Scuba Lessons Jax expelled from PADI--students left in the lurch

[kelemvor]

Another dealership, but I still have to pay. If the first dealership defrauded me, why would I expect the second dealership or even Chevy to compensate me? No, I have to seek recompense from the owners.

Your attorney would know better and would name Chevy in the suit.

 

[ToyZuki9615]

From the letter that was posted it sounds like the recipient Robert did receive his OWD card from PADI (Wookie beat me to it), but they are recommending some form of additional education due to the certifying instructor violating standards (most likely to cover their own personal liability). What bothers me is that they recommend retaking the OWD course with no type of discount on materials. Why could they not provide individualized certificates to take to another PADI facility to allow them to reuse the PADI packets?

 

[Wookie]

Another dealership, but I still have to pay. If the first dealership defrauded me, why would I expect the second dealership or even Chevy to compensate me? No, I have to seek recompense from the owners.

I disagree. If you bought a chevy from a dealership who Chevrolet later found out was stealing the spares and replacing them with donuts, and chevy closed the dealership, and you had a donut when you bought a spare, my bet would be that Chevrolet would do whatever they could to make it right. Even if they didn't have to.

 

[tursiops]

From the letter that was posted it sounds like the recipient Robert did receive his OWD card from PADI (Wookie beat me to it), but they are recommending some form of additional education due to the certifying instructor violating standards (most likely to cover their own personal liability). What bothers me is that they recommend retaking the OWD course with no type of discount on materials. Why could they not provide individualized certificates to take to another PADI facility to allow them to reuse the PADI packets?

I don't understand your comment. The students already have the material.

 

[Rred]

John-
There's a trend towards "meanness" and dis-association from the other bad guy these days. Point is though, that you remember Chrysler didn't help you. Did you buy another Chrysler since? Maybe not.
Customer service is an odd thing. I've had people say "How'd you get them to do that?!" and sometimes it is a matter of asking nicely, sometimes, it is a matter of tossing away the carrot and using the big stick. For instance, if you were to sue your local car dealer in small claims court, and name Chrysler at the same time, each of them has to pay an attorney by the hour to prepare, show up, maybe come back for a postponement, and deal with the case. Sometimes just receiving the court filing (which can cost as little as $25 in some states) will motivate them to say "Oh hell, instead of gambling with the lawyers, let's just make the man an offer."

Obviously if the shop was doing things like counterfeiting PADI cards, never having been PADI authorized, etc. then PADI might not want to help out...details count. The new owners might feel more incentive to step up to the plate.

 

[Wookie]

I don't understand your comment. The students already have the material.

Have you taken an online course yet? You don't get materials, you get a code in a computer. Once you pass, the code is no more. You can go back and review the materials, but when you take a class (which is what PADI is advocating) you have to buy new materials, otherwise you can't take quizzes and tests.

 

[kelemvor]

I don't understand your comment. The students already have the material.

If they chose elearning, they can't switch to a new instructor without buying again.. according to PADI: PADI ELEARNING

Also, the same page lists other serious restrictions like only having access to materials for 12 months. Other agencies don't make you pay again for this stuff, at least I know from personal experience that NAUI and NASE do not.

 

[redacted]

You all do realize that there is o reason for PADI to offer the student a discount on the cost of course materials because the students should already have the course materials. PADI cannot give them the certifications because the students did not do the course as designed and so did not meet the standards.

It is my understanding that PADI has issued OW certifications to the effected divers and has now declared those certifications to be "defective" from a consumer safety standpoint.

From the PADI email:

This situation creates a serious risk of harm to any divers trained by Mr. Conrad and Mr.
Jones who were not required to exhibit competencies in the required knowledge and
diving skills for the PADI Open Water Diver course. Diving can be a safe activity only if the
diver has been trained properly. Divers who take part in diving activities for which they
have not learned the appropriate knowledge and skills are at risk of serious injury or
death.
We strongly urge that you discontinue all diving activities until you have taken part in an
additional diver training course to ensure that you are a competent and safe diver.

I wonder how many divers are involved and what the PADI liability might be were one of those divers to be harmed as PADI has acknowledged is possible. Hell, if you are worth $700M maybe it is a good business deision to just take the chance.

Of course, if the certs involved were not issued by PADI in consideration of appropriate fees, then they probably would have no liability. But if PADI had not issued the c-cards, none of their proposed remedies would be valid.

 

[kelemvor]

I wonder how an attorney would go about getting a list of affected customers for a class action?

The classes were done through PADI. That's how PADI knew which students to contact.

 

[boulderjohn]

I disagree. If you bought a chevy from a dealership who Chevrolet later found out was stealing the spares and replacing them with donuts, and chevy closed the dealership, and you had a donut when you bought a spare, my bet would be that Chevrolet would do whatever they could to make it right. Even if they didn't have to.

As I said above, in the three cases I know of in which a customer went to the car manufacturer with a complaint about a dealer that had clearly defrauded them, the manufacturer clearly said it was completely between the customer and the dealer, and they were not the remotest bit interested in helping out.

John-
There's a trend towards "meanness" and dis-association from the other bad guy these days. Point is though, that you remember Chrysler didn't help you. Did you buy another Chrysler since? Maybe not.

Not only have I never bought either a Chrysler or a Toyota since, I have made sure people know about it--as I just did here. They had to know I would do that, and they had to decide it didn't matter. Clearly the loss of a customer here and there was more than offset by a policy of not standing behind their dealerships, which would apparently cost them much, much more in the long run.

BTW, the two Chrysler examples took place while they were running the ads with Lee Iococca saying repeatedly that Chrysler had only three clear policies: "Satisfy the Customer! Satisfy the customer! Satisfy the customer!"

The Toyota example was about a decade ago. I had been buying nothing but Toyotas except for that one serious error with a Chrysler for decades, and I have not visited a Toyota dealership since then. Neither have any of my children who know the story well.