In article <4gigjb$d7h at newsbf02.news.aol.com>, suterak at aol.com says...
>The cost of the new casing would have been expensive, and a lab
>would have used an older casing.
Oticon has been very generous with me regarding giving me "new" parts to
make office repairs of their hearing aids. The key word here is "new."
>would probably look at that and not repaired it.
If I have a complaint about Oticon repairing old hearing aids, it would be
that they repair old hearing aids inexpensively. Recently they repaired one
of my patients very old E-28P hearing aid charging him only $125 for the
repair. He mailed it to them direct.
>As far as Oticons published reports, did the reports
>indicate how far out of spec they were? or did they just indicate
>different parts? That becomes the ethical question. If the specs have
>changed outside the manufacturers window, then there is an ethical issue.
>The patients needs have not been met.
Oticon has printed pictures of two of the same model hearing aids opened up
to reveal one with the proper circuit made by Oticon and the second picture
showing how an All Makes Repair Lab has substituted a completely different
hearing aid inside the case! In other words, the AMR lab has just opened up
the Oticon hearing aid, removed the entire guts and replaced it with
something taken from another manufacturer. Is this ethical? And yes, it does
happen! Those repair techs at the AMR labs are usually paid on a commission
basis and they can make big bucks by doing this.
>As far as the all make labs asking
>for "old junker aids" I havent seen them ask that.
We usually get an insert from Starkey and the others with the monthly
statements telling us how much they will pay for different used hearing
>I would doubt the
>labs would use old junker parts unless they met the specs of the needed
All I ask is they put it in writing!
Des Moines Iowa USA