Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
From: mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Muffler Rip-Off
Message-ID: <1105@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 8-Sep-85 03:13:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.1105
Posted: Sun Sep  8 03:13:47 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Sep-85 04:16:02 EDT
References: <118@biomed.UUCP>
Organization: U Chicago -- Linguistics Dept
Lines: 27

Bob Lagasse had a muffler installed for $150 parts, $0 labor; tax was charged
on the total, though in his state there would not be tax on labor.  He
explains on a couple of counts why he calls it a rip-off.

You had to pay more tax than if they had divided it, and I won't try to
tell you not to be p.o.'d about that.  But I don't see the rip off angle.
What makes you say they must be pocketing it?  They would have to keep
another set of books, showing that you paid less in parts so they could
pass on smaller tax.  That sound pretty elaborate offhand.

Personally, I like the idea of buying something `installed' -- price 
includes installation.  At least for a standard job that they do all
the time, this makes a lot of sense.  And it can work to the consumer's
advantage.  If the worker happens to be slow or confused that day, or
if some bracket is bent, etc etc, should you have to pay an extra hour's
worth of labor?  I think you save money this way ultimately; but even if
that's not so, at least it has the advantage of letting you know in
advance just what the price will be.  No ugly surprises.

A system that you can also see around has features that we both might like.  
This is the idea of standard labor charges, or standard times, for certain
jobs.  Then you have protection from surprise labor charges, but still
get the breakdown.
-- 

            -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago 
               ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar