It is neither corrupt nor a conflict of interest. The automotive industry as a whole has cultivated the oil change as a perennial loss-leader and an unknowing public refuses to pay a fair price for such a service. So the idea of a low priced oil change packaged with a “27-point” inspection has become standard procedure and has been for as long as I’ve been in this business. I don’t personally like it, but it certainly falls short of corrupt, by any definition.
Given that doing an oil change service results in a net loss for the business, I fail to see how recommending them at 6 month intervals is a conflict of interest.
Nope. It reduces the per-mile maintenance cost. Fewer visits to the shop and less dollars spent.
Take for example the car that came in last week with the washers not working. I had to give that person a bill for $30 to fill the washer fluid. You object to recommending an oil change before it’s due and instead suggest a maintenance inspection. I can’t in good conscience do that. What if I were your mother’s mechanic? I would have her come in for a maintenance checkup for which I have to charge her $49, and then tell her to come back next month when her oil change is due and charge her $40 for that? When she can get the $40 oil change with the maintenance checkup included in that price?
I will agree that package pricing like that can be distasteful, but I can’t change the entire industry and I need to remain somewhat competitive.