Personally, I think this is BS. You should have informed them that you planned to notify your insurance company and advise them to investigate the matter. They would then cover any damage to the car. Any additional damage not covered by the insurance company should be covered by your CC (assuming you had rental insurance from them - most do). I could be wrong, but I don't think the dealership can Legally hold your car if you owe them money on another car.

It sounds like they had you between a rock and a hard place on Saturday. But I would have at least called my insurance company to see what they recommend I do, and if necessary, I would have called the police.

 

They can not hold your vehicle by law. Even though you sign the paperwork when dropping off your car it has absolutely no legal binding. It is there to scare the person into paying. You could have just demanded your car and if they refused to give it to you then you call the police. You own the car not them. They have no legal right to hold your property even for lack of payment. As long as service work on your car was paid for either by Warranty or By You then you are all set.

My family owned a car dealership and I asked my father about that agreement on the Work Order Years ago and he said it really meant nothing as far as the law was concerned. Just there for protection and does not mean you can automatically get a mechanics lean on a customers car for non-payment. For that amount of money it would not have been worth it since the courts would side with you since the car is worth far more than $800 that the damage was. Not to mention you have the right to get the tires yourself and fix the wheel yourself for far less. I know you needed your car back but that was an expensive mistake I hope you learn from.

 

Actually, depending on the state, they can hold your car, or whatever product they worked on, as a lean on the payment (else everyone who walks into my store wanting a computer repair can simply demand it back and walk out without payment after repair!). In Washington, for instance, the AG's site clearly states that any cost remaining on the repair of a vehicle is grounds for keeping the car until payment is made; in this case, payment to the repair of the car "you damaged"

Now, this may be different in New York, so contact your local AG's office, found here http://www.oag.state.ny.us/ Unfortunately it wasn't as plain as the site for Washington's AG, so I couldn't find the law itself, but give them a call and see if they can help you out.

Don't get me wrong though; this sucks, IMO. But it is important to know your rights in your state (or lack thereof) before you do go calling the police for anything. Usually the police department itself has an operator who will direct you to the proper department. You could try giving them a call as well.

Another set of laws to be aware of: rental car laws and insurance in those cases. Often your insurance will cover such incidents (if you didn't get insurance at the dealer, which is probably the case, since I've never been offered it on an MB loaner), and thus this would be an issue for your insurance company to resolve with the dealer. Especially in a case like this, where the fault is not yours, they are more willing to hear your side of it, since you are their customer (this depends somewhat on your carrier and local office, of course). Give that a try if all else fails to get some (or all) of your money back.

 

You are correct in the case of say a computer. But you would be hard pressed to actually get a Mechanics Lean on a ~$30,000+ vehicle for $800 in repairs. In order to actually get one in most states you need to have a certain percentage of the worth of the vehicle. I mean could you see a shop putting a mechanics lean on a Benz for a $100 oil change? It would not fly when it came to the courts. And in this case especially it was not his car that was in need of fixing it was of course the Dealerships. Plus the dealership has the burden of proof that you in fact did do the damage to the vehicle. Either way to actually go through the process of getting the lean on the vehicle would not have been worth the $800 in damage to there vehicle. Not to mention the aforementioned Insurance part. Since it would have been paid by some insurance company, dealers or the drivers, then what is the point in this dealership potentially losing business due to ticking off one customer? Too me as a person who sees management constantly kissing the customers butt it seems funny that this huge dealer would risk losing any business for $800 that they could have recouped in so many other ways.

 

that sucks you had to pay tp get your car out. In florida, i had my rx-7 in this jerk's shop , the engine blew and this guy had just rebuilt it five weeks before. anyways i knew something had gone wrong when i heard this strange sound, turns out as verified by a freind that there was no oil in the pan and this fool used the wrong sealant on the oil pan which meant oil was leaking. Had it towed and a week later after the motor was torn apart, the jerk mechanic claimed it was all the mods that caused the motor to go and he would not honor the warranty. Anyways i refused to give this guy another dime and wanted to remove my car, this guy blocked my car. I called the police and they came out and claimed that possesion is 9/10 of the law and I would have to go to court to get the car back. What worried me was this guy could have stripped my car for parts and would have made a killing. Since the cops wouldn't help me, I came back with a flatbed at night and took my car back minus the motor,turbos,wring loom, intercooler etc...... which was locked inside .anywyas I did my own work and got my car running again. It took me four years to pay that catastrophe off and I learned the hard way. I hope you get that GAIL fired.

 

Interesting. So if I steal your car in Florida then I can pretty much keep it as long as I park it in my garage? Seems that if it is on my property that possession is 9/10 th's of the law so it is mine! Must be some a$$backwards laws down in FL.

