Mike5215

For little niggles like that, where the tech gets maybe .5 hours to figure it out, I take the tech out and demo the issue myself up front. I've taken both my SA and tech out at the same time. Very helpful.

z28lt1

I think there are a couple of concepts intermingled here, probably because one of the posts asked about crashing the car, or if the car was considered "stolen". One is liability, and the dealer's insurance. That is, generally, out of your hands, and in most cases, the dealer is liable for damage to your car while within their care, and you don't care if they or their "Garage Keepers" insurance pays. Even if they have signs that say they are not responsible for damages, that doesn't mean they are not (exceptions would be be theft or damages done by a third party while in their possession), but the question was about if the McDonalds driver wrecked your car. It doesn't really matter if they were on a legit drive or not in this case, the dealership or their insurance would be responsible.

The next is if the car was "stolen". I have no real knowledge of this area, but personal (about worthless) opinion is no, this car driven under normal circumstances, even to McDonalds, was not stolen. I did read an instance where a dealer employee went back to the dealership after hours, and used access to keys to drive (and I believe wreck) a customer's car. This probably could be consider stolen, since this was not done during the operations of the business, and without knowledge of the dealership, customer, or anyone else involved. Outside of a case like that, your car isn't stolen if someone had permission to drive it.

The final is what the dealer is authorized to do to your car. Which is to take reasonable actions to fix your car in a professional manner. Contract and Contract and Civil law is full of these "reasonable" and "professional standards" tests. Unfortunately, they are a bit vague and won't give a hard line to not cross.

To the most extreme, I think we can agree that you didn't authorize for the dealer to keep your car for a week and drive cross country a few times and put 10,000 miles on it? Or take it to the local track for some (legal) racing? You don't give them blanket authorization to do whatever they want, even if you sign something that says dealer may need to drive the car.

So, the grey area is how many miles, or to where would they drive your car while in their care, and more importantly, what are the damages? Even if someone would think going to McDonalds does not constitute reasonable standards (which would be tough to argue), the damages are pretty much zero, so in this case, all the discussion is pretty meaningless.

Full disclaimer: I'm sure it is obvious, I am not a lawyer, although I work with one on professional contracts weekly, and I'm sure our resident lawyers can find some cases that go the other way, or fault in the actually wording I use.

All of that said, the OP SMa2c specifically said they were not looking for anything, but were disappointed and had his(/her) trust broken. I might feel the same way, nobody wants their car used by other people to run errands. I don't eat in my car, so I don't want the tech doing the same either (and yes, I know we don't really know if they actually ate in the car). It is disappointing that your car is not treated how you would treat it.

Mike5215

Yeah, they'd have a hard time arguing that their tech, who left for work five days ago and neither he or your car has been seen or heard from since, was acting within the scope of his duties on a 10,000 mile test drive. I think everyone including the shop would agree the car was stolen.

This McDonalds situation is more just an unfortunate intrusion of the real world into the normal, professional relationship between dealer and owner. It's mildly disrespectful. Like when you're at Applebee's and you realize your urologist is drunk at the bar making dick jokes. Poor form. No real harm done.

ItalianJoe1

In warranty, there is NO pay for a NPF (no problem found) diag. So if the tech drives the car, doesn't hear the noise, and says he can't find it, he gets exactly $0 for that. It's much more in the techs interest to find something to fix even if it isn't actually broken. Dealers limit that because repeated, ineffective fixes lead to lemon law buybacks.

MASSC450

It also depends on the type of work performed...especially labor intensive work.

The dealership is less likely to perform certain warranty work if the manufacturer reimburses less than it takes to correct the issue. So if it usually takes 4.0 hrs labor to perform a repair that Mercedes reimburses only 2.0 hrs of labor for...well you do the math...the dealership loses money on that job.

Sma2c

Let me count the ways I came to this "assumption"...

1. The car was at the dealership at the time on the receipt.
2. The car was picked up 6.5 hours after the time on the receipt.
2. I was not in town at that time.
3. The McDonald's is on Broadway, the dealer is on Broadway.
4. I do not eat McDonald's.
5. I do not eat in my car.
6. My wife and kids do not eat at McDonald's.
7. My wife and kids do not eat in my car.
8. My wife does not drive this car (kids too young to drive).
9. I only commute in this car.
10. There is never any trash or other artifacts in my car.

I am not an attorney but...

Mike5215

I believe ya! It's unprofessional at best. What was the spread between odo in and out?

The bad news is your tech did not go to McDonalds. Your tech's crack dealer, however, is another story.

Machine1

Dealerships should not be using client's vehicles for personal stops be it the bank, drive-thru, convenience store, etc. unless they've given authorization to drive the vehicle home for an extended test drive.

Mike5215

They shouldn't. They do. It's an imperfect world.

Machine1

So it's up to the dealers to make it more perfect now isn't it? It's all about training.

Have you ever stepped foot in a non-luxury car dealership service department? It's horrendous. It's like walking into the stone age.

Yidney

I'd rather find the bones of an entire deep-fried turkey in my car if the work is decent before I'd take my car to MB of Denver (Murray Motors). I literally was glad when my warranty ended just so I would not need to deal with those people anymore. That leaves you with Westminster, which is a long haul if Littleton is close to you.

Mike5215

I've stepped in many. Don't let the glitz, the espresso machine, or the lounge with the leather recliners and flat screen TV at an MB dealer fool you. It's a show. At its core its run no differently than your local Dodge store.

