Need Input: Vehicle Damaged by shop, they may not pay? (interesting event)

[look 171]

Originally Posted by Head416

I don't understand why some of you feel that the opening of a sunroof is a violation. It's like a 5th window. Apparently rolling down the drivers windows is okay. Opening the the other windows... maybe most of you would say that's okay. But opening the "roof window"? HE HAS NO BUSINESS DOING THAT! HE SHOULDN'T BE TAKING MY CAR ON A JOY RIDE!

Just like adjusting the seat for comfort while driving, what's so wrong about adjusting the climate of the vehicle while using it? Because he's working he should be forced to be miserable?

I guess I treat people who do work for me like people. If they come to my house you'll hear "Hey, it's hot outside, can I get you something to drink?" That's just plain courtesy.

What is it that is so hard for you to understand that it is not OK to open the sunroof but necessary to open the driver side window for the test? Opening the sunroof reaally isn't a big deal until something like this go wrong. It would nice for the owner to disclose the non working sunroof, but really, he dosen't have to say squad. Because, IT IS NOT PART OF THE TEST THAT HAS TO BE PERFORM. When a electrican come to your house to fix the door bell, you should never have the need to tell him that your driking water on the ref. door will not stop once it is pressed. He has no business there. If he uses it and floods the house, then whos paying for the clean up? I sure hope you don't think the owner is trying to scam the electrical contractor, do you? Or, would some of your guys here would like to split the bill on a water damaged custom kitchen?

As far as workmen are concern (the ones that do labor work, or crafts people) most are not very careful. I hate new guys that come on my project and open window and when they leave, they never shut them. No excuse to not walk the house and make sure everything is close. when I see a new workman from a sub, I am always the last one to leave. Milt can tell you another 1000 stories about stuff like that. I hires the same subs for all my jobs, they are trained.

I treat my men very well and they love working for me. Sometimes, they do dumb things and it is my job to get on them because they hurt my check book.

[look 171]

Originally Posted by RWebb

we don't know whether they effed with it, do we?

we know they opened it and it now broken worse than before

all they did for sure was to operate a normal function of using the car, tho it was not necessary for the test drive they did

Right. All the owner wanted was that it stays close just like the was it was when it came in. He doesn't want a complete fix.

[billybek]

Never did get an answer.
Is it fixed? Does the sunroof function normally now? Is the sunroof now closed and non functional as before?
If it does operate than you will have gotten something for nothing.

[phoenix_iii]

MB stated that the repairs done were necessary in order to get it to close. The sunroof does in fact work now, but I am not going to play with it.

I do have an update though, but I'll wait (probably another week) to post the closure. I still have one more step to complete.



I would have gladly accepted broken and closed if Midas could deliver that. I should have had THEM bring the car to the dealer to get it closed though, in hindsight, or received an even more explicit description/permission.

[phoenix_iii]

Originally Posted by avi8torny

I think it's painfully obvious why PHOENIX just gave them the tool, showed them what to remove (dome light), and basically said " have at it"........because he KNEW it wasn't going to budge because the whole thing was kaput. It's just like the guy some threads back who had this concrete truck drive down his ratty driveway and then was going to sue them for cracking his pavement.

I closed it myself with said tool approximately 3 months prior without much difficulty. Just the darkness of night and a flashlight, but I got it without any forcing/help.

[RWebb]

and that fact suggests to me that Midas did eff with the sunroof

anyway, we shall see

I was hoping for some exciting verbiage about what can/should be done to a car during a bailment (which I think this is, legally), but alas no posts on that yet.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by RWebb

dunno - do you?

what did their contract cover?

Sure, it's going to come down to negligence.

If there was a written contract, it will be a form contract used by the shop. It isn't going to specifically address the sunroof, or anything like that. The plaintiff could allege that opening the sunroof was outside of the scope of the contract, and was therefore a breach of the contract, but the core issue would still be one of negligence. I.e., he'd be asserting the negligent performance of the contract was the breach.

A bailment for repairs was likely created, too. If so, the standard will again be some form of negligence.

[phoenix_iii]

After setting up a claim on Geico via telephone, I went to their local appraiser, stated my case, with my documents from the manager/etc, and they are cutting me a check for the FULL amount minus my $100 deductible.

Check shipped today according to online status!

So... now I want the shop to pay my deductible. I will tell that insurance may pick up the tab and 'take him up on his offer' of 1hour of labor/$100 deductible...

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by McLovin

Sure, it's going to come down to negligence.

If there was a written contract, it will be a form contract used by the shop. It isn't going to specifically address the sunroof, or anything like that. The plaintiff could allege that opening the sunroof was outside of the scope of the contract, and was therefore a breach of the contract, but the core issue would still be one of negligence. I.e., he'd be asserting the negligent performance of the contract was the breach.

A bailment for repairs was likely created, too. If so, the standard will again be some form of negligence.

I got all excited about this concept and it turns out that is only sometimes correct. Some states have a sliding scale, and sometimes strict liability applies. Sometimes the std. is negligence however.

[McLovin]

A sliding scale is still a negligence standard, it's just on a sliding scale.

It is highly unlikely, IMO, that any state's law would impose strict liability on a shop for opening a window or sunroof.

This would be a small claims case in just about every state. A small claims judge is going to look for negligence.

[jyl]

I'm not clear. You got paid by your own auto insurance company? Not by the Midas place?

After setting up a claim on Geico via telephone, I went to their local appraiser, stated my case, with my documents from the manager/etc, and they are cutting me a check for the FULL amount minus my $100 deductible.



Check shipped today according to online status!



So... now I want the shop to pay my deductible. I will tell that insurance may pick up the tab and 'take him up on his offer' of 1hour of labor/$100 deductible...

[phoenix_iii]

Originally Posted by jyl

I'm not clear. You got paid by your own auto insurance company? Not by the Midas place?

Correct. Check should be in the mail. I will have Midas pay my deductible (Well, he offered to pay one hour of labor, and I will tell him my insurance has agreed to pay, and I would like him to pay the less than one hour of labor for the deductible and call it good).

Do I think Geico should have to pay this? No.

Did some one else cause harm to my vehicle, tell me to get it closed at the dealer, then refuse to pay? Yes. Not sure how Geico files it, but it's comprehensive.

[jyl]

Hopefully it won't affect your auto insurance rate.

[phoenix_iii]

Originally Posted by jyl

Hopefully it won't affect your auto insurance rate.

First thing I asked, and about goodwill. I'd rather go to court than burn up goodwill I have earned with 10+ years of clean driving.