bill Burkimsher, facility operators have good reason to be concerned. If the newspaper's Appeal is successful, the Privacy Commissioner will order the Ministry of Environment to release the garage identifiers. Matched to some other Drive Clean data that's already available, the SGIs would reveal intimate financial details about their respective businesses, he says.

"And that's confidential. It's information that normally only one's accountant, and perhaps his bank manager are privy to. In the hands of a competitor it could be very damaging," said Burkimsher. "But that's exactly what could happen if the appellant (newspaper) gets the information they've asked for. The Privacy Commissioner should definitely not allow the facility operators' sales volumes and other competitive info to become public," he asserted.

The issue of the newspaper's Appeal surfaced early last month. A letter to facility operators from Assistant Privacy Commissioner Tom Mitchinson advised them that a decision had not yet been made to release the garage identifiers, and that they were invited to file a protest if they believed their revelation would be harmful. A letter quickly followed from Drive Clean Office Director Ed Gill who attempted to reduce the confusion the correspondence from the Privacy Commissioner's office left in its wake. Following a flurry of calls received at the AARO office, we also also tried to help cut through the legalese with a bulletin that was faxed to our 250+ member-Drive Clean facility operators. (See "News Alert", five articles below.)

Those of you who practiced due diligence by contacting the Privacy Commissioner about your desire to protest the Appeal have now received further guidelines from them. (And you thought their initial correspondence was confusing!) As they indicated in the covering letter, you now have only until February 7, 2003 to send your representations to them. We wish to stress that it is important for you to follow through with this. Granted, the instructions they've provided for doing it are somewhat daunting to anyone unfamiliar with such a procedure. Us included.

Oh well, not to worry. Ed Gill again came to the rescue. His letter to you of January 22nd put things in easier to understand terms. AARO has tried once again to help, too. Another bulletin was dispatched to our members today (January 23rd) together with a copy of the association's representation to the Privacy Commissioner. We're hopeful that our submission will seed some ideas for your own letters of protest.

Remember, nobody knows better than we do that "it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease". Why not tackle this task over the weekend. Just follow Ed Gill's step-by-step prompters and you'll probably be done with it in time for the Super Bowl game.

"CLICK HERE" to view the January 23, 2003 Bulletin, and our Submission to the Privacy Commissioner of January 17, 2003.

Posted Jan. 23/03

 

SCRAP TIRE REGULATIONS COMING:  Environmental legislation announced by the Ontario government last June has implications for tire dealers. Regulations that concern the disposal of used tires have been incorporated in Bill 90, "an Act to promote the reduction, reuse and recycling of waste".

Created by Waste Diversion Ontario, the challenge facing this 14-member board was to create a diversified waste diversion program and ensure that industry, municipalities and businesses financed it. No easy task. The Ministry of Environment exercised little restraint in selecting the wastes to be diverted. In addition to scrap tires they targeted blue box materials, kitchen waste, paints and solvents, electronic items such as fluorescent tubes, and used motor oil. "And develop a sustainable funding strategy to cover the costs for all of this," were the apparent instructions to the Board.

Ontario generates approximately 10 million scrap tires every year, but is one of the few jurisdictions in North America without a clearly defined waste tire management program. Following consultations with a stakeholders committee, Waste Diversion Ontario recommended a strategy for tires similar to some of the programs that already exist in eight other provinces. The most successful of these ensure that local rubber recycler processors get a predictable supply of scrap tires. This is essential to their economic viability, allowing them to invest in plants and machinery to crumble the rubber and develop marketable by-products such as those used in the paving of roadways.

The program proposed for Ontario envisions a special environmental tax. Consumers would be levied $3.00 per tire when they purchase them. For garages and tire stores, this means they'll be required to collect the future disposal costs for a tire up-front, when they sell it. Yes, it would be yet another tax collection burden for you, the retailer. But in addition to the obvious benefit to our environment, there's another positive side to this for you. Under the proposed program your used tires will be picked up free by a certified carrier. And if Ontario follows the lead of the other provinces, you may actually receive a handling fee.