See the way I see it, and I am no lawyer, is that the car is titled to me and I paid for it so it is mine. Now if the dealer does work on my car worth say $500 and I am not happy with that work or think I am being ripped off I have two choices. Negotiate a better price or pay it and then take the a$$ to court. But either way I still get the car since it is worth far more than the service performed that I am not satisfied with. Just because I signed the work order means nothing, ***** I do not even sign one when my MB gets serviced. And they drop the loaner to me, so the driver could have curbed a wheel between the dealer and my work, either on the way to me or on the way back when my car is done. Crap I do not even have to put gas in the car before returning it. Damn glad I chose the dealer I did.

Anywho, sometimes to keep customers one must give in. It seems they will not so take it all as a lesson learned and give you business to someone else.

Oh and something funny. I once knew a person who did not like the way he was treated at a dealership. He then put a sign on his car that stated this and drove around. It was kind of funny since this guy was a genious but he had absolutely no street smarts what so ever. He did get away with it since he was not really defaming the dealer but he was telling the truth about an experience. They did lose business and eventually after years of complaints they lost there Chrysler, Jeep, and Dodge Franchise over there **** poor service. Yes they sold a ton of cars and were a huge dealer but they did not service the vehicles after the sale. So just because this dealer is large does not mean MBUSA wants to here complaints about *****ty service. So when you get your next survey, let them know how you really feel.

 

I'm not a lawyer but I can pretend really well. There's a legal relationship called a bailment that's established when the dealer (bailor) lends you use of the loaner car without pay to you (the bailee) and you have exclusive control over the property. Your responsibility in a bailment is to use reasonable care to protect the property while it's in your possesion. Did you use reasonable care? I think so, you got a flat that was totally out of your control, you excercised good judgement in switching it for the spare as soon as you were aware. Did you use reasonable care in driving the car, if so there's no responsibility beyond that. Of course their contension is that you didn't use reasonable care by driving it into a pot hole.

Then there's the other side of the coin, when you lent them your car for repair exclusively, you established a bailment with them. In such situations you, the bailor can demand the return of your property at any reasonable time without prior notice. Moreover, a bailee may be liable in conversion if the property is not returned upon the request of the bailor, or if the property is used without permission of the bailor. This is where the police come in handy, conversion, in criminal law, is usually defined as the crime of exerting unauthorised use or control of someone else's property as the dealer has. It differs from theft in that it does not include the element of intending to deprive the owner of the use of that property. So while it's not theft and I can see the officers's reluctance to treat it as such, it's still criminal conversion and as such you can file a police report but it won't likely get acted on unless you know somebody.. What's worked really well for me in the past is to use under-enforced laws in your favor. One time a dealer pissed me off and wouldn't fix the car they agreed to in the purchase contract. I blocked his driveway for 2 hours in the peak of the day, police were defenseless as their policy was to write me a parking ticket, dealer lost 2 hours worth of drive in traffic, started a big scene and finally caved in and fixed it. They even threatened to ram me with a big tow truck. Took my camera out and said go for it, turn my parking infraction into your assault with a deadly weapon, I'm for it. They backed down real quick, specially when the police came. You see, if someone threatens you with a deadly weapon with dozens of witnesses, it's a tad more serious than a parking infraction.

Like I said before, negotiate, it's in your best interest.

 

That really sucks. I agree with the above posters who say the ML is your property & the dealer has no legal right to refuse you of its possession. It's the same if you refused to return the loaner until they return your ML. I'm no lawyer but, to me it sounds like extortion if they are keeping your car to try get payment they *claim* you owe. This is really 2 separate issues:

1. You had your car serviced and it was paid for. There should be no dispute about this and they must release your car.

2. They claim you caused the flat tire and you dispute this claim. This is up to a judge to interpret the agreement and determine if the flat was caused by you and/or if you are responsible to pay. Your driving the car while it happened doesn't automatically mean you should pay. The tire could have been faulty before you got the loaner. If they are accusing you then they'd have to prove you were at fault *not* your responsiblity to prove anything. If they didn't do an inspection in your presence and both parties acknowledged that the loaner was in perfect working condition before you drove it off the lot, then that's their problem. Even if the flat was caused by driving over a pothole, I don't know if that is automatically your responsibility to pay or not. You'd have to read the agreement to determine this.

You should talk to a lawyer for legal advice. The worst that could happen is that a judge rules in their favor and makes you pay for the flat. If you are right you could get your money back and possibly additional damages for holding your car illegally. If anything I would talk to a lawyer based on principles alone. It's easy for them to get this fixed under warranty/ insurance so I don't see why they are trying to make you pay for this. Good luck

 

finally here are some pictures of the 2 damaged tires and 1 "damaged" rim




heres a picture of the "damaged" rim, some curb rash that was ALREADY ON THE RIM!



the tire thats on the rim,



and the torn tire

 

wow... those look horrible

 

I'm confused. If you weren't able to do a walk around before you left, how was the curb rash pre-existing? And it does seem pretty odd that the rash is in the same place as the tire damage.

 

well the thing is that im pretty sure the tire was already torn, im saying its a exisiting curb rash because i never parked anywhere besides the garage at my house and garage at school and work