1
2
202.31
50.83
Engineer needed to return to site when the supplier sent the wrong part.
0.4
2
465.79
109.4
New part would not communicate with the instrument. Required off-site assistance from the supplier before a return visit could be made. On-site call would have fixed this.
0.5
1
322.22
70.85
Engineer found that an additional part was required for a repair. Remote call with the supplier on first visit could have saved this.
1
2
322.22
77.48
Engineer needed to return a second day because supplier had not provided all required information for part installation and remote email support was not quick enough.
0.25
1
298.31
65.54
Recently serviced compressor developed issues which required a return to site. Compressor issues related to complication during pump service.
0.25
1
298.31
65.54
Re-installation of a replacement part for the visit above.
2
2
358.36
85.52
Fitting cracked when connecting a new part. A call with another engineer could have avoided a return visit as this had been resolved in the past.
0.75
2
358.36
85.52
Installation of replacement parts damaged in the visit above.
0.25
2
590.17
137.04
Engineer could not resolve the issue but another engineer had information which would have helped had an AR call been available.
2.5
4
352.5
97.48
This return visit could have been avoided if another SSS engineer had been available to consult on an issue as they had resolved a similar issue in the past.
1
2
590.17
137.04
Engineer could have avoided a return visit had the correct part been identified in the first visit.
1
1
218.86
47.88
Significant troubleshooting by two engineers on consecutive visits finally pinned down a rare issue. Had both engineers been able to work together via AR call this last visit would have been eliminated.