Stay tuned.

Posted Jan. 09/03

 

WITH A POTENTIAL TOP SPEED OF NEARLY 400 MPH, the motorcycle-like Dodge Tomahawk ain't yer everyday bike. Rolled out recently at the North American International (Detroit) Auto Show, DaimlerChrysler is calling it a "personal transportation concept vehicle". Whatever. Onlookers were left slack-jawed, and it received rave reviews from industry journalists assembled for its unveiling.

The single-passenger, four-wheeled vehicle is eye-candy, to be sure. The press notes describe it as "a sleek, rolling sculpture that combines art-deco styling with extreme engineering". And guess what, folks? While manufacturers habitually overstate things at auto shows, we think their buzz about the Tomahawk is a rare exception.

The 500-horsepower Viper V-10 engine powering the dual rear wheels and its radical styling puts this concept vehicle in a class all by itself. Don't take our word for it. "Click" on the animated disc to view a video/audio clip and see what we mean. (Turn the volume up on your speakers.) Unless we miss our bet completely, you're certain to agree that the Dodge Tomahawk shatters all the barriers of conventional thinking about so-called personal transportation vehicles.

Posted Jan. 08/03

 

And from our "CLASSIC GROANERS" file ...

A shop owner fed up with his senior technician's whining about a persistent headache gave him time off to visit his doctor. During the exam, the doctor found a piece of string in the man's ear and pulled on it. More and more string came out and, finally, on the end of the string was a dozen roses. "Where did they come from?" asked the startled technician. "Damned if I know," his doctor replied. "There's no card."

Posted Dec. 19/02

 

CONSUMER BILL 180 GETS THIRD READING: On December 10th, Ontario's "Consumer Protection Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002" received its final reading. The Government Bill, introduced by Consumer & Business Services Minister Tim Hudak, now awaits only Royal Assent to become law. Extensive consultation with stakeholders is promised before it's proclaimed into force, however. The existing auto repair regulations covered by Bill 22 (the Motor Vehicle Repair Act) will remain in force in the interim.

AARO received a flurry of calls from members following a media scrum held earlier this year to publicize the pending legislation. The callers were concerned that garage operators had once again been singled out as the bogeymen of commercial enterprise. And it's understandable they got that impression. We're sure the public did, too.

Although Bill 180 will govern numerous industries in addition to automotive, (real estate brokers, mortgage brokers, and travel agents for example,) Hudak staged the event at a Toronto area car dealership. His choice of venue, and "the spin" he indeed placed on the entire event, made ours come across as being the industry with the most rip-off artists. With the likes of the Automobile Protective Association and sundry other consumer organizations maligning us to earn a living, the last thing we need is to have the Ontario Government joining the chorus.

Why Mr. Hudak focused on auto repair to promote Bill 180 is puzzling. In actual fact, there isn't much in the new legislation that isn't already covered under old Bill 22, rules that have been in force since 1988. Save for a contentious twist regarding "estimates", the old Act will be repealed and its regulations are to be rolled - virtually intact - into the new one. Notwithstanding this, the changes they plan for how we'd be required to handle estimates are problematic. And not just for us, for vehicle owners as well.

Under the current regulations, the consumer has the right to request a written estimate of the cost for a repair. The final price cannot exceed the estimated cost by more than 10 percent without his/her further approval, the consent for which must be documented on the work order form. A reasonable arrangement for both parties it would seem, but the government appears concerned that some consumers may not be aware of their rights and are therefore in need of still more protection.

Not knowing the law is seldom viewed as a valid excuse- anyone who has tried to play the ignorance card to avoid a speeding fine can attest to this. Under Bill 180, however, they apparently view disputes involving auto repairs to be a rare exception to that time honoured rule. They plan to make a cost estimate mandatory whether a vehicle owner requests one or not.