Trust me. My MB SA for the past ten years is also a close family friend. Get a few beers in him and you wouldn't believe the crazy stuff that goes on. It's universal. Doesn't matter whose logo is on the side of the building.

Believe me, the only training that tech got was a reminder not to leave behind the wrapper if he takes a customer's car thru McDonalds.

Machine1

I'll be sure not to go to the dealership that you've been going to .

Jdem22

Don't take this the wrong way, but why the heck was I quoted in this response? LOL! I know what the OP said and I cannot see where I stated a contrary opinion or feeling on anything he (or you) said.

The text you quoted was directed at Mike5215, asking him where he got the information he did, which is a kind of a side convo on what constitutes right and wrong and reasonable. Maybe I am missing something?

Of course there was no crime committed and no harm done and I do not think that was ever the question.

z28lt1

Luton Driver made a post about what if the car was crashed, and what if it was stolen. Mike responded with a statement, you asked a question about the statement (quoting both of those) and I quoted you as the last post in that "sidebar". I know internet message boards sometimes become uncivil and can make people defensive, but we can actually quote each other while agreeing with each other . My original intent was to try to bring some clarity around the "what are they really authorized to do", but I just kept on typing. Then I added the last bit, just trying to bring the thing full circle, answer some questions, and tie it back to the OP, who didn't mention unauthorized, stolen etc., but it was still a valid discussion. If you prefer I didn't quote you, that's ok, let me know and I can edit my post.

JWH321

I'm not so sure that there is not a legal issue here, regardless of whether or not it is criminal. The unauthorized use of a motor vehicle is, in many jurisdictions, highly improper. The agreement made to service the car is made for exactly that purpose. No other use is implied. The dealership is responsible for the actions of its employees.

I can give you another example of how this worked at a dealership. A client took his C63 in for service. While he was there, a customer in the waiting room who was interested in how a C63 performed convinced the service manager to allow the customer to accompany the service tech on a "check" ride. That check ride included accelerating to well over 100 miles per hour. The check ride also resulted in the driver being ticketed for excessive speed. The client not only had his personal property abused but had to reconcile the issue with his insurance company who intended to add cost to his policy because he had allowed the car to be operated in an improper manner. The Mercedes dealership settled out of court.

Regardless of the wording on the service agreement, the car is there for the purpose of being serviced and any other use is not authorized.

The OP should advise the dealership that he intends to seek legal counsel. They are responsible, period.

z28lt1

First, thankfully, the OP is reasonable and isn't looking for anything in return. Second, what do you suppose the damages would be in the OP's case? 54 cents a mile wear and depreciation for the run to McDonalds? Maybe plus $20 for the cost of cleaning the car? Maybe 4 extra miles on the warranty expatriation to cover the McDonald's run.

Maybe some mental anguish that his fine, German, Luxury Automobile had to bear the torture of the McD's drive through lane.

EDIT: Should add that like the OP, I personally would be mad, and dissapointed though, just don't see anything to do about it.

Jdem22

[QUOTE=z28lt1;6882973If you prefer I didn't quote you, that's ok, let me know and I can edit my post.

[/QUOTE]

No of course not, not all. Just all my years in forums it's mostly been when you quote someone you're either agreeing, refuting or asking a question. Just seemed ambiguous which threw me.

Absolutely all good. 😁

Mike5215

Responsible for what? He has zero damages. The icky feeling he got when he saw someone had consumed fast food in his C Class? Not actionable or compensable, criminally or civilly. No damages? No legal recourse.

Forget the "what ifs". Hypotheticals have no foundation in law. What if he pulled out of McDonalds and killed a pedestrian?! What if the tech saw a customer choking on a McNugget and saved their life with the Heimlich?! All irrelevant. Nothing happened. No crime was committed, no tort was committed, no contract was breached. Nada. No damages.

Regardless of the wording of the repair authorization? The wording is the basis for the agreement.

The OP is owed an apology, and I think a free detail would square things up fine. The rest I'm afraid he'll just need to get over.

bluefang08

I purchased my car from MB of Littleton and I have had some issues in the past with the service. They have always tried to make it right but if this happened to me I would be very upset since I never allow food in my car.

Mike5215

Of course. But you understand that if someone did eat food in your car you wouldn't have the basis for a lawsuit, right?

Let me give some personal background here. Last year, during an outpatient back surgery, the doc lost control of a drill. The net result was a permanent loss of bladder control and the total loss of sensation on one side of my trunk, from midline of my junk out to my hip.

I have the largest law firm in Florida, and one of the largest in the country. They're still not certain we have a medical malpractice case. For real.

I'm pretty sure nobody is going to be suing Mercedes Benz Of Littleton over Burgergate.

Mikey53

Get lawyers involved? I guess that is the American way these days. Geez!

hyperion667

some of the guys trying to justify the crap behavior of a tech driving through a drive thru is RETARDED.......this shouldn't happen ever.....

I'd complain like hell and add that trash was left in my car.......simply unacceptable.......

sorry it happened to you OP, I'd raise hell even if it didn't seem like a big deal......it's the principle........

Mike5215

Hype, weren't you the fella that got banned from your home dealership over run-ins with the service department? I thought that was you. Might be mistaken. I think even those of us who are minimizing the significance of the incident agree the shop was wrong. We're just suggesting that maybe it doesn't rise to the level of the Kennedy assassination.

hyperion667

yes, that was me......and they did me a favor in fact......complain enough and you're asked to leave......THAT'S the best or nothing.......they chose nothing

haha, I know it's not kennedy, but OP was upset and I read a lot of comments saying it wasn't a big deal......but it is to OP