We put a b/g in a 1996 Buick Century last week. DB6999 net priced at $258. List price is $688.80. So, contract pricing with Guardian is -20% and $91.00 flat labor. Finally , a part we can make some money on. So, I bill at our "agreed" pricing. After Guradian gets a hold of it , they call me and say , you have to bill at 35% mark up of your cost. Since when?? I told them I billed at what my contract says I can bill at. No one ever called me when I paid $150.00 for a part and billed at 20% off list for $180.00 (plus flat labor). I didn't make any profit then, but all of a sudden when I am making a fair profit you're calling me and saying to bill at 35% markup?? I told them show me where I signed something stating that I would bill at that price when NAGS has a published list price! I told them I am not changing my bill, I let you know what they pay in 30 days when I get the check. Hopefully they'll see things my way or this is one that may get my attorney's attention.
Has any one else had this happen???

i haven't seen that, but we don't see much of the problems others have seen on here

OH YEAH!!!

Never had that happen, although you know it wouldn't surprise me in the least! I don't think there is any crooked, unfair, unlawful, unethical and unreasonable thing that these TPA's won't do to insure that THEY are the only friggin ones making a dime in this business! I wouldn't take that crap for a second, if they shortpay you take the a_swipes to court. You will win!

Just thought I'd lwet you know how this turned out. You'll never believe it , but Guardian paid in full. Didn't even take off an invoicing fee!! Sure glad I stood my ground and told them that I would not change my bill. I don't think I would ever get away with it at SGC or LYNX. Thanks to Guardian (if you have eyes watching this forum). Just wish that I got more work out of them. Lucky to get 1 per month.

I don't think anyone "got away" with anything. You held up your end of the bargain (contract) and performed the work to the high standards we all know the TPA's require of it's participants . They paid you at the discount rate agreed to in either your electronic or faxed dispatch/claim. We agree to a percentage off as long as there is a published NAGS price, the ONLY time TPA's have the right to veer from that agreement is if the NAGS list isn't there. Then it's a serious screwing to the tune of 10% over cost. I find it unbelievable (not questioning you) that they would attempt this scam. Probably worked on some other shop that wasn't paying attention or didn't care, so Gaurdian thought they'd try to make it policy. Good for you for standing up for yourself! It's the few and far between job's like that one that make it possible to take the pennies from most other jobs. One more thing if you'd follow this a little farther, check the next NAGS publication and see what happens to the list on that part number and let us know.....it'll be interesting to see if it drops SUBSTANTIALLY.

Believe me that will not be long lived. They have noted it. And i will bet that it will be changed in thier new contracts.

I am sure karen at gurdian is shaking in her boots as we type... NOT

Every time the networks decide to change the agreed upon price with thier ever changing structure on being fair all you have to do is remind them that this is INVOICE TAMPERING & some will change thier minds others you will have to fight. Invoivce tampering has been around for years & becomes very costly to big companys who refuse to give thier "fair share" present those invoices to your lawyer exspecialy the invoices you paid taxes out on to the state because now the state has to get involved with tax refunding. People of the industry wake up & smell the cheating!! DROP THE NETWORK CONTRACTS & WATCH AS THEY UN-FOLD IN TRUE DEFAULT!

What was dealer list? I've had a couple jobs where the TPA argued that dealer glass should have been used because dealer list was far less than NAGS.

I like JOHN L. Keep say it John, it will take hold!

KJ i have heard that b4 also, one of the companies that bills thru guardian use to pull that, but that has been 4 yrs ago since i heard that...