Well okay, at some point between its readings the offending clause in the Bill was amended just a little. The way things now stand it states ... " a repairer may charge a consumer for work done without an estimate if the consumer declines the (mandatory) offer of an estimate and authorizes (instead) a maximum amount that he or she is willing to pay and the cost charged does not exceed that maximum amount". Good grief. Are we missing something here, or is this still an estimate under another name?

What an imposition Bill 180 will be on the thousands-upon-thousands of consumers who have developed a trust relationship - some of which span many years - with an auto repair garage operator and his skilled technicians.

Gone would be the days when 'George, the Consumer' could drop his vehicle off saying, (for example,) "Check her over carefully, Sam... and do whatever's necessary to put her in peak running order. I'm driving the family to BC for our summer holiday."

Under normal circumstances, George would be shuttled to the GO station, and when shuttled back to Sam's garage after work he'd expect the family car to have been serviced - with any necessary repairs also done - and to be ready for the long drive West. Unfortunately, if he was in meetings all day and unable to be reached by telephone, and Bill 180 is proclaimed into force the way it is now written, George might be one unhappy vehicle owner upon his return to the shop.

How would Sam explain that they couldn't proceed with some repairs his car required because of Ontario's new consumer protection legislation? Sam couldn't adequately rationalize it because, to put it politely, the regulation involving estimates would be a case of misguided bureaucratic overkill.

As we mentioned, Honourable Tim Hudak has promised extensive stakeholder hearings before they proclaim Bill 180 into force. During this process, we fully intend to have two or three AARO board member/shop owners meet with him and/or his senior ministry staff members. The association's directors will explain that while the changes they're planning relative to auto repair estimates may be well intentioned, they are in reality a bad idea. Hopefully common sense will prevail over legislative zeal.

Posted Dec. 17/02

 

 

 

NEWS ALERT

Notice to Drive Clean Test and Test & Repair Facilities

LETTERS FROM ONTARIO'S PRIVACY COMMISSIONER and the Drive Clean office have caused concern among emissions test facility operators. On Friday, we faxed a special bulletin to the association members concerned. Our purpose was to try and clear up some of the confusion sparked by the government correspondence.

The contents of the AARO alert follow:

BULLETIN

We believe you will have by now received a letter from Tom Mitchinson the Assistant Privacy and Information Commissioner for Ontario, and another from Drive Clean Office Director Ed Gill.

To clear up any confusion, here is what is going on:

A persistent (unidentified) newspaper is requesting that the Ministry of Environment release to them various electronic records from the Drive Clean database. The Ministry refused their request, but they subsequently appealed under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act). Following an inquiry into the matter, the Information and Privacy Commissioner ordered the disclosure of certain portions of the Drive Clean database.

The information released to the appellant (the newspaper) to date includes cumulative pass/fail rates and various other test data, but does not include the "specific garage identifiers" relating to each emission test. And that is precisely what the newspaper is now requesting.

What are the implications to you? We believe they are onerous. With this detailed data they could easily match the test results and specific garage identifiers, and create profiles on individual Drive Clean Facilities, including yours. They would then be in a position to publicize your pass/fail rates, even privileged and confidential economic information about your business. In the wrong hands - competitors, for instance - this could subject you to one of the "harms" outlined in section 17(1) of the Act which was printed on the back of Mr. Mitchinson's letter.

Mr. Mitchinson has advised you that he has not yet decided whether to provide the specific garage identifiers the newspaper is requesting. He has further informed you of your right to protest the release of specific data about your emission tests if you believe you submitted it to the Ministry in confidence, and that its disclosure could prove harmful to your business.

Should you protest? In our opinion, yes. If you are agreed, to file your protest you must request a Notice of Inquiry from the Privacy Commissioner's office prior to December 23, 2002.

Here's how to proceed: Call (416) 325-3865 and ask for a Notice of Inquiry for Appeal PA-010121-2. You will be asked to leave your mailing address on an answering machine. When you receive the document, complete it (as instructed) and return it to the Privacy Commissioner's office.

Should you have further questions, please contact the AARO office.  

Posted Dec. 15/02

More archived News Briefs (Sept. 9/02-Dec. 02/02) ... "CLICK HERE"