I am going to open a can of worms with this post.
The Carolinas Chapter is having a Judging School Saturday on the process of judging several parts using the CDCIF method used by NCRS. In thinking about it, unless a part is installed incorrectly, there can never be a 100% TOTAL DEDUCTION. We all know that that is only technically correct. I would like to hear opinions about this for our discussion Saturday.
Second issue. If a part has no date but is determined to be a service replacement part, can you technically deduct 20% for the date that does not exist. I know how I handle this but I would like to hear the opinion of other MASTER JUDGES and or Team Leaders.
The Carolinas Chapter is having a Judging School Saturday on the process of judging several parts using the CDCIF method used by NCRS. In thinking about it, unless a part is installed incorrectly, there can never be a 100% TOTAL DEDUCTION. We all know that that is only technically correct. I would like to hear opinions about this for our discussion Saturday.
Second issue. If a part has no date but is determined to be a service replacement part, can you technically deduct 20% for the date that does not exist. I know how I handle this but I would like to hear the opinion of other MASTER JUDGES and or Team Leaders.
Comment